The Next President is...

[disgruntledemployee]

How can Elon fire a mil GS?  Doesn't he have to follow the same process as the civ's regular boss?

[ClearedHot]

15 minutes ago, Day Man said:

if the goal was to lose users and a shitload of value, then yeah it worked

I think the goal was to restore free speech, and yeah, it worked.

[dream big]

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

I must have missed your outrage when Biden killed thousands of coal miner jobs...his flippant retort for all those people was "learn to code".

Not defending what is happening as I think it is unneeded chaos....but the other side has done things that are equally insensitive and I never heard a peep out of you.

You mean business as usual? Politics as usual wrt General Officer firings? That’s too reasonable and a Stoical response  for a group of folks that need to be constantly outraged by something.

[Banzai]

17 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Nice try at a save lol.

To be clear, your original comment was a false equivalency that sidesteps the actual arguments about holistic tax policy. You aren’t dumb (although you avoid arguments and argue fallaciously), so I know you know that taxes are a societal thing to fund programs for everyone. If I could get more for myself by paying more taxes, maybe I would. But in your scenario, you are arguing that people should just pay more money to get nothing - I.e. give the disproportionate return on those benefits to moochers like you.

If you support reduction of taxes while we’re in a deficit, i assume you would also support commensurate reduction in government entitlements like military retirement pay and disability, right? I mean. In the end you should be getting the same amount of money. 10% cut to taxes, 10% cut to pay, all evens out and seems super fair! Something tells me none of you would advocate for that.

No, you guys want more of everything, cuts to things you don’t use, and to not engage in a grown up conversation about how to realistically balance the budget.

[Sua Sponte]

3 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

How can Elon fire a mil GS?  Doesn't he have to follow the same process as the civ's regular b

[GrndPndr]

2 hours ago, Banzai said:

To be clear, your original comment was a false equivalency that sidesteps the actual arguments about holistic tax policy. You aren’t dumb (although you avoid arguments and argue fallaciously), so I know you know that taxes are a societal thing to fund programs for everyone. If I could get more for myself by paying more taxes, maybe I would. But in your scenario, you are arguing that people should just pay more money to get nothing - I.e. give the disproportionate return on those benefits to moochers like you.

If you support reduction of taxes while we’re in a deficit, i assume you would also support commensurate reduction in government entitlements like military retirement pay and disability, right? I mean. In the end you should be getting the same amount of money. 10% cut to taxes, 10% cut to pay, all evens out and seems super fair! Something tells me none of you would advocate for that.

No, you guys want more of everything, cuts to things you don’t use, and to not engage in a grown up conversation about how to realistically balance the budget.

You may have missed it.  Tax cuts do not have to be a zero sum gain.  Tax reductions (if structured correctly) result in increased revenue.  So no, we're not thinking about giving up toys in order to provide tax relief of some kind to the masses.

[uhhello]

Trump admin just walked back the ramifications of the GS email.  Voluntary and no repercussions if not responded to.

[Sua Sponte]

2 minutes ago, uhhello said:

Trump admin just walked back the ramifications of the GS email.  Voluntary and no repercussions if not responded to.

Yeah, the attorneys know it’s illegal. That’s why Kash Patel told the FBI not to respond. 

[BashiChuni]

[SurelySerious]

Elon FWA’ing with everyone’s time. IG complaints inbound.

[Sua Sponte]

28 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

IG complaints inbound.

No complaints when Trump fired the IGs.

[Lord Ratner]

7 hours ago, Banzai said:

No, you guys want more of everything, cuts to things you don’t use, and to not engage in a grown up conversation about how to realistically balance the budget.

Why do you clowns insist on creating some false aggregate of positions to create the perfect conservative bogey man to debate instead of the people actually here in the discussion? 

 

You wanna balance the budget? Freeze all distribution programs at their nominal levels immediately. Let inflation solve the rest. Cut Medicare of for anything but stabilization and pain management after 80 years old. Fix Medicaid so that some retarded homeless junkie can't use emergency rooms for free while everyone with a job and insurance has to pay a fortune for after-hours care. Reform all benefits programs to *once again* require working age adults to work or starve. Strip the military acquisitions process of all special interests. No more buying pens from the blind just because. Remove all tax benefits for capital gains on publicly traded and private equity assets. It's income, you pay income tax on it. Stop securing home loans and student loans at the federal level and stop the rocket ship of rising home and education prices. Means-test VA disability benefits. For every $3 above $100,000 you make you lose $1 of your benefit. Obviously you aren't financially suffering from your disability. 

