Quote Originally Posted by JimmyS1985 View Post
I've mostly said my piece, I'll just point out a few things.
Cherry picking which things you want to point out doesn't make your point any stronger.

He had $1 trillion deficits, after inheriting the WORST ECONOMIC DOWN TURN IN 80 YEARS.
First of all, I'm not convinced that Obama didn't at least partly cause that economic down turn. We saw what the stock market did when Trump got elected. Why wouldn't you expect the inverse once it became clear that McCain had no chance?? And Trump inherited a leaky garbage bag full of foreign policy disasters. Our deficit spending would be lower if we didn't have to gear-up for military showdowns with rogue regimes in the middle east and the Korean peninsula.

"For Trump’s tax cuts to pay for themselves, the economy would have to grow by $5.5 trillion, or roughly a sustained 4.5 percent, for the next 10 years, according to CRFB.
Cherry picked figures. The same article you linked said that the growth target could be as low as $3 Billion, which would only require half as much growth. Furthermore, it's wholly retarded to look at the issue in a vacuum. Only a damned fool would imagine greedy politicians racking up national debt just to slash taxes and essentially give themselves raises. That's the kind of argument a 9 year old would make.

Think harder.

Is it maybe just maybe possible that some of these politicians support tax cuts as part of a multi-planked economic platform that also includes spending cuts? Have Trump and the Repubs not signaled that the next major legislative project is entitlement reform?? Maybe try getting your news from outside your liberal echo chamber.

My point is if your citizens basically are brainwashed, and live in a false reality, that does not bode well for this country's future going forward. We need to do a better job at making sure people can distinguish between false bullshit, and actual facts.
So you're saying is that you only want freedom of speech to apply to those voices that fit your definition of "true", and anyone speaking something you deem to be "false bullshit" needs to be silenced? Do I have that right?

If you make lots of things illegal, you get lots of criminals. Make less things illegal, and you get less criminals.
I don't even get what your point is here. We've already been over the numbers. Drugs are responsible for 5% of the prison population. If all you want is legal drugs, then "mass incarceration" is a hopelessly poor argument. If your problem is with mass incarceration itself, then what else would you make legal, and by how much would it reduce the prison population.

I hired a couple lady friend, and had to pull my junk at one point, and that easily requires for lewd and lascivious behavior in our legal code
You "had to"? Sorry bud, I'd rather live in a country where I can walk down the street and see people who respect modesty. I don't have to risk getting a glance at your junk. And if that means I have to pay a little bit more in taxes to put a flasher in prison...so be it. Money well spent.

It seems you're basically arguing that you take pride in the US having a higher incarceration rate per capita, than the next 194 countries. You don't see it as a problem that we incarcerate more of our citizenry than any of the other 194 countries. And I do find it to be a problem. And that's our disagreement.
I mentioned nothing of pride. Nor do I see incarceration as a problem. I've managed to stay out of prison, and it wasn't that hard. I don't feel like government laws are stifling my behavior at all. If you do, it's because you're a psycho who can't control himself and probably should be locked up.

However, if I were to stipulate that it was a bonefide goal to reduce the prison population, I think the absolute LAST potential solution I would consider is legalizing drugs and prostitution.