Printable View
You are literally saying: If this thing that hasn't happened would happen, then you would definitely react in the way I imagine you would! After I have pointed out that you do that like three times in the past two pages.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Can we get just the tiniest amount of self reflection in here, please. What is the point of a speculation like that? How do you think this reflects on you?
Hmm... well. No I'm being pretty literal. I mean there's a spectrum I guess. You know how legally blind people might not be technically completely blind, but they are considered blind in the eyes of the law. I would consider Trump to be legally retarded. He might be just slightly above what would be considered mentally retarded, but for all intents and purposes, he might as well be. One of the dumbest from the standpoint of stupidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
WOW...
What do think Trumps IQ is?
If youre only measure of intelligence is "how well do you articulate on camera, unrehearsed?" then Im not sure what you think intelligence is
I can't answer this until I know what is meant by collusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Are you using collusion by a legal definition? (If so, please share.) Or a more general usage that means, "working together?"
Probably not. Working with someone to create a physics demonstration for use in a classroom is widely regarded as a net positive for education.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
However, it is a high energy demo, which could catastrophically fail if safety is not paramount. IDK the French position on that kind of fun.
His current verbal IQ at least is definitely below average. No-one says 'wettest from the standpoint of water' if they have an average or higher IQ.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Trump is basically the guy at the carnival convincing people to play the ring toss game. He doesn't need to be well-spoken and present intelligent arguments because smart people aren't his customers.
The biggest problem isn't just that he is an idiot who got to be president, although that isn't a good thing. The biggest problem is that he actually believes he's the smartest guy in the room on any topic that comes up, regardless of how little he actually knows about it. Foreign policy and trade are two items he's clearly been fucking up since he got started on them. Balancing the budget is another obvious one. Immigration is a worldwide embarrassment.
And, "zomg the stock market" and "zomg unemployment" are the consistent rejoinders. Let's see how the stock market and unemployment do once no-one will trade with the US 'cause of Trump's protectionism. let's see if those midwestern farmers going bankrupt still wanna play the ring toss game then.
Just use context clues.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
When discussing current events in politics and world affairs in 2018, the term "Russian Collusion" refers specifically to efforts by Donald J Trump, either personally or through his presidential campaign, to make a quid pro quo arrangement with Vladimir Putin (or his agents) to materially affect the 2016 election in Trump's favor by publicizing hacked emails, and promoting specious journalistic content on social media.
That's one hypothesis. Another theory is that the Russians just did those things because they're dicks.
Manafort has not pled guilty to anything remotely close to that.
He may have been 'colluding with Russians' to launder money, but if the headline tomorrow read "Manafort busted for Russian Collusion!" that would be an epic miscarriage of journalism even though that statement is literally true.
yeah yeah, let's put you on camera in front of a worldwide audience with 9 seconds notice and see how smart you look. I doubt very much the 'on-camera' Trump is the same as the 'off-camera' Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Who are the smart people patronizing??Quote:
Trump is basically the guy at the carnival convincing people to play the ring toss game. He doesn't need to be well-spoken and present intelligent arguments because smart people aren't his customers.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/politiqs/
Henry Ford was not very educated. Maybe not even a high school grad, but I might be wrong about that. A newspaper called him stupid and he sued. The attorney put Ford on the stand and peppered with general knowledge questions. Ford said something like "Dude, I can push a button on my desk and in five minutes have 10 experts, on any subject you care to name, in my office"Quote:
The biggest problem is that he actually believes he's the smartest guy in the room on any topic that comes up, regardless of how little he actually knows about it
The court sided with Ford.
Clearly? LOL, ok.Quote:
Foreign policy and trade are two items he's clearly been fucking up since he got started on them.
I'm indifferent on this one. I could agree with you. But I also understand the philosophy of 'spend money to make money'. GDP is kickin' ass, so the investment is paying off, which theoretically should pay back the deficit as long as spending decreases at some point. Trump's pledged entitlement reform in the second half of his term. So the jury's out on that one.Quote:
Balancing the budget is another obvious one
That's some ego you got there. You're opinion = "worldwide" opinion.Quote:
Immigration is a worldwide embarrassment
You think they'd turn to the democrats?Quote:
let's see if those midwestern farmers going bankrupt still wanna play the ring toss game then.
