This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The facts show he didn't even work with his own party on budgets and spending. KC_HokieThat's just a complete falsehood. These budgets that congress votes down are not Obama's actual budgets, they're just republican amendments that they say are Obama's budget. Obama never worked with his own party on budgets and spending. Hell he didn't even submit budgets and when he did ZERO democrats voted for it. I'm sorry but repeating lies over and over again does not make them any less false.
You can always vote for Gary Johnson and libertarians.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
I'll prob starting voting Dem when they've gotten to the point where they've become more Republican than the Republicans were themselves. It's getting close.
coolbeans90
There are things I like about them, but they're a wee too far in each direction. Also, dat Federal Reserve thing. Moreover, I would feel a little disoriented voting w/ the climate change deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists and the like.
The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. And Obama didn't mention climate change in a single debate nor at the convention. It's because it's a non-issue. I don't know of any 9/11 conspiracy people.You don't seem to be making a cogent point here. You want Biden to make charitable donations to the US Treasury?It's simple....Biden wants to force people to pay more taxes to 'share the burden' and for income redistribution via taxation because 'it's the right thing to do'.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]We are borrowing at least 34 cents out of every dollar. The rest comes from taxes or printing.
Biden and Obama want to spend that taxpayer money to 'share the burden' or whatever and yet Biden doesn't donate his own.
KC_Hokie
Then he donates a grand total of 1.5% of his own money. That's hypocrisy at it's finest.
Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]You can always vote for Gary Johnson and libertarians.KC_Hokie
There are things I like about them, but they're a wee too far in each direction. Also, dat Federal Reserve thing. Moreover, I would feel a little disoriented voting w/ the climate change deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists and the like.
The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. And Obama didn't mention climate change in a single debate nor at the convention. It's because it's a non-issue. I don't know of any 9/11 conspiracy people. No, Obama didn't mention climate change because it's not an issue that's going to win him votes.The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. KC_HokieLOL
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's simple....Biden wants to force people to pay more taxes to 'share the burden' and for income redistribution via taxation because 'it's the right thing to do'.[QUOTE="Abbeten"] You don't seem to be making a cogent point here. You want Biden to make charitable donations to the US Treasury?Abbeten
Then he donates a grand total of 1.5% of his own money. That's hypocrisy at it's finest.
Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything. But Obama/Biden's rationale for increasing taxes is that it's the right thing to do and the wealth needs to be spread around. It's social justice, etc., etc.Then Biden only voluntarily donates 1.5% of his income. That's majority hypocrisy.
LOL[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. coolbeans90
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
Let me guess Hokie you think that Congress should oversee the Fed?[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's simple....Biden wants to force people to pay more taxes to 'share the burden' and for income redistribution via taxation because 'it's the right thing to do'.[QUOTE="Abbeten"] You don't seem to be making a cogent point here. You want Biden to make charitable donations to the US Treasury?Abbeten
Then he donates a grand total of 1.5% of his own money. That's hypocrisy at it's finest.
Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything.But its the general principle of giving wealth. There is no honest way to defend the pitiful amount of money he donated. If he believes it's one's duty to give money then his charitable donations should reflect that moral. Not tying charity and taxes directly, its an overarching idea.
LOL[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. coolbeans90
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything. But Obama/Biden's rationale for increasing taxes is that it's the right thing to do and the wealth needs to be spread around. It's social justice, etc., etc.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's simple....Biden wants to force people to pay more taxes to 'share the burden' and for income redistribution via taxation because 'it's the right thing to do'.
Then he donates a grand total of 1.5% of his own money. That's hypocrisy at it's finest.
KC_Hokie
Then Biden only voluntarily donates 1.5% of his income. That's majority hypocrisy.
You're still missing the point. Their rationale for increasing taxes is that we need to close the deficit with a balance of revenue increases and spending cuts. Biden's charitable donations have nothing to do with that.[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Obama never worked with his own party on budgets and spending. Hell he didn't even submit budgets and when he did ZERO democrats voted for it.KC_HokieI'm sorry but repeating lies over and over again does not make them any less false. When did Obama submit a budget to the Senate where his own party supported it? I would love for you to inform me. Just this year.
Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's simple....Biden wants to force people to pay more taxes to 'share the burden' and for income redistribution via taxation because 'it's the right thing to do'.
Then he donates a grand total of 1.5% of his own money. That's hypocrisy at it's finest.
dsrules13
But its the general principle of giving wealth. There is no honest way to defend the pitiful amount of money he donated. If he believes it's one's duty to give money then his charitable donations should reflect that moral. Not tying charity and taxes directly, its an overarching idea.
