One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Canada now running up to Trump asking to join in on Trump's pro-American NAFTA replacement
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
Sep 2, 2018 20:18:32   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Super Dave wrote:
Of course it isn't a coincidence. It's a political tactic.

Since budgeting rules don't permit the economic benefits and that everyone knew would result from the tax cut:
(1. The feds are now receiving more income to to government now than before the tax cuts, reducing the deficit.
2. Welfare, unemployment and food stamps have reduced since the tax cuts, again reducing the deficit. )

The deficit numbers Democrat sheep bleat out repeatedly would be too huge of a number if both were made permanent, so they picked the ones that Democrats would hate the most to make permanent.

IOW..... The GOP punked idiot Democrats into making the argument you're making right now. So now when (hopefully soon) the GOP puts up a new bill to make the tax cuts permanent, Your idiot party is already on record pretending to agree with it.

This keeps happening to you because your motivation is hatred of those keeping your party from power instead of MAGA.

Don't you people ever get tired of looking like idiots?
Of course it isn't a coincidence. It's a political... (show quote)




HAHAHAHA.

I will try and tell you again, but it is late and my book is calling..

tax revenue to date is down... If you look back to April, revenue is up for that month.. for reasons i listed.

If any part of the tax bill needed to be temporary, why not any one of the several specific gift to various corporations and the rich..

Looking for the GOP to repair the bill on behalf of the Middle class are you.. When was the last time that happened??

the reduction in use of any of the safety net programs has not effect on the deficit at all.. It may at a later date by being able to cut the cost of the program.

but reduced usage of the program has no effect at all.



Reply
Sep 2, 2018 20:35:42   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
permafrost wrote:
HAHAHAHA.

I will try and tell you again, but it is late and my book is calling..

tax revenue to date is down... If you look back to April, revenue is up for that month.. for reasons i listed.

If any part of the tax bill needed to be temporary, why not any one of the several specific gift to various corporations and the rich..

Looking for the GOP to repair the bill on behalf of the Middle class are you.. When was the last time that happened??

the reduction in use of any of the safety net programs has not effect on the deficit at all.. It may at a later date by being able to cut the cost of the program.

but reduced usage of the program has no effect at all.
HAHAHAHA. br br I will try and tell you again, bu... (show quote)


You actually just said that reducing the # of people on welfare does not reduce the cost of welfare.... Amazing admission..

So that means that Socialist programs aren't meant to be efficient or fiscally responsibile. They're meant to spend all of the $ they can steal.

Amazing admission... Just amazing...

Reply
Sep 2, 2018 21:00:39   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
Super Dave wrote:
You actually just said that reducing the # of people on welfare does not reduce the cost of welfare.... Amazing admission..

So that means that Socialist programs aren't meant to be efficient or fiscally responsibile. They're meant to spend all of the $ they can steal.

Amazing admission... Just amazing...


Purely by mistake Dave...
can’t wait to see how he twists it now....

Reply
 
 
Sep 3, 2018 08:43:51   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Super Dave wrote:
You actually just said that reducing the # of people on welfare does not reduce the cost of welfare.... Amazing admission..

So that means that Socialist programs aren't meant to be efficient or fiscally responsibile. They're meant to spend all of the $ they can steal.

Amazing admission... Just amazing...




NO, what I said that a reduction in the number of people using the safety nets we have has no affect on the deficit..

If such a reduction in use is recorded, then the next govt budget will no doubt have a reduction in financing for that specific program..

Try and think things thru.. It is very logical..

If you think it does reduce the deficit, show a sample of your thinking and we will discuss it..


How about that NAFTA deal??



Reply
Sep 3, 2018 10:23:44   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
Super Dave wrote:
So far the economy is booming.

So far unemployment is at historic lows.

So far ISIS is all but completely wiped out.

So far manufacturing jobs are coming back to America.

So far the stock market is record high.

So far receipts to the government are at a record high.

So far confidence is at a multi decade high.

So far Democrats haven't had much to cheer for.


So far you hsve struck the nerve of every progressive left that can not truly dispute your recitation of the facts twisting or lying as we typically see..

I kept this and feel its a very good read.. Too long to post ..just a start for you~~

Big Media was working overtime for the Democratic Party to mislead the American people about the bill and they didn’t see it coming until it was too late. Democrats were left to pretend as if they were happy the individual mandate was repealed because they could pass off the blame for already-rising premiums on Republicans.

It remains to be seen whether that tactic works. But for Republican voters freedom and choice are more important than scoring political points. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) — an agency that once targeted them for their political beliefs — has been weakened.

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)
For nearly 40 years, Republicans have tried and failed to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for oil drilling. Since the 1980s, the effort always failed in the face of intense opposition because weak congressional Republicans were too afraid of the Democrat-Big Media coalition.

They repeatedly abandoned the decades-old campaign promise.

Yet, a provision for drilling in ANWR was included in the President’s signature tax bill with minimal backlash.

Justice Neil Gorsuch
President Trump nominated and the U.S. Senate confirmed Justice Neil Gorsuch, despite unprecedented opposition and obstruction by Senate Democrats. Many of those same Democratic senators, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., unanimously confirmed Justice Gorsuch to his prior role in a voice vote back in 2006.

