2024 POTUS Thread...

[Smitty]

Reagan's massive spending also hurt the economy, because supply side economics is a bad policy, and that's been proven for decades.

Compared to what?

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Compared to what?

He doesn't ever want his taxes raised, but he also hates supply side economics. What does he want?

 

[Plan9Misfit]

Compared to what?

Compared to investing and saving money. Reaganomics is a hell of a lot better than Keynesian economics or any variation of it, but running an economy exclusively through consumption is a bad idea. It's what dries up retirement benefits and erodes middle class wealth. You can't spend your way into prosperity, just like you can't tax your way into it.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

He doesn't ever want his taxes raised, but he also hates supply side economics. What does he want?

No taxes and I support investing/saving rather than spending. I'm a Libertarian. We don't like big Government, and spending creates a bloated Government.

 

[boozeman]

Definitely a Chardonnay vibe.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

No taxes and I support investing/saving rather than spending. I'm a Libertarian. We don't like big Government, and spending creates a bloated Government.

I think the vast majority of us here agree with that.

Now, how does anyone deal with the Leviathan that is already in place? Nobody can wave a wand and shrink the government 90%, no matter how much we'd like it. The interest on the debt alone now is a trillion every 33 days or whatever.

Serious question.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

Definitely a Chardonnay vibe.

From a box, maybe. No glass. Just spout-to-mouth.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

I think the vast majority of us here agree with that.

Now, how does anyone deal with the Leviathan that is already in place? Nobody can wave a wand and shrink the government 90%, no matter how much we'd like it. The interest on the debt alone now is a trillion every 33 days or whatever.

Serious question.

I wish I had an answer for that, amigo. In my opinion, the real problem is Congress. The President puts his ideas and agenda out there, but it's up to Congress to do something about it by creating legislation to drive the agenda. And given that they're far more interested in pitting Americans against each other rather than driving real policy and change, I don't think much of anything can be accomplished unless that changes. It's one of the main reasons why I support the "vote out the incumbent" idea, especially if it means voting out Democrats.

I'll say this: I'm 100% convinced that the group in this forum can develop far more reasonable and effective solutions to many of this country's issues than Congress. The difference in intelligence between the two mediums is obvious.

Please remember, I dislike both sides. I'm of the opinion that just because a person disagrees with one side doesn't mean that they're obligated to agree with the other. They can disagree with both sides equally. It may be for very different reasons, but the level of disgust balances out equally. Like I've shared before, I live by 3 rules (in no particular order):

1. Don't fuck with my money
2. Don't fuck with my guns
3. Don't fuck with my family

That's it. And if anyone does, I immediate oppose them.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I'll say this: I'm 100% convinced that the group in this forum can develop far more reasonable and effective solutions to many of this country's issues than Congress. The difference in intelligence between the two mediums is obvious.

Sure we could. But I'd say the difference wouldn't be in intelligence, but because we would have actual good intentions and lack of corruption.

I do think there are some good politicians out there. Not many, but some. Problem is, the system already in place has taken on a life of its own to the point that even the good ones have to work within limitations. That's where I disagree with you in general. I want the ones who are at least closest to your ideal -- not to just say they're all equally worthless so it doesn't matter who is in there.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

Sure we could. But I'd say the difference wouldn't be in intelligence, but because we would have actual good intentions and lack of corruption.

I do think there are some good politicians out there. Not many, but some. Problem is, the system already in place has taken on a life of its own to the point that even the good ones have to work within limitations. That's where I disagree with you in general. I want the ones who are at least closest to your ideal -- not to just say they're all equally worthless so it doesn't matter who is in there.

I totally understand. My level of cynicism is at an all-time high, and I don't expect people to agree with me. I've just abandoned all hope and given up believing that those corrupt, despicable fuckers will ever do anything other than what's in their best interests, not ours.

 

[Smitty]

Compared to investing and saving money. Reaganomics is a hell of a lot better than Keynesian economics or any variation of it, but running an economy exclusively through consumption is a bad idea. It's what dries up retirement benefits and erodes middle class wealth. You can't spend your way into prosperity, just like you can't tax your way into it.

Fair enough. I say all the time that otherwise smart people get all confused when they start pondering economics cause there are so many variable that they just get lost.

It's very simple.

Make more stuff, there's more stuff for everyone to have, the prices go down.

There's not much more to it than that.

 

[Rev]

My level of cynicism is at an all-time high

Brought to you by ....

 

[Smitty]

I wish I had an answer for that, amigo. In my opinion, the real problem is Congress. The President puts his ideas and agenda out there, but it's up to Congress to do something about it by creating legislation to drive the agenda. And given that they're far more interested in pitting Americans against each other rather than driving real policy and change, I don't think much of anything can be accomplished unless that changes. It's one of the main reasons why I support the "vote out the incumbent" idea, especially if it means voting out Democrats.

I'll say this: I'm 100% convinced that the group in this forum can develop far more reasonable and effective solutions to many of this country's issues than Congress. The difference in intelligence between the two mediums is obvious.

Please remember, I dislike both sides. I'm of the opinion that just because a person disagrees with one side doesn't mean that they're obligated to agree with the other. They can disagree with both sides equally. It may be for very different reasons, but the level of disgust balances out equally. Like I've shared before, I live by 3 rules (in no particular order):

1. Don't fuck with my money
2. Don't fuck with my guns
3. Don't fuck with my family

That's it. And if anyone does, I immediate oppose them.

The problem with Congress is that, especially the House, it's most made up of the big mouthed idiots you knew in high school that had big aspirations but were too much of a loser to make anything else out of their lives.

 

[Cotton]

Definitely a Chardonnay vibe.

Good lord, I can't stand that damn woman.

 

[Cotton]

Sure we could. But I'd say the difference wouldn't be in intelligence, but because we would have actual good intentions and lack of corruption.

This is 100% correct. If we could somehow get money out of politics, it would solve 90% of our problems.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

Fair enough. I say all the time that otherwise smart people get all confused when they start pondering economics cause there are so many variable that they just get lost.

It's very simple.

Make more stuff, there's more stuff for everyone to have, the prices go down.

There's not much more to it than that.

It’s the primary reason why eliminating regulations, monopolies, and barriers of entry are important for a healthy economy. That was something that Trump did very well.

 

[Plan9Misfit]

The problem with Congress is that, especially the House, it's most made up of the big mouthed idiots you knew in high school that had big aspirations but were too much of a loser to make anything else out of their lives.

I like to say that Congress is comprised of people who want to make very nice incomes without ever having to be responsible for doing any actual work.

 

[boozeman]

 

[Cotton]

Please let it be Whitmer.

 

[boozeman]

Please let it be Whitmer.

Kelly would be the smartest choice.