There is a fundamental difference between taxes and charitable donations. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. They are entirely separate issues.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]LOL[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. chessmaster1989
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
Let me guess Hokie you think that Congress should oversee the Fed?Oh God, keep those bastards as far away from it as possible. Some things simply shouldn't be the subject of manchildren's games.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. And Obama didn't mention climate change in a single debate nor at the convention. It's because it's a non-issue. I don't know of any 9/11 conspiracy people. No, Obama didn't mention climate change because it's not an issue that's going to win him votes.If it was so important he would have at least mentioned it more than once or twice on the campaign trail. He mentioned it every five minutes in 2008.There are things I like about them, but they're a wee too far in each direction. Also, dat Federal Reserve thing. Moreover, I would feel a little disoriented voting w/ the climate change deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists and the like.
chessmaster1989
LOL[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. KC_Hokie
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Why is that scary?[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. And Obama didn't mention climate change in a single debate nor at the convention. It's because it's a non-issue. I don't know of any 9/11 conspiracy people.KC_HokieNo, Obama didn't mention climate change because it's not an issue that's going to win him votes.If it was so important he would have at least mentioned it more than once or twice on the campaign trail. He mentioned it every five minutes in 2008. John McCain talked about climate change in 2008 as well.
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]When did Obama submit a budget to the Senate where his own party supported it? I would love for you to inform me. KC_HokieJust this year. Ahhh...his party didn't even vote for it. Are you on the pot? Are you? You should probably reread the article.
LOL[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The Federal Reserve is a disaster and at least needs huge revisions. KC_Hokie
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
[QUOTE="dsrules13"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] Another person assuming a thematic connection between taxes and charitable donations. That's not what hypocrisy is. The bill that would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would apply equally to him. He would be a hypocrite if he wanted an exemption for himself, but he doesn't. And he's not calling for closing the deficit or the wealth gap through charitable donations or anything. Abbeten
But its the general principle of giving wealth. There is no honest way to defend the pitiful amount of money he donated. If he believes it's one's duty to give money then his charitable donations should reflect that moral. Not tying charity and taxes directly, its an overarching idea.
There is a fundamental difference between taxes and charitable donations. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. They are entirely separate issues.You blatantly disregarded what I had to say in that message. I said its not a direct correlation, and did not say they are fundamentally the same. I said its an overarching theme of sharing wealth. I'm not sure why that's hard to understand.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]LOL
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
Abbeten
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Why is that scary?You don't think a dozen people who claim they are 'experts' on the economy having the authority to print literally trillions out of thin air. Then they don't have to tell the American people. No one overseas their actions and yet their actions can easily outweight everything else going on in the country.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.Why is that scary?You don't think a dozen people who claim they are 'experts' on the economy having the authority to print literally trillions out of thin air. Then they don't have to tell the American people. No one overseas their actions and yet their actions can easily outweight everything else going on in the country. Except they do tell the American people what they're doing, which is why you are even able to b!tch about it in the first place.I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
KC_Hokie
They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]
[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]LOL
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
coolbeans90
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
Pretty sure that's strong evidence against global warming.They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]
[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]LOL
See, now you get why I can't vote for Johnson.
coolbeans90
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
It's not right now because the worldwide economy sucks and the Euro is down.But once that all corrects we could see rapid inflation. We're already seeing that on food and already commodities and that's just the tip.
There is a fundamental difference between taxes and charitable donations. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. They are entirely separate issues.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="dsrules13"]
But its the general principle of giving wealth. There is no honest way to defend the pitiful amount of money he donated. If he believes it's one's duty to give money then his charitable donations should reflect that moral. Not tying charity and taxes directly, its an overarching idea.
dsrules13
You blatantly disregarded what I had to say in that message. I said its not a direct correlation, and did not say they are fundamentally the same. I said its an overarching theme of sharing wealth. I'm not sure why that's hard to understand.
I'm not disregarding it, I'm rejecting it. Biden thinks we need to close the deficit in part with higher revenue generation. Why would you expect more charitable donations to reflect this idea?[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
chessmaster1989
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
Pretty sure that's strong evidence against global warming.The sun really does have 11 year cycles. We are near a peak now in terms of activity and therefore radiation. The next few years will be cooler.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
KC_Hokie
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
It's not right now because the worldwide economy sucks and the Euro is down.But once that all corrects we could see rapid inflation. We're already seeing that on food and already commodities and that's just the tip.
Why yes, we could see rapid inflation if they continued expansionary monetary policy in an economic boom. But they won't do that. That's the whole point of basic monetary policy. Expansionary in a recession, contractionary in a boom. You seem to be utterly terrified that they're doing their job.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
KC_Hokie
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
It's not right now because the worldwide economy sucks and the Euro is down.But once that all corrects we could see rapid inflation. We're already seeing that on food and already commodities and that's just the tip.
Total brojecture.
[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They printed literally trillions out of thin air over the last few years. And they didn't tell anyone until 1.5 years later.
I call that scary and a system that needs revision. 12 people or whatever sitting in a room with the authority to print trillions out of thin air with the American people not even knowing it's happening is scary.
chessmaster1989
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
Pretty sure that's strong evidence against global warming.It's science![QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] Why is that scary?-Sun_Tzu-You don't think a dozen people who claim they are 'experts' on the economy having the authority to print literally trillions out of thin air. Then they don't have to tell the American people. No one overseas their actions and yet their actions can easily outweight everything else going on in the country. Except they do tell the American people what they're doing, which is why you are even able to b!tch about it in the first place. Like I said they told us 1.5+ years later. I think that's some scary **** when a group of a dozen people say 'oh by the way we printed trillions of dollars the other year'.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's not right now because the worldwide economy sucks and the Euro is down.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
Inflation is actually not a problem in the U.S. I hear it's going to be another cold winter on Bull Sh!t Mountain, though.
