Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 120,472
- 125,444
- 3,645
Well, I knew you would convulse, per your programming.Of course.
I didn't know you had a sense of humor.
But the facts show what they show.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well, I knew you would convulse, per your programming.Of course.
I didn't know you had a sense of humor.
It's the first step. Can't grow the deficits and pay the debt. Unless you know of some special math that I don't.I would submit that narrowing the deficit is better than enlarging it, but then all you're doing is delaying the inevitable financial catastrophe. That is not the same as reducing the debt from X to X-Y.
When it comes to spending the taxpayers money, you seem to think that thereWell, I knew you would convulse, per your programming.
But the facts show what they show.
It doesn't matter what I think, the facts show what they show.When it comes to spending the taxpayers money, you seem to think that there
are distinctions between the two parties. I laugh at that, yes.
We can't keep borrowing and adding to the $39T Debt either.We can't tax OR wealth confiscate our way out of the national debt problem while the spend-o-holics politicians are still borrowing and spending like maniacs.
Second, the damage to the economy by confiscating people's wealth would be catastrophic. Only a politician idiot would think that after you can't tax the people any higher, you pivot to just confiscating their wealth. WTF
Screw the facts? Who said that other than you???It doesn't matter what I think, the facts show what they show.
But I think your compulsion to say "screw the facts, I will go with my feelings" sums you up very well.
Doesn't matter what I think.You seem to think that democrats are better with the purse strings.
Riiiight, you go with that, tiger.Doesn't matter what I think.
The numbers show what they show, in re: democrat vs republican presidents.

I will go with the facts. And you go with your fee fees. Per your programming.Riiiight, you go with that, tiger.
So?Discretionary spending was $1.8T for 2025. Mandatory spending was $5.1T. So that left a $1.9T deficit to start.
SS is going insolvent
Medicare is going insolvent
Trump wants a $500b add to defense
Obamacare is a mess
Interest on the debt grows as the debt grows
Medicaid and Welfare are rife with fraud
No way $5T can work.
- Defense Spending: Primarily funds the Department of Defense, military operations, and related security programs. The FRA allows for a maximum of $895.2 billion, with emergency adjustments included for unforeseen events.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=0fcc...DI1LUFwcHJvcHJpYXRpb25zLVBvc3QtQ1IucGRm&ntb=1- Non-Defense Spending: Covers all other federal programs, including health, education, housing, and infrastructure. The cap is set at $736.4 billion, with certain programs exempt from the cap or adjusted through legislative mechanisms.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=0fcc...DI1LUFwcHJvcHJpYXRpb25zLVBvc3QtQ1IucGRm&ntb=1- Emergency and Disaster Funding: Approximately $140.1 billion is designated for emergency or disaster relief, including $110 billion approved in response to Hurricane Milton.
View attachment 1229639
If you cut all spending. All of it. It's not enough to pay down the debt. There was no debt before the first round of massive tax cuts for the rich in 1983, coupled with increased military spending.So show us how we pay it down without new taxes, considering that "discretionary spending" isn't discretionary.
Why?So we need a lot more revenue.
Nope. If the debt never went down there was no surplus. Saying the surplus was spent is stupid, and proves there was no actual surplus.Read again.
There was a surplus, but the pols couldn't resist cutting taxes, wars, recessions, and borrowing more.
View attachment 1229806
You don’t have to do that today.So we don't need to borrow and add to the $39T debt.
Actually the Debt went down $453b:Nope. If the debt never went down there was no surplus. Saying the surplus was spent is stupid, and proves there was no actual surplus.