 

None of this is going to happen right now because everybody is hooked on the drug of free shit. What's going to happen is at some point we are going to get into a bloody messy war, a bunch of our kids are going to get fucking slaughtered by the Chinese or the Russians or the Europeans or the Africans or whoever the fuck we end up fighting, and all of a sudden people will get very serious again. You'll spend your savings on war bonds that you know are going to depreciate in value because what other choice do you have when it's directly funding the survival of your children in some God forsaken warzone? It will suck for a lot of people with pink hair and custom pronouns as the society exits the war with a newfound sense of homogeneity and community responsibility. Being your "authentic self" will be wiped away by the same judgemental fury of the surviving servicemen who will shun and shame those who believe the society owes them a payout or a tax shelter. Both the ultra rich and the ultra lazy will find themselves with fewer allies than ever. 

 

Until then, chill out, have a beer, and be happy that we don't die of paper cuts or colds. This has all happened before and it will all happen again.

[BuddhaSixFour]

And just like that, proof it was never about the budget:

 https://www.zerohedge.com/political/house-republicans-advance-trump-agenda-final-vote-looms-tonight

 

“The House's resolution lays out a $1.5 trillion floor for spending cuts across committees with a final target of $2 trillion, as well as a $4.5 trillion ceiling on the deficit impact of any GOP plan to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts, The Hill reports. It also includes $300 billion in additional spending on the border and defense, as well as a $4 trillion debt limit increase.”

 

 

[Sua Sponte]

36 minutes ago, BuddhaSixFour said:

And just like that, proof it was never about the budget:

 https://www.zerohedge.com/political/house-republicans-advance-trump-agenda-final-vote-looms-tonight

 

“The House's resolution lays out a $1.5 trillion floor for spending cuts across committees with a final target of $2 trillion, as well as a $4.5 trillion ceiling on the deficit impact of any GOP plan to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts, The Hill reports. It also includes $300 billion in additional spending on the border and defense, as well as a $4 trillion debt limit increase.”

 

 

“If the Republican plan passes under the rosiest assumptions, which aren’t even true, we’re gonna add $328 billion to the deficit this year, we’re gonna add $295 billion to the deficit the year after that, and $242 billion to the deficit after that, under the rosiest assumptions” Massie warned, adding “Why would I vote for that?”

[disgruntledemployee]

So Trump is going to veto this spending bill, right?

[Lord Ratner]

4 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

So Trump is going to veto this spending bill, right?

Look dude, if there's someone here you can quote or remember supporting Republican spending increases, let's see it. Otherwise this obviously ignorant "if you voted for someone you must support every single thing they've ever done or ever will do" act of yours is just boring. With the exception of maybe one or two people, every single person who voted for Trump here has been quite honest about the trade-offs being made when voting for him.

 

I bet the people in your life would benefit greatly if you unplugged yourself from political news for a bit.

Edited February 26 by Lord Ratner

[BuddhaSixFour]

3 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Look dude, if there's someone here you can quote or remember supporting Republican spending increases, let's see it. Otherwise this obviously ignorant "if you voted for someone you must support every single thing they've ever done or ever will do" act of yours is just boring. With the exception of maybe one or two people, every single person who voted for Trump here has been quite honest about the trade-offs being made when voting for him.

 

I bet the people in your life would benefit greatly if you unplugged yourself from political news for a bit.

Thats not our point. We know you are against spending increases and that Brabus is genuinely concerned about the deficit. The point is that less than a month in, the GOP is proving it doesn’t share those values at all, and that DOGE is saving pennies over here to distract you while you while they rob you over there. 
 

[Lord Ratner]

12 minutes ago, BuddhaSixFour said:

Thats not our point. We know you are against spending increases and that Brabus is genuinely concerned about the deficit. The point is that less than a month in, the GOP is proving it doesn’t share those values at all, and that DOGE is saving pennies over here to distract you while you while they rob you over there. 
 