Abbeten
But once that all corrects we could see rapid inflation. We're already seeing that on food and already commodities and that's just the tip.
Why yes, we could see rapid inflation if they continued expansionary monetary policy in an economic boom. But they won't do that. That's the whole point of basic monetary policy. Expansionary in a recession, contractionary in a boom. You seem to be utterly terrified that they're doing their job.It happened in the late 70s once the economy started recovering. It's going to happen again. You can't print trillions and trillions out thin air and not have substantial inflation at some point.Except they do tell the American people what they're doing, which is why you are even able to b!tch about it in the first place. Like I said they told us 1.5+ years later. I think that's some scary **** when a group of a dozen people say 'oh by the way we printed trillions of dollars the other year'. Ben Bernanke had a press conference the day he announced QE3. What are you talking about?[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]You don't think a dozen people who claim they are 'experts' on the economy having the authority to print literally trillions out of thin air. Then they don't have to tell the American people. No one overseas their actions and yet their actions can easily outweight everything else going on in the country.KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Like I said they told us 1.5+ years later. I think that's some scary **** when a group of a dozen people say 'oh by the way we printed trillions of dollars the other year'. Ben Bernanke had a press conference the day he announced QE3. What are you talking about? Not even talking about the quantitative easing. They printed trillions they never told anyone about and told us two years later.[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Except they do tell the American people what they're doing, which is why you are even able to b!tch about it in the first place. -Sun_Tzu-
KC_Hokie has convinced me that the Fed has recently found its calling to go on a crusade to destroy itself.
BRB buying guns, food, ammo, beer and gold.
Or just beer.
It do believe it needs to be reformed. I actually agree with Bernie Sanders on one thing (other than the time of day).KC_Hokie has convinced me that the Fed has recently found its calling to go on a crusade to destroy itself.
BRB buying guns, food, ammo, beer and gold.
Or just beer.
coolbeans90
Why yes, we could see rapid inflation if they continued expansionary monetary policy in an economic boom. But they won't do that. That's the whole point of basic monetary policy. Expansionary in a recession, contractionary in a boom. You seem to be utterly terrified that they're doing their job.It happened in the late 70s once the economy started recovering. It's going to happen again. You can't print trillions and trillions out thin air and not have substantial inflation at some point. mmm yes, the situations have so many parallels, including our wage and price controls and the oil shocks and the equivalent liquidity traps and oh wait no that comparison totally falls apart[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It's not right now because the worldwide economy sucks and the Euro is down.
But once that all corrects we could see rapid inflation. We're already seeing that on food and already commodities and that's just the tip.
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]It do believe it needs to be reformed. I actually agree with Bernie Sanders on one thing (other than the time of day).I think Bernie Sanders should look into voluntary euthanasia.KC_Hokie has convinced me that the Fed has recently found its calling to go on a crusade to destroy itself.
BRB buying guns, food, ammo, beer and gold.
Or just beer.
KC_Hokie
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It happened in the late 70s once the economy started recovering. It's going to happen again. You can't print trillions and trillions out thin air and not have substantial inflation at some point. mmm yes, the situations have so many parallels, including our wage and price controls and the oil shocks and the equivalent liquidity traps and oh wait no that comparison totally falls apartThe only real difference today is the fact the world economy is struggling. Plus, the Euro is a disaster which really helps the dollar.[QUOTE="Abbeten"] Why yes, we could see rapid inflation if they continued expansionary monetary policy in an economic boom. But they won't do that. That's the whole point of basic monetary policy. Expansionary in a recession, contractionary in a boom. You seem to be utterly terrified that they're doing their job.Abbeten
But it's not going to last. Inflation has to hit. You don't print $16 trillion out of thin air in a single year without that hitting eventually.
It do believe it needs to be reformed. I actually agree with Bernie Sanders on one thing (other than the time of day).I think Bernie Sanders should look into voluntary euthanasia. Probably legal in Vermont. But Bernie Sanders is good people.[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
KC_Hokie has convinced me that the Fed has recently found its calling to go on a crusade to destroy itself.
BRB buying guns, food, ammo, beer and gold.
Or just beer.
coolbeans90
mmm yes, the situations have so many parallels, including our wage and price controls and the oil shocks and the equivalent liquidity traps and oh wait no that comparison totally falls apartThe only real difference today is the fact the world economy is struggling. Plus, the Euro is a disaster which really helps the dollar.[QUOTE="Abbeten"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]It happened in the late 70s once the economy started recovering. It's going to happen again. You can't print trillions and trillions out thin air and not have substantial inflation at some point.
KC_Hokie
But it's not going to last. Inflation has to hit. You don't print $16 trillion out of thin air in a single year without that hitting eventually.
That's actually a huge difference, given the fact that the high demand for liquidity right now is preventing any inflation spikes. And your apocalyptic scenario here is built on the assumption that the Fed won't implement contraction policies when the economy booms. Which is a huge and stupid assumption to make.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment