The left's own narrative proves that they are wrong

[buckeye45_73]

The left loves to crow that their socialist utopia is justified because the U.S. is "the wealthiest nation in the world". Well then why are we $20 trillion in debt? And why did the U.S. government borrow $0.17 of every dollar in 2017? Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

Now, of course, the left will scream "but...but...but....defense!". But like all of their emotional, irrational arguments, that fails as bad as their policies. For starters, defense is the constitutional responsibility of the federal government. Social programs are 100% unconstitutional (thus illegal). Second, we spend a paltry $500 billion per year on defense. Which means if we completely eliminated defense, we would still be running a deficit. But, we spend over $1 trillion per year on the illegal/unconstitutional social programs. Which means if we were to eliminate them, we would be running a surplus.

5 Ways Congress Fell Short in Spending Your Money in 2017

You should learn how the Constitution works before you say anything more.

you should be specific then

the military, currency, and border are the only important things the government is supposed to do.

Are you posting from another planet? That is some awesome wifi.

Nope, I'm surprised on planet buttsex you can get this

again no a response to my post.

 

[Seawytch]

Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

So Trump isn't wealthy? Good to know...

Donald Trump owes Deutsche Bank big bucks | Business | DW | 01.09.2017

 

[P@triot]

Are you posting from another planet?

Are you posting from ignorance? Why yes. Yes you are!

 

[Norman]

The left loves to crow that their socialist utopia is justified because the U.S. is "the wealthiest nation in the world". Well then why are we $20 trillion in debt? And why did the U.S. government borrow $0.17 of every dollar in 2017? Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

Now, of course, the left will scream "but...but...but....defense!". But like all of their emotional, irrational arguments, that fails as bad as their policies. For starters, defense is the constitutional responsibility of the federal government. Social programs are 100% unconstitutional (thus illegal). Second, we spend a paltry $500 billion per year on defense. Which means if we completely eliminated defense, we would still be running a deficit. But, we spend over $1 trillion per year on the illegal/unconstitutional social programs. Which means if we were to eliminate them, we would be running a surplus.

5 Ways Congress Fell Short in Spending Your Money in 2017

Hate whites....

Hate self...

Yeah it does seem to do so, unless you are a masochist.

 

[P@triot]

Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

So Trump isn't wealthy? Good to know...

Donald Trump owes Deutsche Bank big bucks | Business | DW | 01.09.2017

No - he's really not. He's filed bankruptcy multiple times and always has money issues. Bill Gates is wealthy. Warren Buffet is wealthy. They aren't in debt and they don't borrow.

Stop trying to weasel out of the reality that your narrative contradicts itself.

 

[P@triot]

then Obama's spent a trillion to avoid a full blown depression

A. The apostrophe shows possession. So Obama owned the spent?

B. Obama was not empowered to spend tax payer money that doesn't belong to him on "avoiding" anything. It was 100% unconstitutional.

C. It didn't "avoid" anything - it created the a recession. Unemployment went from 7% to over 10% after Obama started throwing around tax payer money like a 20-year old rapper at a club with no clue about economics.

 

[Seawytch]

Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

So Trump isn't wealthy? Good to know...

Donald Trump owes Deutsche Bank big bucks | Business | DW | 01.09.2017

No - he's really not. He's filed bankruptcy multiple times and always has money issues. Bill Gates is wealthy. Warren Buffet is wealthy. They aren't in debt and they don't borrow.

Stop trying to weasel out of the reality that your narrative contradicts itself.

Awwwww, look at you contradicting yourself again...

"At least Trump made his wealth in the private sector." ~ P@triot Nov 22, 2016

"I noticed you haven't denounced one of those women for allowing him to grab anything he wanted because of his wealth and fame." ~ P@triot June 3, 2017

 

[regent]

The left loves to crow that their socialist utopia is justified because the U.S. is "the wealthiest nation in the world". Well then why are we $20 trillion in debt? And why did the U.S. government borrow $0.17 of every dollar in 2017? Wealthy people are not in debt and they don't borrow.

Now, of course, the left will scream "but...but...but....defense!". But like all of their emotional, irrational arguments, that fails as bad as their policies. For starters, defense is the constitutional responsibility of the federal government. Social programs are 100% unconstitutional (thus illegal). Second, we spend a paltry $500 billion per year on defense. Which means if we completely eliminated defense, we would still be running a deficit. But, we spend over $1 trillion per year on the illegal/unconstitutional social programs. Which means if we were to eliminate them, we would be running a surplus.

5 Ways Congress Fell Short in Spending Your Money in 2017

Conservatives love to talk about the national debt, how they would pay it off if given the opportunity, but the only time the debt has been paid off was by a Democrat.
As for defense you might read about the trouble the Democrats had getting a new draft law passed just before Pearl Harbor.

