How to Squander Money and Ruin Our Reputation in this World

[bubblegum]

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

As could you!

 

The reason that I asked him was that I do read the news and his post was not factual.  

 

"Instead of asking for links (at later claim they are bias) you could..."

Instead of lamely attempting to rebuke me for asking for sources of, clearly, false information, you could have posted your Economist's confirmation of his figures...if there was any.  Obviously there are not.

Give it up, a simple internet search gives you all the answers. 

[impulse]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Fact check:

 

Harris policies will add $1.2 trillion to the US national debt.

 

Trump policies will add $5.8 trillion.

 

The federal budget deficit was $1.8 trillion in fiscal year 2024, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. 

 

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-10/60730-MBR.pdf

 

 

 

Conclusion: neither president has a good record on the debt and deficits, but the annual levels of red ink were twice as high under Biden. The average deficit was $800 billion under Trump and $1.6 trillion under Biden.

 

That's leaving out 2020 and 2021, the Covid years.

 

https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/hotlines/biden-v-trump-on-deficits/

 

Factor in Harris claiming she didn't recall anything that she'd do differently, and what's $1.6 trillion x 4 more years of the same?

 

Edited 5 hours ago by impulse

[Liverpool Lou]

Just now, bubblegum said:

4 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

As could you!

 

The reason that I asked him was that I do read the news and his post was not factual.  

 

"Instead of asking for links (at later claim they are bias) you could..."

Instead of lamely attempting to rebuke me for asking for sources of, clearly, false information, you could have posted your Economist's confirmation of his figures...if there was any.  Obviously there are not.

Expand  

Give it up, a simple internet search gives you all the answers. 

If confirmation was available it would have been posted by now.  Why should I have to go searching the internet for information that does not exist when a simple corroborating answer to my question would have sufficed?  And who are you to tell me to "give it up"?

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

The federal budget deficit was $1.8 trillion in fiscal year 2024, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. 

 

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-10/60730-MBR.pdf

 

 

 

Conclusion: neither president has a good record on the debt and deficits, but the annual levels of red ink were twice as high under Biden. The average deficit was $800 billion under Trump and $1.6 trillion under Biden.

 

That's leaving out 2020 and 2021, the Covid years.

 

https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/hotlines/biden-v-trump-on-deficits/

 

Sure, Larry kudlow analysis.

[impulse]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Sure, Larry kudlow analysis.

 

So post your own numbers.  Here's the link where you can find them:

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN/

 

You'll need this link for the last fiscal quarter of 2024 (preliminary numbers)

 

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-10/60730-MBR.pdf

 

[Baht Simpson]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

How much did you read? Just those two?

You only posted two links. 

 

The first one I commented on and the second one refers to a limited study in New Zealand 25 years ago!! In any case they reach no real conclusion other than LGBT people are at greater "risk of psychiatric disorder and suicidal behaviors", not that being gay is a mental illnessas you think.

[Yagoda]

3 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

You only posted two links. 

 

The first one I commented on and the second one refers to a limited study in New Zealand 25 years ago!! In any case they reach no real conclusion other than LGBT people are at greater "risk of psychiatric disorder and suicidal behaviors", not that being gay is a mental illnessas you think.

Well keep doing your research and get back to me.

[Lacessit]

40 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

The federal budget deficit was $1.8 trillion in fiscal year 2024, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. 

 

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-10/60730-MBR.pdf

 

 

 

Conclusion: neither president has a good record on the debt and deficits, but the annual levels of red ink were twice as high under Biden. The average deficit was $800 billion under Trump and $1.6 trillion under Biden.

 

That's leaving out 2020 and 2021, the Covid years.

 

https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/hotlines/biden-v-trump-on-deficits/

 

Factor in Harris claiming she didn't recall anything that she'd do differently, and what's $1.6 trillion x 4 more years of the same?

 

I am talking about the projected debt levels for whoever gets in on November 5, in the ensuing years.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Not facts, then, just your speculative opinion.  I'm not claiming to have facts, you did that even though you can't justify what you posted.

Not an opinion, I saw the figures on some YouTube video.

 

Perhaps reading comprehension and logic are lacking in your skill set.

[impulse]

14 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I am talking about the projected debt levels for whoever gets in on November 5, in the ensuing years.

 

Projected by whom?  The same buttwads that have been lying to us about the crime rate, jobs numbers and border security?

 

Outside of the Covid years of 2020 and 2021, the Harris/Biden team added to the deficit at twice the rate of the Trump team.  Past performance is no guaranty of future results.  But it's a better indicator than some election year "projection" by a partisan MSM buttwad.

 

Edit:  "Buttwad" isn't a strong enough word.  They're worse than that.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by impulse

[Walker88]

It's 2024. Perhaps the OP missed it, but scientists have a much better understanding of the brain and how it develops. Sexual orientation is not a conscious choice, nor is it something 'groomed' into growing children. I was aware of homosexuality when growing up, but not once did I think "I should give that a try". There simply was zero desire, as that is not how my brain functions.

 

I happen to be a heterosexual, not by choice, but because of the way my brain developed and neurons cross linked to various parts of the thing.

 

Just as we now know witches cannot curse people and cause disease, nor crops to fail, and demons do not take over the brains of psychopaths (though if told demons are in the felon's head, I might have to give that some credence), sexual orientation is not any sort of curse nor choice. Very minor differences in brain structure cause behaviors to differ markedly. To discriminate against someone because they naturally are attracted to the same sex is like discriminating against someone because he is tall....or in the case of the OP, short.

 

Now personally, I find fat to be a sickness. Fat is 100% the responsibility of the person. Calories in, calories out. Nobody went to bed one night svelte and fit, and awoke the next day with a giant gut or spare tires that Airbus could use on the A380. I could not care less what someone's sexual preference happens to be, as it has zero effect on me. Perhaps I'm wrong, but when I see fat people, I cannot help but think they are lazy and, frankly, unattractive. I feel they have zero self-respect and no discipline. Like all of us, we get one body, and we should preserve it not only because it's better for health, but it also is much more aesthetically pleasing to those who have to see it.

 

As one poster noted, the folks here showing bias against sexual attractions that are not a matter of choice would be the first to bark about religious persecution, when religion in 2024 is as bizarre and primitive as a belief in witches and casting spells. Talk to an unregistered imaginary friend and one gets SSRIs or committed to an asylum; talk to a registered imaginary friend and one is 'spiritual'. Both have mental issues, though the religious choose to embrace fantasy and delusion.

[impulse]

1 minute ago, Walker88 said:

It's 2024. Perhaps the OP missed it, but scientists have a much better understanding of the brain and how it develops. Sexual orientation is not a conscious choice, nor is it something 'groomed' into growing children. I was aware of homosexuality when growing up, but not once did I think "I should give that a try". There simply was zero desire, as that is not how my brain functions.

 

I happen to be a heterosexual, not by choice, but because of the way my brain developed and neurons cross linked to various parts of the thing.

 

Just as we now know witches cannot curse people and cause disease, nor crops to fail, and demons do not take over the brains of psychopaths (though if told demons are in the felon's head, I might have to give that some credence), sexual orientation is not any sort of curse nor choice. Very minor differences in brain structure cause behaviors to differ markedly. To discriminate against someone because they naturally are attracted to the same sex is like discriminating against someone because he is tall....or in the case of the OP, short.

 

Now personally, I find fat to be a sickness. Fat is 100% the responsibility of the person. Calories in, calories out. Nobody went to bed one night svelte and fit, and awoke the next day with a giant gut or spare tires that Airbus could use on the A380. I could not care less what someone's sexual preference happens to be, as it has zero effect on me. Perhaps I'm wrong, but when I see fat people, I cannot help but think they are lazy and, frankly, unattractive. I feel they have zero self-respect and no discipline. Like all of us, we get one body, and we should preserve it not only because it's better for health, but it also is much more aesthetically pleasing to those who have to see it.

 

As one poster noted, the folks here showing bias against sexual attractions that are not a matter of choice would be the first to bark about religious persecution, when religion in 2024 is as bizarre and primitive as a belief in witches and casting spells. Talk to an unregistered imaginary friend and one gets SSRIs or committed to an asylum; talk to a registered imaginary friend and one is 'spiritual'. Both have mental issues, though the religious choose to embrace fantasy and delusion.

 

What does that have to do with sending my tax money to another country and sowing division by supporting programs that are as popular as building synagogues in Riyadh would be? 

 

When we're $35T in debt and we have pressing, unfunded needs back home.

 

 

[Baht Simpson]

28 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well keep doing your research and get back to me.

Ah, the old I got nothing so send your adversary off to do more research stunt. LOL. 

 

 

".... research and subsequent studies consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as anything other than a natural and normal sexual orientation that is a healthy and positive expression of human sexuality. "

 

You know better though. 😀 

 

 

Source: In re Marriage Cases 2008

[RSD1]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

Did that forecast come from the same yobs who claimed inflation was transitory, Harris/Biden created 15 million jobs, had to revise the monthly job gains down 17 of the last 18 months, recently had to revise the violent crime figures to reflect the truth that violent crime did go up, told us for 3-1/2 years that Biden was sharp as a tack behind closed doors, and that the border was secure, nothing to see there?

 

Because I don't believe them any more.  They lost our trust.  They can't even predict the past honestly.

 

In response to my fact based post you added nothing useful or on topic. In typical MAGA supporter style, just a bunch of rambling whataboutism from you that has zero to do with the subject at hand. 
 