As People’s Pundit Daily (PPD) has previously examined, the Democratic Party historically has been the party of obstruction with judicial appointments, particularly relating to the Supreme Court.

“We’ve cemented the Supreme Court right-of-center for a generation,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kty., said while rattling off his own list of year-one accomplishments during the celebration for tax reform at the White House. “Mr. President, thanks to your nominees, we’ve put 12 circuit court judges in place — the most since the circuit court system was established in 1891.”

Set Record for First-Year Judicial Appointments to Federal Appellate Courts
President Trump on December 14 officially set a record for the most federal appeals judges appointed during the first year of a presidency, more than any other before him. The U.S. Senate pushed through the twelfth federal appeals court nominee that day, breaking the previous record held jointly by Presidents Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy.

As we’ve seen front-and-center during the first year of the Trump Administration, judicial appointments can have a very significant impact on public policy and a president’s legacy. Democrats are particularly inclined to engage in “judge-shopping” when they fail to muster enough support for an initiative at the ballot box or implement policy through the legislative process. <snip, but plenty more to read should you wish...>

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_richard_baris/trump_s_first_year_accomplishments_compiled_in_shockingly_long_list

Reply
Sep 3, 2018 11:37:05   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
permafrost wrote:
NO, what I said that a reduction in the number of people using the safety nets we have has no affect on the deficit..

If such a reduction in use is recorded, then the next govt budget will no doubt have a reduction in financing for that specific program..

Try and think things thru.. It is very logical..

If you think it does reduce the deficit, show a sample of your thinking and we will discuss it..


How about that NAFTA deal??


How about that NAFTA deal???

Reply
Sep 3, 2018 13:04:02   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
permafrost wrote:
NO, what I said that a reduction in the number of people using the safety nets we have has no affect on the deficit..

If such a reduction in use is recorded, then the next govt budget will no doubt have a reduction in financing for that specific program..

Try and think things thru.. It is very logical..

If you think it does reduce the deficit, show a sample of your thinking and we will discuss it..


How about that NAFTA deal??
You made a good point.

I was probably naive.

If a private charity had the number of people needing assistance reduced by a few million while having income increase, then they would see a huge winfall that they could use to help other people with other problems.

But you're point was spot on.... Government doesn't give 2 shits about the people. Their job is to spend all of the money they can get inefficiently and bitch for more money.

When I was in the military we were told at the end of every fiscal year to spend every dime in out budget so we wouldn't get a cut the next year.

Reply
 
 
Sep 3, 2018 14:28:26   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
lindajoy wrote:
How about that NAFTA deal???




What about it?? Last I heard, we were still talking, so something may be worked out.. I think it will.. getting recovery should be the point..



Reply
Sep 3, 2018 16:57:54   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Super Dave wrote:
You made a good point.

I was probably naive.

If a private charity had the number of people needing assistance reduced by a few million while having income increase, then they would see a huge winfall that they could use to help other people with other problems.

But you're point was spot on.... Government doesn't give 2 shits about the people. Their job is to spend all of the money they can get inefficiently and bitch for more money.

When I was in the military we were told at the end of every fiscal year to spend every dime in out budget so we wouldn't get a cut the next year.
You made a good point. br br I was probably naiv... (show quote)





Do you live in the United States??



Reply
Sep 3, 2018 17:48:26   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
permafrost wrote:
What about it?? Last I heard, we were still talking, so something may be worked out.. I think it will.. getting recovery should be the point..


Trumps rallies during campsigning made hillary look like the reject she was...

But keep spreaden the misconceptions since that's all you got to work with, perm...
A picture tells it all...













Reply
Sep 3, 2018 18:49:49   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
lindajoy wrote:
Trumps rallies during campsigning made hillary look like the reject she was...

But keep spreaden the misconceptions since that's all you got to work with, perm...
A picture tells it all...




What in the world did my comment have to do with any trump rally??

Is that all you have to talk about??

How about decorating his future cell?



Reply
 
 
Sep 3, 2018 20:02:56   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
permafrost wrote:
What in the world did my comment have to do with any trump rally??

Is that all you have to talk about??

How about decorating his future cell?
Hahaha...

Keep sucking that Hate-sickle.

Even a loser can do that.

Reply
Sep 4, 2018 08:02:38   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
NO, what I said that a reduction in the number of people using the safety nets we have has no affect on the deficit..

If such a reduction in use is recorded, then the next govt budget will no doubt have a reduction in financing for that specific program..

Try and think things thru.. It is very logical..

If you think it does reduce the deficit, show a sample of your thinking and we will discuss it..


How about that NAFTA deal??


The Reagan tax cuts brought on about 4% in increased revenue.

Reply
Sep 4, 2018 08:16:03   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
permafrost wrote:
What in the world did my comment have to do with any trump rally??

Is that all you have to talk about??

How about decorating his future cell?


You posted the picture..

Reply
Sep 4, 2018 08:35:26   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Super Dave wrote:
Hahaha...

Keep sucking that Hate-sickle.

Even a loser can do that.




Are you ever going to have anything worthy to say?

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.