What does "your side" get wrong?

@sh76 said
I agree 100% with you on that.

If I could force the federal government to do one thing, it would be to balance the budget, especially when the economy is good.

In good times, the federal government should be running budget surpluses.

That debt is not sustainable. Nobody would run up this much debt unless they were planning a big war. A really big war. So big that fiscal catastrophe is not a priority anymore.

Many countries that we owe money to. They will never get it back. Debt is not a problem if you dominate the world. Create a new digital currency. You can use your cell phone. Every purchase you make will be monitored. And if you do not conform you cannot buy anything.

They do not care if they go to war with China while fighting a proxy war with Russia. Now they want a war with Iran while fighting a proxy war with Russia. Ukraine was just to keep Russia occupied with their own war so they do not help countries the US is trying to invade, like Syria. Remember how Russia helped Assad fight off the terrorists?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_intervention_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

Now that Russia is busy in Ukraine we can use our proxy Israel to start a war with Iran. The Zionist Jews are just pawns to take the brunt of the backlash. Installing a minority to be puppets of imperialism is an ancient imperialist technique.

Sometimes the minority that takes the brunt of the backlash are exterminated in a horrible genocide. Notice the Belgian Mandate for East Africa. That minority group that was used by Belgium in Rwanda were exterminated in a horrible genocide because the resentment lingered long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate

The Jews in Israel are in danger of being exterminated like the Tutsis. From the link below:

"The roots of the genocide lay in Rwanda’s colonial past. A German colony until 1916, Belgium took control of Rwanda after Germany’s defeat in World War I. Belgian colonial administration favored Tutsis over Hutus using racist beliefs to justify their discriminatory practices. These beliefs claimed that because Tutsis were, wrongly, assumed to have a different bone structure, including thinner noses and higher cheekbones, they must come from European or North African descendants, unlike the Hutus, who were shorter, had wider noses, and therefore determined to be from African descendants. The Belgians employed the colonial model of “divide and rule,” which allowed them to rely on indirect rule by Tutsi elites. Part of the “divide and rule” strategy included the introduction of ethnic identity cards, which solidified the identities of Hutu and Tutsi, which had previously referred more to social status and wealth. In other words, colonialism introduced ethnic conflict into a social structure where ethnicity previously did not exist. Later, in post-colonial history, this antagonism evolved into a systematic, genocidal ideology that pitted the Hutus against the Tutsis and justified the extermination of Tutsis."

https://sfi.usc.edu/collections/rwandan

Belgian colonial administration favored Tutsis over Hutus using racist beliefs to justify their discriminatory practices. Sound familiar?

Part of the “divide and rule” strategy included the introduction of ethnic identity cards, which solidified the identities of Hutu and Tutsi, which had previously referred more to social status and wealth. In other words, colonialism introduced ethnic conflict into a social structure where ethnicity previously did not exist. Sound familiar?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_identity_card

Israeli Jews are being used just like the Tutsis were. Pawns. We all know what you do with pawns. Sacrifice them when necessary. Do yourself a favor and read that link about Rwanda and colonial rule. You will learn a lot.

@Metal-Brain said
That debt is not sustainable. Nobody would run up this much debt unless they were planning a big war. A really big war. So big that fiscal catastrophe is not a priority anymore.

Many countries that we owe money to. They will never get it back. Debt is not a problem if you dominate the world. Create a new digital currency. You can use your cell phone. Every purchase yo ...[text shortened]... essary. Do yourself a favor and read that link about Rwanda and colonial rule. You will learn a lot.

With your well-written post, you don't mention what 'budgeting and balancing' Harris has planned...................................because there is no such plan.
Only spending. She will asking for trillions. She will simply dole it out.

So, how do your thoughts square with a spendthrift who knows NOTHING about growing an economy.....only dolling out? Who wants to take our reins?

@AverageJoe1 said
With your well-written post, you don't mention what 'budgeting and balancing' Harris has planned...................................because there is no such plan.
Only spending. She will asking for trillions. She will simply dole it out.

So, how do your thoughts square with a spendthrift who knows NOTHING about growing an economy.....only dolling out? Who wants to take our reins?

Non partisan economists have run the numbers and agreed that Trump's plan adds almost double to the debt.

Republicans don't even disagree, because facts no longer matter.

Edit: sorry it's not almost double, it's more than double. What the heck are you doing chastising Harris on this issue? There's a moose in the road but you want to swerve around the squirrel?

https://www.crfb.org/papers/fiscal-impact-harris-and-trump-campaign-plans

@sh76 said
Agree on all three points, but I find it interesting that you would describe yourself as a conservative for this purpose. I don't think I would classify you as right-leaning, even in the pre-Trump sense. But of course, I'm just going off a general sense from your posts; I don't know you in real life...

Maybe it's because I complain a lot about Republican hypocrisy?

I can't remember if Rand Pauls entitlement overhaul was attempted before or after trump? I was definitely in favor of his efforts, and I don't think Republicans have done much of anything good since then.

If Republicans addressed the three points I mentioned, then I'd vote for them in every election.

@wildgrass said
Non partisan economists have run the numbers and agreed that Trump's plan adds almost double to the debt.

Republicans don't even disagree, because facts no longer matter.

Edit: sorry it's not almost double, it's more than double. What the heck are you doing chastising Harris on this issue? There's a moose in the road but you want to swerve around the squirrel?

https://www.crfb.org/papers/fiscal-impact-harris-and-trump-campaign-plans

There can be no perfect plan, no perfect economy.
Best to compare plans, economy as well as border and child castraytions, and pick the candidate for you.
The problem is, Trump is the only one with specific plans, nothing to compare to.
He says he will correct inflation and cut gasoline prices in half etcetera by drilling. On the other hand, his opponent says that she will fix everything by taxing billionaires. There are only 750 billionaires in this country.

@sh76 said
If I could force the federal government to do one thing, it would be to balance the budget, especially when the economy is good.

In good times, the federal government should be running budget surpluses.

Agreed. Debt is one area of misgiving I have in voting for Democrats (which I will do, nonetheless, for the foreseeable. The GOP must be completely destroyed for their disgusting betrayal of America.)

Heather Cox Richardson repeats this mantra at least several times a week: 'Politicians and commentators agreed that most Democrats and Republicans shared a “liberal consensus” that the government should regulate business, provide for basic social welfare, promote infrastructure, and protect civil rights. It seemed the country had finally created a government that best reflected democratic values.'

It lines up well with the Democratic Party. The part that rubs the wrong way, though, is Dems being over-eager to regulate business. Not regs about pollution (which are the only regs Trump cut) but on things like healthcare with 'certificates of need' and licensing, our arcane tax code and then bailouts like flood insurance and the farm bill.

I don't criticize Dems for wanting to do good things; I criticize them for going too quickly to ham-handed, top-heavy regulatory approaches which sometimes do little and occasionally make problems worse.

Government should be focused on protecting all our rights equally, not on finding somebody who is in trouble and "fixing" them.

@TheListener said
There can be no perfect plan, no perfect economy.
Best to compare plans, economy as well as border and child castraytions, and pick the candidate for you.
The problem is, Trump is the only one with specific plans, nothing to compare to.
He says he will correct inflation and cut gasoline prices in half etcetera by drilling. On the other hand, his opponent says ...[text shortened]... hat she will fix everything by taxing billionaires. There are only 750 billionaires in this country.

Not true at all, both plans are well laid out. Read the link

Kamala = high debt spending
Donald = more than double what Kamalas number will be

Vote accordingly.

-Removed-

How many Jews did the UK refuse and send back to Nazi Germany to die in the camps?

That's where the US asylum laws came from. We can't turn people away until Congress changes the law.

And Trump won't let Congress change the law.

@wildgrass said
Non partisan economists have run the numbers and agreed that Trump's plan adds almost double to the debt.

Republicans don't even disagree, because facts no longer matter.

Edit: sorry it's not almost double, it's more than double. What the heck are you doing chastising Harris on this issue? There's a moose in the road but you want to swerve around the squirrel?

https://www.crfb.org/papers/fiscal-impact-harris-and-trump-campaign-plans

Of course his path is not without some bumps. I will venture he will be at least 60%, or 95% ahead of the game in 4 years.


WILL KAMALA!!!!!!!??????????!!!!?????????????


Right, no great choice. So, which one? Does she even know what Supply Side economics is? She most certainly does not, as discoveed in a 'gotcha' question. She is a dead head.

Pick your poison. How about somoeone who leads vs someone who does not.

-Removed-

Not his fault that they are coming. But he did torpedo the fix that was on the table. He wanted to run on the immigration "issue", so he told the Speaker of the House to table the bill. The Speaker of the House saluted, said, "How high, sir?" and did as he was told.

Trump couldn't afford to let Biden have a "win" on immigration.

@spruce112358 said
Not his fault that they are coming. But he did torpedo the fix that was on the table. He wanted to run on the immigration "issue", so he told the Speaker of the House to table the bill. The Speaker of the House saluted, said, "How high, sir?" and did as he was told.

Trump couldn't afford to let Biden have a "win" on immigration.

What a friend told me, who is a republican, is that the bill was torpedoed because it would also give millions to Ukraine.

What giving Ukraine and birder control have in common and why it would be in 1 bill us beyond me.

Can anyone verify this?