Or are you suggesting that they wouldn't have a voice anymore because they fucked it up so bad with Trump?
What would happen then? Who would represent those bankrupt farmers?
Then it definitely wouldn't be collusion to work with the French to do anything at all.
It's not clear yet if that kind of collusion took place, IMO. There was definitely money changing hands and political cooperation being given (sold, whatever) by Manafort.
Whether or not there was any direct communication about the Trump election may not be material. Maybe I'm too influenced by Hollywood, but it does seem plausible that there were implicit, unspoken agreements. I'm not making any accusations, but it's still an open question. Manafort's recent promise to give significant cooperation probably has implications which haven't come to fruition, yet.
No one has directly been convicted of openly cooperating with the Russians to affect the election, though. That much should not be in dispute.
It is perfectly clear that the Russians definitely did try to affect the outcome of the election. At the very least they used social media to spread fake news and fake outrage over the fake news. To what depth that affected anything is unknown. I know less about the DNC hacking. It's not in dispute that happened, right?
It's perfectly clear that there were shady, illegal activities involving Russia by Trump's closest advisor(s?) during the final 8 months of his campaign.
So there's good reason to retain a bit of skepticism that Trump himself is squeaky clean in all of this. No reason to jump to the conclusion that he definitely had anything to do even with Manafort's activities, but it's certainly plausible that he did.
Regardless, it doesn't look good for him either way. Best case scenario is that Trump had no knowledge of Manafort's activities, but that's not a good thing, IMO. It's an easy lesson to learn or hire someone to make sure that oversight doesn't happen again, but it's still a low-level mistake to hire someone involved in money laundering, tax evasion, and whom has political ties to a nation with interests in affecting the outcome of our election.
Yeah, for like 5 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Source? What exactly do you mean "shady shit"? As far as I know he's guilty of money laundering and bank fraud regarding his own money. Why would the Russians pay him to do that? What would the Russians get out of paying Manafort to launder Manafort's own money?Quote:
He's also getting paid by Russia to do shady shit.
What could he have done differently? It was after Trump hired him that the Feds were able to make a case against the guy. And they probably would have never found him if he hadn't been thrust into the public eye the way that he was.Quote:
The most generous interpretation is that Trump didn't vet his campaign manager appropriately.
Was Manafort effective at his job? Did Ted Cruz withdraw before the convention or not?Quote:
Which is serious enough. And the reason he didn't vet him is that he just "hires all the best people" intuitively. In other words, he talks to people for five minutes and decides he likes them and gives them an important job.
This is foil hat bullshit and you know it.Quote:
The worst interpretation is that Trump was money laundering for Russian oligarchs and Manafort was "recommended" to him by same.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEBUNMVP_8kQuote:
That would seem at least consistent with Manafort's weak ass, stuttering denials that Trump had any business dealings with Russians.
First, who said he had 9 seconds notice? No-one told him he'd be talking about a hurricane that day? How could he watch cable news for hours a day and not know there was a hurricane?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Second, saying that you can't form proper sentences using proper words speaking off the cuff is retarded. You actually can if you're not an idiot.
Contemporary accounts suggest he is much the same apart from using more profanity when the cameras are off.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Most likely the candidates who know what the word "fictitious" means.Quote:
Origins: On 8 October 2011, the IAHYM News Network web site published a
fictitious article claiming that liberals on average had lower IQs than conservatives.
Trump can do the same thing; problem is he won't listen to them but insists he knows better.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
No, I think they will vote again for the guy who's tariffs made them go bankrupt ldo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
fypQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Really? It's not clear? There hasnt' been a shred of evidence to that effect in over 2 years now. I thought you were a man of science. Do we go about trying to prove negatives?Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
Citation neededQuote:
There was definitely money changing hands and political cooperation being given (sold, whatever) by Manafort.
For how much longer? Mueller's team doesn't work for free you know. Think about how many food stamps 30 lawyer's salaries can buy.Quote:
I'm not making any accusations, but it's still an open question.