No dude. That's not the point. Also the Republican spending plans were known before the election. It was all over the news obviously.

 

The point is that the Republican party has recognized what the Democrats knew and started years ago. Once the American people are hooked on free cheese, you ain't unhooking them. Not without some sort of external catastrophe resetting societal expectations. Donald Trump is the reason the Republicans have figured that out. I lament at the implications, but I don't deny the reality. 

 

If you want to go shout at a crowd of deranged mega hypocrites, you're at the wrong website. Like I said, everyone here who supported Donald Trump that I know of did so explicitly acknowledging the problem with deficit spending. I have gone into great detail of my personal beliefs. We are going to spend ourselves into Oblivion no matter what, so what I have to vote on is who is going to allocate this magic money towards the items that best position us to win world war 3, which I believe is inevitable.

 

It doesn't help that we are also in the middle of a political shift, where the parties fall apart and realign under new identities. So all of your gnashing at wailing at Republicans is pointless, because the Republican party of George w bush has already been killed, and we don't know what the Republican party being born of Donald Trump will look like when it is fully formed. Just like progressivism assassinated the Democratic party, we have no idea what they will look like when they reorganize. For now, it looks like Republicans are going to steal labor away from Democrats. But I'm sure there will be more realignments involved. 

 

 

[BuddhaSixFour]

Okay, then I’m not talking to you personally. Carry on.

[brabus]

@BuddhaSixFour To be honest, DOGE and this bill combined are cutting trillions in wasteful spending, not “pennies.” Now what I don’t like is why are we possibly adding upwards of 3-4 trillion to the deficit? Essentially this negates all the wasteful spending we’re cutting. I suppose the positive for one side is at least the money is potentially being spent on things they agree with/can accept vs. the alternatives. Regardless, I don’t like it at all. I’d like to know what spending falls under the massive amount earmarked under ways and means? Don’t have time to dig into it, but they’d be very hard pressed to convince me it makes sense to add to the deficit. 

Edited February 26 by brabus

[disgruntledemployee]

5 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Look dude, if there's someone here you can quote or remember supporting Republican spending increases, let's see it. Otherwise this obviously ignorant "if you voted for someone you must support every single thing they've ever done or ever will do" act of yours is just boring. With the exception of maybe one or two people, every single person who voted for Trump here has been quite honest about the trade-offs being made when voting for him.

 

I bet the people in your life would benefit greatly if you unplugged yourself from political news for a bit.

You read quite emotional. It's OK.

Trump blustered his lies of making things great again, to include out of  control spending.  Some Rs balk and he brow beats em in line, except 1.

I called out Trump's actions, that's all.  And it's too easy because he does it all the time.  And yet you seem to take it personally.

Instead of attacking me for calling the shot, lay some criticism where it belongs... the dude doing the shots.  You could have easily said, "Not a good look to go bashing Ds and out of control spending and yet he looks to do the same." Or something like that.

[HeloDude]

If the Trump/GOP don’t lower the deficit then it was all a joke.  I get how they want to “increase spending at a lower rate” compared to the Dems, but this is the same nonsense they (the GOP) have done before.  If someone wants to know where I stand, look at what Massie says and I’m sure I’m close to his position.

[BashiChuni]

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If the Trump/GOP don’t lower the deficit then it was all a joke.  I get how they want to “increase spending at a lower rate” compared to the Dems, but this is the same nonsense they (the GOP) have done before.  If someone wants to know where I stand, look at what Massie says and I’m sure I’m close to his position.

this. the deep state is in both sides of the political spectrum. it's why businesses contribute to both parties...why risk ever being out of influence/power based on elections?

[Sua Sponte]

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If the Trump/GOP don’t lower the deficit then it was all a joke.  I get how they want to “increase spending at a lower rate” compared to the Dems, but this is the same nonsense they (the GOP) have done before.  If someone wants to know where I stand, look at what Massie says and I’m sure I’m close to his position.

Prepare to laugh, because that joke is about to be reality. 

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, Sua Sponte said:

Prepare to laugh, because that joke is about to be reality. 

i'm afraid you're correct