Next time, save yourself the energy rather than going on some useless, factless, tangential rant that has no value, is irrelevant and nobody needs. 
 

Edited 4 hours ago by RSD1

[Yagoda]

59 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

Ah, the old I got nothing so send your adversary off to do more research stunt. LOL. 

 

 

".... research and subsequent studies consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as anything other than a natural and normal sexual orientation that is a healthy and positive expression of human sexuality. "

 

You know better though. 😀 

 

 

Source: In re Marriage Cases 2008

I assume thats a British or Australian court case. So what

[bubblegum]

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

If confirmation was available it would have been posted by now.  Why should I have to go searching the internet for information that does not exist when a simple corroborating answer to my question would have sufficed?  And who are you to tell me to "give it up"?

Because Lou, every person who reads ans follows the news will know. I am not falling into the link trap game!

 

In case you don't know:

Right wing trollers will ask a link for just about anything you post. You take your time, read articles, look at news clips and then post a link. NOW every link you post is suddenly bias, paid for by the lefties and so on. Without even reading or looking at your link, you are disqualified. You post a link they cannot refute (Fox) then you are simply ignored.

 

Now, my apologies to you Lou because I know you are not a troll but at the same time you are very capable of reading and searching the internet.

[bubblegum]

@Liverpool Lou BTW, The Economist just endorsed Harris. You need a link or can you find The Economist by yourself on the web? 

[save the frogs]

Hey Jingthing,

 

With the new layout and larger avatars and dark mode, I think staring at your avatar for more than 1 minute might induce hallucinations. 

[impulse]

1 hour ago, RSD1 said:

In response to my fact based post you added nothing useful or on topic. In typical MAGA supporter style, just a bunch of rambling whataboutism from you that has zero to do with the subject at hand. 
 

Next time, save yourself the energy rather than going on some useless, factless, tangential rant that has no value, is irrelevant and nobody needs. 

 

What facts?  Your post was light on facts and heavy on election year forecasts.  Which are about as reliable as election year promises.  With no links, BTW.

If you want your posts to be taken seriously, a little data would be in order.

 

[RSD1]

14 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

What facts?  Your post was light on facts and heavy on election year forecasts.  Which are about as reliable as election year promises.  With no links, BTW.

If you want your posts to be taken seriously, a little data would be in order.

 

Meandering and off-topic again. Not even a word about your previous rubbish post filled with conjecture that had nothing relevant to add to anything. 
 

This method of distraction that you employ, as do so many Trump supporters, may have some success with weak minded punters who are easily thrown of course, but will fall short most of the time.
 

My suggestion to you is that you know your level and give up this feeble set of tactics you are using, unless you are able to really argue a point by offering something substantive. 
 

Edited 2 hours ago by RSD1

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Projected by whom?  The same buttwads that have been lying to us about the crime rate, jobs numbers and border security?

 

Outside of the Covid years of 2020 and 2021, the Harris/Biden team added to the deficit at twice the rate of the Trump team.  Past performance is no guaranty of future results.  But it's a better indicator than some election year "projection" by a partisan MSM buttwad.

 

Edit:  "Buttwad" isn't a strong enough word.  They're worse than that.

 

Which buttwad claimed immigrants were eating pets in Springfield? Which buttwad sexual predator claimed he is "protecting" American women?

 

Here's an example of someone who badly needs a buttwad.

[riclag]

10 hours ago, Yagoda said:

The US State Department has always been a hotbed of elitist Leftists, but his takes the case. What business do we have supporting or advocating for sexual perversion in other countries. How is that in our national interest?

 

https://www.city-journal.org/article/how-gender-ideology-captured-the-state-department?skip=1

This is what Trump & other conservatives are always complaining  about ,bureaucrats pet projects on our dime.This is the first I heard of this but these dems are using our money for many Social Justice causes,Epa funds ear marked for special interest groups web sites were promoting pro Palestine causes .

“A Slush Fund for Radical Protesters?

The Biden administration’s massive program of “environmental justice” grants appears designed to empower extremist groups”.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-slush-fund-for-radical-protesters

 

 

 

 “I want to be crystal clear about this,” the secretary said upon appointing the agency’s first chief diversity officer in June 2021. “Promoting diversity and inclusion is the job of every single member of this department. It’s mission critical.”

Pic from the source

 

more from Us senators

 

Edited 1 hour ago by riclag

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

 

 

 

".... research and subsequent studies consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as anything other than a natural and normal sexual orientation that is a healthy and positive expression of human sexuality. "

 

 

There is plenty of scientific evidence homosexuality exists in other species apart from homo sapiens - approximately 1500 of them.

 

The bigotry surrounding same-sex relationships is fueled by religious retards, who would be far more comfortable if they went back to the Middle Ages.

Edited 1 hour ago by Lacessit