 

[P@triot]

Awwwww, look at you contradicting yourself again...

"At least Trump made his wealth in the private sector." ~ P@triot Nov 22, 2016

"I noticed you haven't denounced one of those women for allowing him to grab anything he wanted because of his wealth and fame." ~ P@triot June 3, 2017

Sweetie...wealth is not a constant. It can be accumulated, lost, accumulated again, and lost again.

 

[P@triot]

Conservatives love to talk about the national debt, how they would pay it off if given the opportunity, but the only time the debt has been paid off was by a Democrat.

That’s because we’ve had no opportunity. The Dumbocrats have strapped the U.S. with unsustainable debt starting in the 1930’s and have continued to add to it ever since.

 

[regent]

Conservatives love to talk about the national debt, how they would pay it off if given the opportunity, but the only time the debt has been paid off was by a Democrat.

That’s because we’ve had no opportunity. The Dumbocrats have strapped the U.S. with unsustainable debt starting in the 1930’s and have continued to add to it ever since.

So how many times did the conservatives pay off the debt before it became unsustainable?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No, our government is SUPPOSED to utilize the third branch of government, the Supreme Court, to determine the constitutionality of laws.

As it does

Is that what they do? Because for the last 75 years, they have been making law.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So how many times did the conservatives pay off the debt before it became unsustainable?

The GOP certainly has done JACK SHIT to pay down the debt. The duopoly is in a race to see who can bankrupt us first by spending twice what China spends, at least 5 times what the next nation spends, and so on.

 

[P@triot]

So how many times did the conservatives pay off the debt before it became unsustainable?

How many times did the Dumbocrats? Answer: 1

And Andrew Jackson’s views don’t even remotely mirror that of the modern radicalized, anti-America Dumbocrat Party of today.

By the way chief, before Abraham Lincoln, there was no Republican Party. More importantly - and brace yourself - there was also no federal income tax. Which means there was nearly no opportunity for the Republican Party to pay it off. They had a small window of maybe 20 years when they held office, weren’t being obstructed by a Dumbocrat Congress, had federal income revenue, and weren’t strapped by the Dumbocrats with unconstitutional, unsustainable debt.

Bet you regret asking that question now. You should anyway...

 

[regent]

So how many times did the conservatives pay off the debt before it became unsustainable?

How many times did the Dumbocrats? Answer: 1

And Andrew Jackson’s views don’t even remotely mirror that of the modern radicalized, anti-America Dumbocrat Party of today.

By the way chief, before Abraham Lincoln, there was no Republican Party. More importantly - and brace yourself - there was also no federal income tax. Which means there was nearly no opportunity for the Republican Party to pay it off. They had a small window of maybe 20 years when they held office, weren’t being obstructed by a Dumbocrat Congress, had federal income revenue, and weren’t strapped by the Dumbocrats with unconstitutional, unsustainable debt.

Bet you regret asking that question now. You should anyway...

We have always had a conservative party in the USA. In fact, the conservatives just couldn't seem to hang on to the voters, at least two conservative parties have died, while the party of Jefferson just keeps rolling along. An income tax is not needed to have a debt, we had a debt when the Revolutionary War ended. Why is our capital in
Washington DC?

 

[P@triot]

while the party of Jefferson just keeps rolling along.

Uh...the Tea Party is the “party of Jefferson”. Constitutional conservatives. It is astounding how bad you are at peddling propaganda.

The Democratic-Republican Party was an American political party formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1791–1793 to oppose the centralizing policies of the new Federalist Party run by Alexander Hamilton

Thomas Jefferson vehemently opposed everything you and your fellow Dumbocrats stand for and advocate.

Andrew Jackson was the first Dumbocrat genius.

 

[P@triot]

An income tax is not needed to have a debt

No kidding, Sherlock. It’s required to pay off debt.

 

[regent]

An income tax is not needed to have a debt

No kidding, Sherlock. It’s required to pay off debt.

So how did Hamilton pay off the first debt--no income tax?

 

[P@triot]

An income tax is not needed to have a debt

No kidding, Sherlock. It’s required to pay off debt.

So how did Hamilton pay off the first debt--no income tax?

Uh....snowflake....Alexander Hamilton was never President of the United States and never paid off the debt.

These programs were funded primarily by a tariff on imports, and later also by a controversial tax on whiskey

While he was Secretary of the Treasury for George Washington (the highest office he ever held), he leveraged tariffs and "sin" taxes. I never cease to marvel at how the left has managed to create the uninformed, uneducated electorate that they need to hold office.

Alexander Hamilton - Wikipedia

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

An income tax is not needed to have a debt

No kidding, Sherlock. It’s required to pay off debt.

Why is an income tax required to pay off the debt?