The TRULY ***Official*** 2024 Election Season thread

TheTexan said:
Follow up question:

If you primarily just care about government expenditure, why do you care if Trump wins or loses? From an expenditure standpoint both parties are indeed pretty much identical.
Click to expand...

Actually that's not true:


The analysis released Monday by the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget suggests a Harris presidency could increase the national debt over 10 years by $3.5 trillion. That’s even though the vice president’s campaign insists her proposed investments in the middle class and housing would be fully offset by higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy. Her campaign policy guide states that Harris is “committed to fiscal responsibility — making investments that will support our economy, while paying for them and reducing the deficit at the same time.”

The same analysis says former President Trump’s ideas could heap another $7.5 trillion onto the debt and possibly as much as $15.2 trillion.


https://apnews.com/article/budget-deficit-trump-harris-kamala-debt-1ee3ff65e22ccf19d19b792ee22c46da
Click to expand...


Even Ron Paul wrote an article citing very similar numbers. If you are interested in slowing things down while you're still alive to somewhat live comfortably, like I am, best keep Trumptard waaaaay away from that Oval Office.

It's the money honey.
 
PAF said:
Well, all indications are that the folks waaayyyy above lobbyists and not part of the WH have already decided that the full-blown Police-State is ready to be rolled out.

Percentage-wise, the gay community is still tiny in numbers, and unlike [MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] I couldn't care less if they have a sex change operation or not. Those gay-pride marches are nothing but a fad, and as long as I don't cross the same street it doesn't affect me one way or the other. Eventually, just in time for the next election season, it will no longer be a fad, but something else that they can generate Fear Porn for the voters.

Trump himself has written and announced his Police-State agendas funded by federal tax dollars. But people are so much in arms about "he/she/it is a q-u-eer!" that they are going to vote for said Police-State and not think anything of it. In 4 or 8 years Giuliani's massively expensive and anti-BoR Nationwide "Stop & Frisk" and militarized LEO and Immunity will be as commonplace as Patriot Act and TSA and folks will think nothing of it.

By that time, they will come up witch ah poor baby irritates "republicans" *again* and they will be happy to shred the last remnants of the BoR until they no longer matter/exist anymore. Harris' $3 Trillion versus Trumps projected $15 Trillion seems like a sensible trade among "conservative republicans" who no longer care about spending. Spending which is necessary to roll this garbage out.

Every. Republican. Administration. The. Same. Thing. Happens.
Click to expand...

Cop-sucking and advancement of police-state policies are definitely not unique to the Republican party. They're both pretty fucking guilty of that.
 
PAF said:
Even Ron Paul wrote an article citing very similar numbers. If you are interested in slowing things down while you're still alive to somewhat live comfortably, like I am, best keep Trumptard waaaaay away from that Oval Office.

It's the money honey.
Click to expand...

Yea, I can't say I'd take anything in that apnews article seriously, but I would definitely read the Ron Paul thing if you've got a link to that.
 
PAF said:
It should be in here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?477303-Donald-Trump-On-The-Record

or in one of his threads here [it's definitely in his subforum where Ron Paul discusses it]:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?296-Ron-Paul-Forum
Click to expand...

I wasn't able to find the Ron Paul link, but I did do some fact checking of the apnews article. It seems that their source is a report done by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

https://www.crfb.org/papers/fiscal-impact-harris-and-trump-campaign-plans#appendix3

If you take all the numbers they've provided at face value, then yes, a Trump presidency would increase the deficit more than Kamala. But this is not due to any significant difference in spending between him and Kamala. The deficit would increase, according to these numbers, due to Trump collecting less in taxes, via reduction in taxes and extensions of tax breaks - which is a good thing.

So if your goal for this country is to maintain or decrease the deficit, yea sure support Kamala or whatever.

But if your goal is to collect lower taxes, then Trump is the better choice.

Either way, in total they appear to spend a comparably similar amount of money. I didn't do the math to see who actually spends more, but on glance it looks pretty close.

The side by side analysis with low and high estimates they provide is below:

updated%202024%20PnP_fig3_v1.png.webp
 
Last edited:
TheTexan said:
I wasn't able to find the Ron Paul link, but I did do some fact checking of the apnews article. It seems that their source is a report done by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

https://www.crfb.org/papers/fiscal-impact-harris-and-trump-campaign-plans#appendix3

If you take all the numbers they've provided at face value, then yes, a Trump presidency would increase the deficit. But this is not due to any significant difference in spending between him and Kamala. The deficit would increase, according to these numbers, due to Trump collecting less in taxes, via reduction in taxes and extensions of tax breaks - which is a good thing.

So if your goal for this country is to maintain or decrease the deficit, yea sure support Kamala or whatever.

But if your goal is to collect lower taxes, then Trump is the better choice.

Either way, in total they appear to spend a comparably similar amount of money. I didn't do the math to see who actually spends more, but on glance it looks pretty close.

The side by side analysis with low and high estimates they provide is below:

updated%202024%20PnP_fig3_v1.png.webp
Click to expand...


Thanks. Unfortunately, that chart doesn't include all spending and new federal agency rollouts.

For example, back in 2016, nobody except for Trump, Gates, Pfizer and Moderna knew that there was going to be an Operation Warp Speed or the Cares Act. It took 3 years after that Inauguration Event and the Senate Round Table before they decided that it was ok to tell us.

You have to factor in his Agenda47 programs which rely massively on Federal Dollars which isn't included in that chart - yet.
 
PAF said:
Thanks. Unfortunately, that chart doesn't include all spending and new federal agency rollouts.

For example, back in 2016, nobody except for Trump, Gates, Pfizer and Moderna knew that there was going to be an Operation Warp Speed or the Cares Act. It took 3 years after that Inauguration Event and the Senate Round Table before they decided that it was ok to tell us.

You have to factor in his Agenda47 programs which rely massively on Federal Dollars which isn't included in that chart - yet.
Click to expand...

Probably right, but then again it's probably safe to assume the Democrats have quite a bit of things they are gonna surprise us with financially as well.

I'll admit to being blissfully un-aware of most of the details of Trump's agenda, but I'm casually reviewing it now. Some of it's good. Some of it's... ok? Some of it is just like WTF?

Under the WTF category:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-the-american-academy

He wants to centralize college education? That's just fucking genius, DJT - fucking absolute genius.

Even if it is presumably "revenue neutral" by taking money from the money we are giving to colleges.... why not just STOP GIVING THEM MONEY.

Yea, on balance I still strongly maintain that Trump is significantly a better choice than Kamala, but *goddamn*, he does not make it easy sometimes
 
TheTexan said:
Probably right, but then again it's probably safe to assume the Democrats have quite a bit of things they are gonna surprise us with financially as well.

I'll admit to being blissfully un-aware of most of the details of Trump's agenda, but I'm casually reviewing it now. Some of it's good. Some of it's... ok? Some of it is just like WTF?

Under the WTF category:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-the-american-academy

He wants to centralize college education? That's just $#@!ing genius, DJT - $#@!ing absolute genius.

Even if it is presumably "revenue neutral" by taking money from the money we are giving to colleges.... why not just STOP GIVING THEM MONEY.

Yea, on balance I still strongly maintain that Trump is significantly a better choice than Kamala, but *goddamn*, he does not make it easy sometimes
Click to expand...

Yep that the right link to his Agenda47. Unfortunately, again, reading it at the surface seems like some of it may be good. But a deeper dive and analysis such as what Mises does, it is nothing but, and I quote from the Mises articles "Bait and Switch".

That's why they need Trump back in office again, because as a crony businessman, he knows how to get it done, unlike Kamala who wouldn't have a clue.

Concerning government, I would much rather have a clueless person who doesn't know how to implement new programs, as opposed to somebody who does. YMMV. Remembering that under republican leadership, that is when most of our rights are negatively affected - and costliest.
 
[MENTION=33245]TheTexan[/MENTION]

Here are some articles which are Red Alert Alarming:

Donald Trump - Agenda47: For Homeschoolers

Though Trump’s “Agenda 47” makes him seem like a champion of homeschoolers, it’s another bait-and-switch, laying the groundwork for total government oversight, and has potential for demanding arcane metrics from the same establishment from which homeschoolers are escaping.


Donald Trump - Agenda47: The American Academy

Donald Trump - Agenda47: Stop-and-Frisk Agenda

Check out his On the Record as well.
 
Last edited:
PAF said:
[MENTION=33245]TheTexan[/MENTION]

Here are some articles which are Red Alert Alarming:

Donald Trump - Agenda47: For Homeschoolers

Though Trump’s “Agenda 47” makes him seem like a champion of homeschoolers, it’s another bait-and-switch, laying the groundwork for total government oversight, and has potential for demanding arcane metrics from the same establishment from which homeschoolers are escaping.


Donald Trump - Agenda47: The American Academy

Donald Trump - Agenda47: Stop-and-Frisk Agenda

Check out his On the Record as well.
Click to expand...

I could be missing something but I don't see any problem with his Homeschool agenda. It just says its basically a $10,000 tax deduction. Tax deductions are usually good.

Could it be a bait and switch? Yea, but anything can be a bait and switch. Should we oppose a tax deduction, on the premise that it might be a bait and switch?

But yea, the other 2 items, big time red alert for sure
 
TheTexan said:
I'm curious where you stand on RFK's point on free speech [...]
Click to expand...

Remember when RFK Jr. said he wanted to criminalize and punish the publication of medical information he disagrees with?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Occam's Banana said:
PAF said:
Well, RFK is a start, at least in raising awareness concerning the corrupt pharm complex.
Click to expand...

Using the power of government to jackboot publications you don't like is certainly the start of ... something.
Click to expand...

(But I wonder if RFK Jr. is still to be considered "a start", now that he's persona non grata for endorsing Trump.)
 
TheTexan said:
Yikes. How hard is it to just not want to arrest people for saying stuff? Pretty hard it seems.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

It's almost as hard as wanting to abolish the Department of Education without also wanting to just replace it with something else.

TheTexan said:
He wants to centralize college education? That's just fucking genius, DJT - fucking absolute genius.
Click to expand...

Occam's Banana said:
Occam's Banana said:
Trump says he will get rid of the Department of Education if elected president

“We’ll have a tiny group to make sure everyone is teaching English, math, etc. Department of Education goes.”
Click to expand...

LOL @ "etc."
Click to expand...

We should get rid of the "Department of Education" ... and then replace it with a "Department of Teaching English, Math, Etc." [and/or an "American Acedemy"]

:tears:
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TheTexan said:
If you take all the numbers they've provided at face value, then yes, a Trump presidency would increase the deficit more than Kamala. But this is not due to any significant difference in spending between him and Kamala. The deficit would increase, according to these numbers, due to Trump collecting less in taxes, via reduction in taxes and extensions of tax breaks - which is a good thing.

So if your goal for this country is to maintain or decrease the deficit, yea sure support Kamala or whatever.

But if your goal is to collect lower taxes, then Trump is the better choice.
Click to expand...

You and [MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] and it feels like the whole country.

There's no such thing as a goddamned free lunch, people. Printing leads to devaluation. Devaluation shows as price inflation. Price inflation is a tax. It's the most regressive tax of them all. People who live on investment income notice it less. Working people have to get a raise every damned day to keep up.

The deficit is a tax. We pay it, and we pay it right freaking now. The two major differences are, one, everyone pays it, especially the poor. And two, this way big, fat, connected banks lay claim to a first mortgage on the nation.

You don't care about borrowing. You don't care about the deficit. You don't care about currency devaluation. You don't care that your own spending power, and your own savings, are being decimated. Gee. Who cares what you have sense enough to care about and what you don't?

And yes, the GOP is the party that really moves that ball, because tax cuts without spending cuts. Remember a guy named Reagan? He raised the debt more than all previous presidents combined, too.
 
Last edited:
acptulsa said:
You don't care about borrowing. You don't care about the deficit. You don't care about currency devaluation. You don't care that your own spending power, and your own savings, are being decimated. Gee. Who cares what you have sense enough to care about and what you don't?
Click to expand...

You're right, I don't really care about the deficit, or the borrowing. I pretty much just care about the taxes.

If taxes go down, and deficit goes up, good.

If taxes go way down, and deficit goes way up, great.

If taxes go too far down, and deficit gets out of control, even better. :up:

My spending power is gonna be fine either way. I have valuable land, valuable property, and valuable skills, I'm gonna be fine.

Just keep those goddamn taxes down and I don't give a shit what the government does with its borrowing :up:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Tucker - Former Pentagon official Dan Caldwell explains what would happen if Ted Cruz gets his way in Iran.
Replies
1
Views
66
acptulsa
acptulsa
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Tucker: Candace Owens discusses Brigitte Macron and the Lawsuit
Replies
0
Views
42
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Tucker: Margaret Roberts says most of what you think you know about the Oklahoma City bombing is a lie
Replies
1
Views
66
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Tucker: Why is Pam Bondi’s Justice Department covering up Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes and murder?
2
Replies
39
Views
286
unknown
unknown
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Tucker: Economist Richard Werner on where money comes from
Replies
1
Views
38
oyarde
O
Back
Top