If he is able to rat-out Trump, he had far greater incentives to do it earlier. If he's keeping secrets, it means he was willing to risk dying in prison to keep them. He's not going to give them up now just so he can die in a slightly nicer prison.Quote:
Manafort's recent promise to give significant cooperation probably has implications which haven't come to fruition, yet.
Far more likely is that he doesn't have any secrets to tell.
Yeah, but...would you not be shocked if they didn't? It's kind of on us to defend ourselves. If they're successful, it's because WE fucked up. The Russians hacking the DNC would have been a nothingburger if it didn't expose actual corruption at the DNC.Quote:
It is perfectly clear that the Russians definitely did try to affect the outcome of the election.
The russians rigged the election by exposing how the democrats were rigging the election. There's a lot of blame to go around there.
Well, put it in context. I've heard various reports regarding the scope of that campaign. Though every report I have heard as estimated the total advertising expenses at under $200K. The total amount spent by both campaigns exceeded 2.2 billion. Hillary outspent Trump almost 3 to 1. She spent 1.6B, he spent about 600M.Quote:
At the very least they used social media to spread fake news and fake outrage over the fake news. To what depth that affected anything is unknown.
Is 200K of Russian mischief really worth the last 2 years of spaz-out?
Julian Assange was dodgy about Russia being the source, but yeah, it's a pretty sure bet that Russia did that shit.Quote:
I know less about the DNC hacking. It's not in dispute that happened, right?
But again, there's plenty of blame to go around. If Russian hacked nothing, they wouldn't have influenced anything. But some Bernie voters found out that the DNC was helping Hillary unfairly, and then either didn't vote, or voted for Trump. So yes, you could say Russia influenced the election. But, if I told you that your wife was cheating on you, would you blame me for your divorce?
What's that now? Citation needed. Are you talking about Flynn and Popadopolous? Has that not been explained thoroughly enough?Quote:
It's perfectly clear that there were shady, illegal activities involving Russia by Trump's closest advisor(s?) during the final 8 months of his campaign.
Again, the only bad news we know about Manafort is that he tried to skimp on his taxes. He and Trump were friends for about five minutes, I'm not sure it's even reasonable to hypothesize about an illegal relationship. Has every person you've ever encountered had a clean criminal record? If not, I think we should look into your activities, right?Quote:
So there's good reason to retain a bit of skepticism that Trump himself is squeaky clean in all of this. No reason to jump to the conclusion that he definitely had anything to do even with Manafort's activities, but it's certainly plausible that he did.
Are you saying that Trump should have known that Manafort was a tax cheat before the Feds did? What "knowledge of Manafort's activities" should Trump have had? What has come to light about Manafort now that would have been reasonable for Trump to know back then?Quote:
Regardless, it doesn't look good for him either way. Best case scenario is that Trump had no knowledge of Manafort's activities, but that's not a good thing, IMO.
It's not like there's a registry of money launderers. The whole purpose of such activity is to obfuscate. How exactly would you expect Trump to figure it out? And if it is possible for Trump to have figured it out...why wouldn't the Feds have figured it out before Trump went looking?Quote:
It's an easy lesson to learn or hire someone to make sure that oversight doesn't happen again, but it's still a low-level mistake to hire someone involved in money laundering, tax evasion,
Do you think someone in Obama's justice department would have done Trump a solid and tipped him off?
How many of those do you think there are? I'd put the number somewhere north of 190Quote:
and whom has political ties to a nation with interests in affecting the outcome of our election.
Egg on my face on that one. Shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
To be fair I've been for way too long and I'm stoned.
If I put a camera on you 20 hours a day, I wonder how dumb you would look if I took all the worst shit and talked about each gaffe for weeks on end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
So the presumption here is that he usually is being smart and coherent and only suffers occasional slip ups. I assume you could link me a clip where he sounds smart and coherent then, right? Anything from his presidency. He does have a camera on him for 20 hours a day, so if he's smart, said camera should capture that at some point, right? Like a cctv at a haunted house.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
How much do you think I care about how other people perceive me? I'll give you a clue... about as much as you care about what I'm having for dinner. In case I've misread that situation, probably pizza.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I don't need to self reflect with regards to the bollocks I talk on the internet. It's not like I'm gonna apply for a job and my potential employer is going to say "wait a minute, didn't you say something dumb on an obscure internet forum?".
In case you're wondering if I was making a point, I was... that the hypothetical situation of Hillary taking it up the arse from a stripper toy boy, and then having her body mocked by that very toy boy, would be reason for outrage by the very people who are mocking Trump. Forgive me if I'm wrong to say you'd be one of them. This kind of mockery exposes the hypocrisy of what society is becoming. Doesn't that concern you?
There are plenty of clips of Trump speaking in "normal" language and sentences.
Even posted in this thread, but a while ago.
The hyperbole that Trump is stupid is misguided at best.
Stupid people don't establish a brand that is recognized world-wide and maintain that brand for decades.
Give credit where it's due.
Maybe he's a con-man. Maybe that describes every politician in Washington. I'm not bothered by it.
Politicians are all full of shit and expecting any one of them to be anything else is naive, IMO.
The challenge is open to you as well!
No, your fantasy doesn't concern me because it's a fantasy.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
You're getting the Banana treatment from now on.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...on_reform.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HQh0AD7Ros
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgMCczkaWCk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1HSmX3gAiE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fX5y8RZeZE
Theres hours of this stuff
So in 4 of those he's reading from a piece of paper. I'm not challenging his ability to read words someone else wrote down for him.
The hurricane florance one is the only one where he's speaking freely, and it starts off like this: https://youtu.be/y1HSmX3gAiE?t=2m45s
can you give me a time stamp where he stops sounding like a retarded person and becomes coherent?
You watched an awful lot of video in not an awful lot of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
What's your beef exactly?Quote:
The hurricane florance one is the only one where he's speaking freely, and it starts off like this:...
can you give me a time stamp where he stops sounding like a retarded person and becomes coherent?
Fake News.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
It must've been the other thread which is 2x as long as this one, and I'm bored of scanning forum pages.
If it makes you feel better, your efforts would have been completely in vain anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
Someone who believes the guy who became a billionaire real estate tycoon in NYC, parlayed that into a massive international merchandise brand, followed that up by winning a presidential election is stupid....can't be reached.
Irrational behavior does not respond to reason.
Oooh please elaborate. You mean I was getting the ong treatment before?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Maybe he was smart at some point. I'm not going back 20 years. I knew of him, but I knew nothing about him before he ran for president.
Quote:
What's your beef exactly?
Talking about hurricane Florence. - A lot of people apparently didn't know that "all of that water" is coming their way. They look outside, and they see this beautiful weather. But Trump knows, and he's telling them: it's coming their way. They didn't know that.Quote:
First of all Henry you're doing a fantastic job, everybody, the job you're doing, the coordination. We just left NC, they got hit really, really hard, and they are working, and all of that water is coming your way. A lot of people don't know that. They assume - you look outside and you see this beautiful weather, but for the next couple of days it's gonna get rough in SC.
Is this the best you can come up with?
I pointed out to you many times already that I'm not dumb enough to fall for your shit shovelling tactics. If you write 10 posts to my one sentence comment, I will read the first paragraph. If you give me 5 links when I ask for one... you know what, I actually looked at every one, but in 4 of them he started off reading, and this one was the one where he was talking, so I chose this one to comment on, which seems fair.
I've rarely, if ever, seen Trump speak intelligently off the cuff on anything
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1HSmX3gAiE
In this one, he isn't reading off a paper, and yeah while he approaches coherence most of the time, he still sounds pretty dumb.
"Washington is with you, Trump is with you, we are all with you 100%, and uh, we'll get through it. And I think the most exciting part is going to be that rebuild."
So basically a bunch of platitudes (which is fine, that's his job, but not exactly 'intelligent speaking'), and then a really dumb thing after.
Seriously, what the fuck is exciting about rebuilding after a hurricane? Like, yay, something to look forward to after the hurricane! Who says that?
Show us a clip of him talking about how economics works, or trade, or foreign policy. I'll even give you an example of someone speaking intelligently about an issue to give you a head start
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Icq60Uxd3As
So tell me, does Trump sound more like that, or like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Cb0nzJJKN8
Also, https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=id...w=1405&bih=867
It looks to me like that talk took place after the rains had stopped, and the weather appeared to be beautiful. however, storm surges following a hurricane can be just as destructive as the winds and rains during the actual hurricane, if not more so.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
That may be something some people may not think about, or expect. Apparently you didn't.
Sounds like the kind of thing worthy of a public service announcement from the guy in charge.
PT Barnum was a great salesman who got really rich, but no-one thought he should be in charge of the whole country because of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Next you'll be saying "Tom Brady. Look at all the Super Bowls he's won. How could he do that if he wasn't smart? He should be president too!"
Tom Brady is selling books telling people they can prevent sunburns by drinking more water, among many other batshit crazy things. He's disqualified himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
lol, as opposed to the guy who got his start in politics by saying a bunch of batshit crazy things like Obama was born in Kenya, and Mexico is going to pay for our border wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Are you saying he isn't smart though? What about all those Super Bowls he won? How could he do that if he wasn't smart? Forget all the stupid shit he says.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Fuck, I think "the banana treatment" is being ignored.
Please oskar, anything but that.
Oskar isn't ignoring me. He agreed to shut the fuck up as a result of his inferior IQQuote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
oskar's lucky I'm not a dick with my modding, otherwise I'd edit his posts to have him admit he's a homosexual.
Let me remind you that your objective was to find a clip where Trump sounds smart, and you give me a clip where the first thing he says is that a lot of people don't know that a hurricane, which he refers to as "lots of water" is coming their way; during a hurricane briefing.
And by that I'm basically admitting that I was about to, then thought better of it.
With Brady, it's not really a matter of overall cognitive ability, he just has a few ideas that make you wonder how he's successful at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Like I don't think Tom Cruise is stupid. But scientology? C'mon.
Ong, I might as well talk to a senile person. There's no reason to talk to you if you'll just keep repeating the same thing over and over.
POST-hurricane briefingQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
The "water coming" refers to storm surges and flooding. Like all that rain that fell in the mountains....now has to make it's way through the river valleys and out to the oceans. But that's kinda tough because all the heavy winds raised the tide so much, that the ocean is kinda backed up for a few days. It's called a Storm Surge.
What's the banana treatment though? Not liking me? Because you didn't before, and I gave no fucks then. What makes you think I give fucks now? What's changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I mean if there's a lot of retards in the audience with zero attention span, that would make sense. But it's not like the news hasn't been saying the same thing for days on end. So when he phrases it like 'people don't know this...but' - it's actually pretty dumb.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Also 'lots of water' is about the most simpleminded description of a hurricane ever. Why not just call it 'big wind and much wetness'. It's like a child talking.
Which also reminds me of when he described Puerto Rico as an island 'surrounded by water, big water, ocean water.'
That said, they for sure didn't know the exciting part of the hurricane is the rebuilding after. Now that's gonna be fun!
I hate to be a pedant, but the storm surge has nothing to do with winds, and happens because of low pressure... there is less air per square inch above the ocean, so there's less pressure on it pushing it down. The winds churning the water up, that's what causes the waves and is a whole different world of shit.
Actually I'm only half right. I did some learning. Winds are a factor because of their inward rotaional nature, they churn water towards the centre of the system, where pressure is at its lowest. The stronger the winds, the more water gets blown towards the centre.
Pressure, tides, topography and winds, all four of them influence storm surge signifcantly.
:thumbsup:
Yeah, my bad. I watched the video again, but this time I didn't skip forward to Trump but started at the beginning where some random old guy explains the whole situation like you would expect from an adult, and now I understand what's going on. Thank you, random literate non-retarded person, capable of speech!Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
For someone who gives no fucks, you sure won't get off my dick.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I like the interaction.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
You still haven't told me what the banana treatment is. I want to know how bad it is. I'm going to bed soon, it will help me sleep better if I know what I'm up against.
Ok I'll get off your dick. I assume what you mean is you'll show me no respect, as opposed the tiny amount you previously did. That's fine by me. I'm surprised there was a tiny bit there in the first place, I always assumed I was already in banana territory.
Regardless, it doesn't change the fact I like you slightly more than the "not very much" that I did before you posted Bill Frisell.
It's cool....I'm here to educateQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Rather than debate Trump's intelligence for the umpteenth time, what do we think the odds on Brett Kavanaugh are?
I gotta hand it to the Dems on this one. This is a shady, underhanded, reprehensible dirty trick, but man did they pull it off to perfection.
When the allegations came out, I rolled my eyes and put the chances of BK getting confirmed at 99%
Now I think it's 50/50
He could have confessed to everything he's accused of, and probably still got through. Instead, the Dems bullied him into a complete denial.
He could have said "yeah I was 17, I'm really sorry, and I've lived ever since then with complete integrity as you know from crawling up my ass throughout the confirmation process, which by the way is the seventh or eight such time I've been vetted for an appointment in my career."
That probably would have been fine. it's plausible that BK and the lady had different interpretations of the incident. He thought it was horseplay, she thought it was rape. He's remorseful, apologetic, and has lived beyond reproach ever since.
Instead, he said "I did not do this" to congress. If that turns out to be wrong...he's fucked.
Well played you bulldog faced cunt.
https://i.imgflip.com/25lbgl.jpg
Which is why Jake Tapper keeps attacking Alexandria ocasio Cortez on her left policies and "how are we gonna pay for that", while never once asking any right wing person ever "how are we gonna pay for any of this interventions and continued wars and military bases you just announced, while simultaneously cutting taxes"Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Yeah, the "media" leans left. Also, that's some awesome South American white powder you seem to be on constantly
I have no idea if what banana says is correct, but that woman certainly has a face like a bulldog.
Is that Angelina Merkel's prettier sister?
In case anyone want to accuse me of hypocrisy, I'm totally fine with people mocking Trump for being fucking ugly, too.
Though if I had a gun to my head and was told to fuck either Trump or Merkel, I still have to think about it.
I too edited a post on the phone and it got deleted, should be a post from yesterdayQuote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
I've undeleted your post #1153. If you intended that to be deleted, then my apologies, go ahead and delete it again and I won't do that in future.
By the way, if you do intend to delete a post, you may be able to "hard delete" it, which would stop mods from even reading deletd posts, let alone restoring them. The ability to hard delete could be a mod function though, I'm not sure.
To be fair, 'left' in America means 'not too far right of centre' to the rest of us. So when a socialist turns up, she's basically a radical communist in their eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
That said, I'm pretty sure the 1/3 of the country who only watches Fox News is not getting inundated with 'leftist double standard talk'.
No, you've got it backwards. Anyone to the right of Lenin is considered alt-right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Attacking? Got a clip to share? Are you sure he wasn't just saying "Yes, socialism is brilliant but people have concerns about cost. here is your chance to put their minds at ease. Please explain how socialism works"Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
It's not really Tapper's fault if she is hopelessly and dangerously stupid. If her answer is "yes healthcare will cost more, but folks will save money on funerals so it balances out", then I think Tapper is obliged to distance himself from that.
Besides, Tapper is one guy. If you think AOC hasn't been getting 95% slow-pitched softballs then you're not paying enough attention.
Because they already know the answer and don't want to give Republicans a forum to give it. The answer would be "GO BACK TO ECONOMICS 101 YOU RETARDED FUCK AND LEARN ABOUT HOW LAFFER PROVED THAT TAX REVENUES INCREASE AS TAX RATES DECREASE"Quote:
while never once asking any right wing person ever "how are we gonna pay for any of this interventions and continued wars and military bases you just announced, while simultaneously cutting taxes"
If that got out, it would be a nuclear disaster for the left.
https://taxfoundation.org/does-lower...nment-revenue/Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyp9fh-u4w8Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
We can't possibly have the highest corporate taxes in the world AND still be on the left side of that curveQuote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The curve doesn't say what t* (the optimal tax rate) is; that's unknown. All the curve shows is that your argument that tax cuts = more revenue is an oversimplification.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
If you read the article, it also shows the Bush tax cuts pushed the revenues down. So it seemed at that time at least, tax rates were probably on the left side of the curve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
LOL, I guess what you call slow-pitched softballs isn't actually slow-pitched softballs, more like 115MPH heaters in the kitchen
Step outside of your bubble for a second and hear. There is no left wing in the ol' US of A. There is right and there is slightly less right. There is no left. There is now a progressive movement coming up, but see how fast the supposed left quashes those bugs.
Whenever someone actually left wing shows up, they get shoved in the dem party and made fun of, then killed off in rigged primaries/elections. Democrats prefer a Republican winning rather than some actually left-wing democrat. When you are against their chosen puppets, you will be accused of the, what's the word, you won't vote because it's a woman/tranny/minority etc. I forget the word right now
This is what I'm talking about
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdtsu25S--g&Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Quite slow-pitched fastballs, aren't they? Like a warmup for the softball homerun derby, isn't it?
When hopelessly stupid Republicans show up, they do get softballs which are decidedly slow pitched. No outfielders nor infielders either only a pitcher and a catcher. All they have to do is make sure to not hit a foul. They can bunt and it's still a homerun.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Stick your head out of the sandQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
:facepalm:Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
He also did it to Bernie, of course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4u9uEnBjIg
It also says that was a misleading result regarding the bush cuts because of the depression in 2002 (thanks Clinton). Reagan went through the same thing. His approval ratings in 1982 were dog shit. Then the tax cuts started working.....just like the bush tax cuts started working.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
It seems there's a 10-18 month delay in the passing of tax cuts, and the generation of tax revenue. Tax cuts still work though.
He also used the Anti-Semitic card on the entire UN for calling out Israel's shenanigans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0czuPVn3rFQ
"Left" bias in media. Hahahahahahaha banana you're a funny guy
Citation neededQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
@Jack. If you want to post a clip of something that happened on CNN, post it. I'm not watching Kyle Kulinski's retarded narrative analysis. I'll use my own eyes and ears thank you very much.
What??? Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have very high odds to be the Dem nominee in 2020.Quote:
Step outside of your bubble for a second and hear. There is no left wing in the ol' US of A. There is right and there is slightly less right. There is no left. There is now a progressive movement coming up, but see how fast the supposed left quashes those bugs.
If you think that the Dems aren't embracing socialist concepts like heavy redistribution, high government regulation, massive social welfare programs, and weak borders, then I want some of what you're smoking.
https://cosmoscon.files.wordpress.co...pg?w=640&h=394Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
It's equally consistent with the tax cuts causing the recession. It doesn't say it did or didn't one way or another, but you don't get to pick and choose what causes what and who gets the credit based on what you want to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
By this logic the current economy is all thanks to Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Both Reagan and Bush ran serial deficits. How is that evidence of tax cuts generating more revenue?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
http://www.stsw.com/2014/10/us-feder...ns-to-pre.html
If by 'work' you mean 'don't work, this is just republican propaganda used to convince you that rich people should pay less taxes', then I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
https://www.decodedscience.org/parad...d-states/42918
Ya, no shit. People have more money to spend because the government is taxing them less, so GDP rises.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
There still has to be some balance in the equation; you can't just lower all taxes to zero, spend the same amount, have a GDP of 15% and claim it's a great economy.
Just like now: Trump gave the economy a huge tax cut stimulus it didn't need, saw marginal gains in an already strong economy, a big rise in the deficit, and claims victory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
You could have just watched the CNN part, and then brush off Kulinsky's comments, as every single one of those clips include the CNN part in full
LOL at this shitQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Sure, you can think of it that way. Like, if Obama was trying to grow tomatoes, and after 8 years, all he had was a decrepit, pathetic little weed that sprouts some tiny red fruit once in a while. Then Trump comes along, feeds it, waters it, gives it the respect it deserves. Then it triples in size and produces a massive bounty of tomatoes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
In that scenario, you could say Obama did such a poor job, that Trump benefited from inheriting such an easy challenge. If Obama had done anything right, the plant would already be very healthy, and Trump wouldn't be able to affect it as much.
Spending and revenue are separate things. Your question makes no sense.Quote:
Both Reagan and Bush ran serial deficits. How is that evidence of tax cuts generating more revenue?
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Either we're talking, or you're here to be a mocking dickhead. Pick one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
Why don't they do it then?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Oh I know; because they're not idiots.
Kulinsky's retarted analysis is BTW exactly on point pretty much every single timeQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Because they're too stupid apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Income tax rate in New Hampshire is 0%. Sales tax is also 0%
Shit runs fine here.
Really? Is that why his studio looks like his mom's basement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
lol, still seeing curves where the lines are straight I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
How's that arithmetic GDP growth going? Is it up to 50% yet? You should try comparing Trump to Lincoln; his GDP growth is astronomically better in dollar terms.
Look again, and explain to me where these big jumps in revenue were in '83-84 and '03-04, and how they were associated with tax cuts. And then explain how the concommitant economic growth couldn't better be explained as borrowing money to stimulate the economy, a la Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
http://www.stsw.com/2014/10/us-feder...ns-to-pre.html
Aren't you mocking "Kulinsky's retarded narrative analysis" while dismissing the entirety of the clips you asked for?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
And then you somehow call other people dickheads>
LOL
Oh, and Kamala Harris as "left candidate". You made my day with that one
Sip the haterade, don't chug itQuote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
lol, you mean they find a different way to tax people and still generate income? That's the same as 'cutting taxes to zero'?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Quote:
"We have the third highest (property tax) in the country,"
The DOW went full blown pryopism before Trump was even inaugurated, let alone before he could borrow anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
More dickeheadery? Do you want to comment specifically on any of Harris's policies and explain why they are non-left?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
If you count EVERY act that sends money from citizens to the government and call it all "tax", then the % that NH residents pay to the gov't is by far the lowest in the nation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Yet we're consistently ranked among the most economically successful and most desirable places to live.
How does that answer my question?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
The economy is "great"
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/2/1763976...mp-republicans
https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/inv...uts/index.html
http://time.com/money/5267940/compan...tock-buybacks/
Btw, please do not hotlink from other sites. When the image goes down, or they complain about bandwidth, the quote will be just a blank space to future FTR readers trying to follow your, ahem, musings.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Use an image hoster such as imgur instead.
Moving on,
https://www.economist.com/the-econom...re-of-progressQuote:
GDP is a creature of the industrial era of mass-produced, homogenous goods. It is a far less useful guide to affluent economies where the quality of services is prized over simply having more stuff. It is badly attuned to digital economies, where activities that were once paid for, such as contacting friends or finding information, no longer attract a charge. GDP is thus increasingly failing to fully capture gains in average living standards. It is tricky to compare the life of a medieval king to that of a modern-day worker. But it is almost as difficult to put a number on how much better is a consumer basket that includes smartphones and music streaming to one filled with fax machines and audio-cassettes.
I shouldn't have to had you known who it was you were talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
This one is homework for you.
Next you will be telling me Corey Booker is also an actual leftist
Not interested in your condescending dickheadery. Just fuck off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
Attachment 1047Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
Good byeQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
What would happen if they did spend it creating new jobs?Quote:
Here's How America's Biggest Companies Are Spending Their Trump Tax Cuts (It's Not on New Jobs)
Are there alot of unemployed people available to fill those jobs?
McDonalds around here is hiring 14 year olds. They pay 12 bucks an hour and they're so desperate for people that they're tapping 8th graders.
Where I'm from in Alberta (that's a province of Canada for anyone who doesn't know), the taxes are the lowest and the economy is the strongest as well. We also happen to be sitting on a giant lake of oil though, so not sure it's as simple as you wanna think it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
I like how you take your local McDonalds' hiring practices as the barometer of the economy. Like there's no college grads out there looking at those MacD's ads and thinking 'yeah, think I'll wait for something better.'Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand