• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

$840 Billion Medicare Cut

Mycroft said:
Oh...deficit "investment" is different from deficit "spending".

LOL!!
Click to expand...

Yes it is and your laughter is that of a maniac. Here's a scenario you might (and I stress might comprehend):

Two people are going broke. They are under-employed and ends don't meet for either. The future is bleak. One of them is conservative and they spend their last thousand dollars on new rims for their Toyota. The other person is liberal and they INVEST the money in job training.

They both "spent" a thousand dollars but one of them spent it in a way that offers hope to improve their future situation and the other just wanted to APPEAR to have money. See the difference?
 
Lakryte said:
What's amazing is Trump proposes to slash all of these social services yet still run massive deficits. Truly absurd.
Click to expand...

It's just the same old borrow and steal conservative philosophy.
 
GDViking said:
Actually food stamp do stimulate an economy.

They are after all an ag subsidy, by subsidizing farmers they buy new trucks, combines, manure spreaders, and on and on.

Thus stimulating manufacturing, along with grocery stores, farm Implement stores, hardware stores.

You know basically stimulating all parts of the economy.

So to answer your hidden question, yes Nancy Pelosi IS much smarter than you...
Click to expand...

Thats like saying taking money from you and giving it to a homeless person stimulates the economy. Which is better? You spending your money or the homeless person doing it? Best result is no change. IN reality, you're taking money from someone productive an giving it to someone who isnt, through middle men bureaucrats who have to be paid, and regulations, and inefficiency. So you lose through overhead.

If someone needs food, they should trade their labor. THAT stimulates the economy.
 
ludin said:
I know what budget increases and decreases are. it is the people in this thread that do not.
A budget cut means i don't have the money that i had the previous year to do what i need to do.
Click to expand...

No, that is a funding cut. That isn't the same thing.

A budget cut means my budget doesn't go up 100b and i didn't get the 200b i asked for.
Click to expand...

This isn't a question of what you asked for....its a question of what would be needed to cover the expected expenses for the year.

You are absolutely correct.....if you asked for 200B more and only got 100B more, that wouldn't even be a funding cut, since you got more than you had last year. That said, if that 200B dollars was gonna be needed to cover expenses as projected this year, you are going to have to cut back on ****, thus adjusting the budget, not the funding in the first place.

a budget cut means exactly that. my budget is 100b less than what i had the previous year.
that is a budget cut.
Click to expand...

Only when viewed myopically.

If you made 100M dollars last year and you made 100M dollars this year, but your expenses were actually 110M, your budget is going to be cut even though you had the exact same amount of money on hand. That is the point of the budget....it tells you what you are going to have to bring in to break even or make a profit.

me getting 100b more is a 100b budget increase.
Click to expand...

No, that is a 100B dollar FUNDING increase. That money, however, may not actually cover the proposed expenses for the year....you know, the budget. I could give you 100B dollars more this year and you might STILL have to figure out how to cut back on things because the things you needed this year exceeded 100B dollars.

which is completely different than reducing budget costs.
Click to expand...

Lets just point something out. The problem is never with the budget, its with the income. Always. The budget isn't controllable one way or the other. If something is a necessity, its a necessity, and its going to have a cost. That having been stated, nowhere have I stated that there might not come a time where a necessity might have to be ignored due to lack of available funds.

these are all defined words that have meanings. people just want to remain ignorant
so they can just cry and scream.
Click to expand...

Its not ignorant to be able to discern between the budget and funding.
 
jonny5 said:
Thats like saying taking money from you and giving it to a homeless person stimulates the economy. Which is better? You spending your money or the homeless person doing it? Best result is no change. IN reality, you're taking money from someone productive an giving it to someone who isnt, through middle men bureaucrats who have to be paid, and regulations, and inefficiency. So you lose through overhead.

If someone needs food, they should trade their labor. THAT stimulates the economy.
Click to expand...

Wow you have no knowledge of how the program works.

That it helps the poor is just a small fringe benefit. In actuality it is an ag subsidy, hence the reason it is part of the farm bill.

Please tell me how the poor were supposed get Jobs when none were available.

Subsidising the whole economy is a progressive ( I know that word scares cultists) move that helps the whole economy, as proven by the Obama administration.

Yelling get a job to a single parent just makes you feel superior in your own delusional mind...
 
calamity said:
I must have given over $100K to that fund over the past few decades or so. Seems a shame to have it stolen. But, I have no doubt that this is the GOP tax plan.
Click to expand...

Yep. Let the rich raid the treasury, and then cut the programs that we've paid into for our entire careers.
 
Helix said:
Yep. Let the rich raid the treasury, and then cut the programs that we've paid into for our entire careers.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The stated purpose of the cuts is to identify areas where we can save money by reducing payments to for-profit providers and reducing pharmaceutical costs through price negotiation. Why are you taking issue with that? Maybe people need to stop measuring the success and viability of a program based on how many hundreds of billions of dollars it can throw away into a for-profit system with no questions asked.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
[/b]

LOL! Nah. But it must be awfully fun to have to pretend that.
Click to expand...

Reagan continues to be right: The government is not the solution to our problem, the government is the problem.
 
GDViking said:
Actually food stamp do stimulate an economy.

They are after all an ag subsidy, by subsidizing farmers they buy new trucks, combines, manure spreaders, and on and on.

Thus stimulating manufacturing, along with grocery stores, farm Implement stores, hardware stores.

You know basically stimulating all parts of the economy.

So to answer your hidden question, yes Nancy Pelosi IS much smarter than you...
Click to expand...

I do not agree with democrats that spending more government money stimulates the economy without causing short and long term problems to the health of the economy.
 
D_NATURED said:
Only the conservative mind can be dumb enough to think that feeding the hungry is what puts our nation in jeopardy. I normally wouldn't even respond to such pathological retardation but I realize that it's a widespread brand of idiocy on the right. The hatred of the poor literally drips from every conservative syllable.

It's the pentagon and trickle down economics, not the welfare system that is bankrupting this nation. Getting that constantly twisted is the mark, or should I say "marke", of the dangerously deluded.
Click to expand...

Feeding the hungry is one issue. Spending more money on more things we cannot afford is another thing altogether. Spending money we do not have and will not get is the real problem here.
 
D_NATURED said:
Tell me how Santa Clause flies around the world in one night too. Damn, dude, you keep stepping right in to a big pile of dumb, every step you take. There is no such thing as a free market. Deal with it. Markets are created by demand but the consumers are protected by regulations, you know the whole reason for government to exist. You can no more have a free market than you can have a truly free religion. When the human sacrifices start, someone with authority needs to intervene. That "someone", in the case of exploitative, cheating and polluting corporations, is government.
Click to expand...

If government control should be the ultimate good behind the best economies then why have so many economies being run by the government failed so miserably in history?
 
marke said:
Reagan continues to be right: The government is not the solution to our problem, the government is the problem.
Click to expand...

Reagan was literally mentally retarded. He claimed the gov't was the problem and then grew the gov't to record levels.

Thanks for admitting he was an idiot.
 
calamity said:
So, they aren't even pretending anymore

Stealing from the poor to give to the rich--ladies and gents, your GOP.
Click to expand...

As I predicted.

Step 1: create budget crisis in good economy by redistributing wealth to the richest via lopsided tax cuts.

Step 2: propose to solve the deliberately-created crisis by slashing things like health care for the poorest and most vulnerable.

America, home of the "brave",
land of the "eat **** and die".



Oh well, at least they know they can't go after Medicare like that without screwing over their own base in a huge way. I suppose I may not have the plan quite right. That description assumes they actually mean to enact the policies. As usual, it's almost certainly just for show.

"See?! We're trying to cut spending but the meanyhead Democrats won't let us! Shhh, don't look at the fact we have the country borrowing close to a trillion a year in a good economy"




Mycroft said:
Cool. Let's see what Schiffty can do that won't result in "Trillion dollar deficits for the next four years".
.
Click to expand...

Huh, so you actually do think you can fool even one person into believing you give a **** about deficits.

:lamo
 
Helix said:
i'm vested in a public pension that i took as part of my salary. it's fully funded, but this is a red state, so who knows what they'll do to it.
Click to expand...

I agree. Nothing is safe with these massive budget deficits. It's not right
 
Bullseye said:
Medicare and Social Security are paid from payroll taxes and are marginally self-funding. My question is Trump merely reporting projected incomes for those programs?
Click to expand...

The programs are running out of money
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Reagan was literally mentally retarded. He claimed the gov't was the problem and then grew the gov't to record levels.

Thanks for admitting he was an idiot.
Click to expand...

Enemies of God and America called Reagan retarded but that did not stop him from being one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had.
 
marke said:
Enemies of God and America called Reagan retarded but that did not stop him from being one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had.
Click to expand...

So, again, you admit that Reagan was mentally retarded and manifestly evil, put in power by Satan.

Glad we agree.
 
marke said:
Enemies of God and America called Reagan retarded but that did not stop him from being one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had.
Click to expand...

Ronald Reagan was an utterly disastrous monster. May be rot in hell for all eternity.
 
Napoleon said:
Nonsense. The stated purpose of the cuts is to identify areas where we can save money by reducing payments to for-profit providers and reducing pharmaceutical costs through price negotiation. Why are you taking issue with that? Maybe people need to stop measuring the success and viability of a program based on how many hundreds of billions of dollars it can throw away into a for-profit system with no questions asked.
Click to expand...

Horse****. The Republicans have had a hard on for those programs for decades. "Wither on the vine" and all that. Trump is just the latest incarnation.
 
Kobie said:
Ronald Reagan was an utterly disastrous monster. May be rot in hell for all eternity.
Click to expand...

I see you have drunk deeply from the deluded democrat cup of hostility towards "Basketsfull of deplorable" Americans who love God and good.
 
Captain America said:
Oh yeah... Cut Medicare. That's going to get the republicans a lot of votes.

Go for it.
Click to expand...

Scary advice, my wife and I will be on it soon, what great timing. As long as the Dems win, it is good advice.

We all know it won't reduce The Cult's support, what's amazing is the average age of a Cult member. What, 63?
 
marke said:
I see you have drunk deeply from the deluded democrat cup of hostility towards "Basketsfull of deplorable" Americans who love God and good.
Click to expand...

“Love of God” and support for Trump are mutually exclusive positions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom