Bet? Did you suggest a bet?
If Trump runs for reelection and I think he will…and Bernie actually gets the democrats nomination…(I don’t think he will) I would love to bet you.
Source for this claim, please.
I never claimed there were any Republican socialists. The burden is on you to provide the names of any Dem socialists (other than Bernie, whom we have discussed ad nauseum).
I’m saying that being fiscally irresponsible is what created the debt. And a big portion of our history of fiscal irresponsibility is indefensible tax cuts by the GOP.
Can you support this assertion?
Eyedentist is a communist or very close to one
Bernie is not a pure Socialist at least that’s what many believe. He does call himself a democrat Socialist. This is from Wikipedia:
"Academic commentators have pointed out that the identification of Sanders’ political platform and ideology with “democratic socialism” is inaccurate. Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, states that Sanders’ platform is not socialist and is better described as “welfarism” reminiscent of the 1950s that aims to regulate rather than to replace capitalism. Goldman notes that he does not advocate public ownership of the means of production, nor does he seek to abolish the profit system - both of which are defining characteristics of socialism
If true the above is bad enough. And Lizzie Warren would probably not be far from Bernie’s tax proposals. The other new heavy hitters in the DNC like Chuck “The Scammer” Schumer also not too far away. But none pure Socialists.
And being fiscally irresponsible is according to you not having high enough taxes? LOL…So it’s the governments right to take as much money as they see fit regardless of what they do with it. Apparently this is what you are claiming when you make no mention that spending is out of control.
I laughed out loud when I read “indefensible tax cuts by the GOP”. They were in essence saying “here hard working men and women of America keep more of the hard earned money that you have made.” And you have the temerity to say that those people don’t deserve to keep more of THEIR OWN FREAKING MONEY.
Especially in light of the fact that we have huge waste and fraud problem in the government. Bureaucrats sitting on top of each other. Entire government agencies that could be eliminated, or at least reduced to a more manageable level. The federal government now partially in the business of health care…generations of hand outs to welfare recipients. dozens of government give-away programs to those who are in fact ABLE BODIED.
And you sit there at your keyboard and claim that hard working men and women should be taxed more not less!
I don’t think there is anything left to say E…Other than how did you get so far down the wrong road?
Now what makes you say such a thing? I think he is a person who works for a government agency (at times) and supports big government. That alone is bad enough…but to call him a quasi communist is
The goal of socialism is communism.
In other words, your statement "if [Sanders] had his way everything would be “owned or regulated by the community as a whole” was incorrect.
We’ve already established that literally every federal elected official–be s/he Dem, GOP, Independent or Other–is socialist to a degree.
These same people ‘own’ the “freaking” Federal debt, don’t they? When Visa asks you to make a payment, do you laugh out loud at the notion that you should ‘give up some of your hard-earned money’?
Logic, common sense, rationality, facts–you know, all those things the GOP rejects. 
Okay, tax cuts and new wars probably shouldn’t go hand in hand, but that still doesn’t support the notion that tax cuts lead us to our current debt situation.
Assuming the U.S. gov lost out on $2.5T (a left leaning estimate):
That amount would have only covered about 13% of the current debt ($2.5T/$19.5T = 12.8%). So, what’s the driver of the other 87.2%?
You did? Then what word would you use to describe a tax cut while also passing Medicare Part D without funding it and putting two wars in the nation’s credit card?
1 Like
100%? No. But surely you would agree that cutting taxes while simultaneously starting a war is a fiscally indefensible thing to do. I mean, think of the sacrifices our grandparents were asked to make during WWII–doing without nylon, gasoline and food rationing, etc. And not only did they pay high taxes, but they were also asked to buy war bonds. That’s an example of what should be asked of the civilians back home when a country goes to war–not tax cuts.
Like I said–fiscally indefensible.
2 Likes
Let’s look at some of the items in the budget bill Trump (super master negotiator) is going to sign:
- No funding for a wall
- No restrictions on any funding for sanctuary cities
- Increase in H-2B visas
- Increase in NIH spending
- 1% reduction in EPA budget (with no staff cuts)
- Increases for certain agencies (like DOE)
- Certain agencies identified as being needing the ax got increases (National Endowment for the Arts)
- Funding for Planned Parenthood (!)
I probably missed some. Chime in.
I wonder if the Democrats are tired of winning yet?
2 Likes
This stuff is blowing my mind. GOP has control over POTUS, SCOTUS, & both houses of Congress. How TF are democrats getting so many wins.
Seeing an increase in Defense still frustrates me. Hopefully one day I’ll just be numb to it.
1 Like
And re: Trump, I can’t say it any better than conservative blogger Allahpundit said it: Which element of basic negotiation strategy requires you to bluff ineffectively over and over again and then sign on to a “compromise” in which you give up virtually everything in return for practically nothing?
I think that in hindsight it’s indefensible. At any rate, my point is that the tax cuts added a very small amount to the debt in relation to other things (like the wars) not that they are the driver of the debt.
I think it’s prudent to remember that part of the tax cuts passed pre-9/11.
If the Bush Era tax cuts are fiscally indefensible then what would you call passing the Affordable Healthcare Act right in the middle of two of the most expensive wars in US history?
Also fiscally indefensible.
Quick devil’s advocate, Obamacare was less about being fiscally responsible and more about being socially responsible. Obamacare was a huge misstep by the Dems (fiscally), but it definitely hit the mark for a lot of people (QoL wise).
To about the 10th degree, lol.
At some point we’re gonna have to be fiscally responsible…
Isn’t this all more reflective of the GOP Congress’s failures?
Agreed. I was really hoping it would be our current POTUS/Congress. If we can’t get Dems OR Republicans to be fiscally responsible, what’s the next avenue.
I wasn’t personally expecting Trump to be fiscally responsible due to his history, but I was really hoping Congress would keep the financials in line.
I don’t think bending the healthcare cost needle down–which saves money–can be considered fiscally indefensible in the same sense that tax cuts in wartime are fiscally indefensible.
Further, it’s arguable to what extent Obamacare added to the debt: