Simple question....who else has a better plan?
Have we heard Kamala's plan to get the US out of $35 Trillion in debt?

There are no easy decisions right now.

Trump is saying smaller govt, bring manf. back, and no wars.

KyleFieldKing said:

---

Just a reminder, it was Donald Trump who authored the book "The Art of the Deal" a Times #1 Best Seller in 1987.

---

He's a horrible businessman. When he actually runs companies, they fail. Funnily, he's an absolutely brilliant marketer of the Trump name in real estate.

He's miles and miles ahead of HeelsUp, though, having actually been in the real world prior to the Presidency. She's terrihorribad, at everything.

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

---

Brother you've been saying stuff like that on here for a decade. The country burned during Mike Brown, the country burned during the summer of Floyd. Whether under Obama, or under Trump the country burned. Who has the will to do what needs to be done? No one.

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

---

Brother you've been saying stuff like that on here for a decade. The country burned during Mike Brown, the country burned during the summer of Floyd. Whether under Obama, or under Trump the country burned. Who has the will to do what needs to be done? No one.

---

If it means entitlements are gone, let it burn.

I won't affect me.

If we do not eliminate entitlements, it's going to collapse at some point anyway. Let's get it over with.

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

---

Brother you've been saying stuff like that on here for a decade. The country burned during Mike Brown, the country burned during the summer of Floyd. Whether under Obama, or under Trump the country burned. Who has the will to do what needs to be done? No one.

---

If it means entitlements are gone, let it burn.

I won't affect me.

If we do not eliminate entitlements, it's going to collapse at some point anyway. Let's get it over with.

---

Nobody is seriously talking about cutting spending, much mess tackling entitlements


It won't be addressed by voters or elected officials until after the **** hits the fan

jamey said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

---

Brother you've been saying stuff like that on here for a decade. The country burned during Mike Brown, the country burned during the summer of Floyd. Whether under Obama, or under Trump the country burned. Who has the will to do what needs to be done? No one.

---

If it means entitlements are gone, let it burn.

I won't affect me.

If we do not eliminate entitlements, it's going to collapse at some point anyway. Let's get it over with.

---

Nobody is seriously talking about cutting spending, much mess tackling entitlements


It won't be addressed by voters or elected officials until after the **** hits the fan

---

Therein lies the problem. Cutting entitlements should be the main thing we are discussing politically.

Tom Fox said:

---

jamey said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

GoAgs11 said:

---

Imagine thinking you know better than noted and accomplished economists only in texags

---

Like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Mises, Hayek, and thousands more of accomplished economist in multiple schools of economics?

You are the side pretending you know better than them. Do you think I drew that diagram up there myself? No, it's one of a 1000 I could have grabbed from economic web sites and text books all over the place.

You are the guy going against economics. Not me.

---

Here is what you don't grasp, those guys are scientists not executives and not governors. There is no question that the free market is the most efficient economy out there, it's a law every bit as much as gravity.

The argument is that market efficiency may be generally good for the country, may even be almost always good for the country, but it is not ALWAYS what is best for the country in even situation.

---

This is an asinine claim. So people being poorer is somehow better for the country? Are you serious?

To pretend that executives and governors are somehow less biased or have more expertise than people who don't need to pander for votes and study this for a living is hilarious. It's obviously a very bad thing to have our national debt to $35T, yet our executives have been doubling it every administration for decades. Executives consistently do the WRONG thing.

---

In some cases yes, sacrificing GDP may be in the country's best interest.

But let's take your examples. Go ahead and get rid of food stamps and unemployment and social security. Will go a long way to addressing the yearly defecit. While you're at it, google what happens when food stamps are late by a day and imagine that happening across the country in every major city.

This is what I mean, in your economic la-la land millions of people on food stamps shrug and go "it's actually better for us in the long run" when faced with their handouts being taken away, rather than burning down the city their in.

---

Obviously stuff like food stamp elimination wouldn't go info effect immediately without forewarning. Those people would be given some time to get off their ass and get a job. Stuff like eliminating regulatory agencies and departments would start right away. That way jobs open up for those people to get into.

And your alternative would be what? Keep all those programs? And then invoke tariffs and hope that THIS time tariffs will make everything better instead of worse? Talk about la-la land.

---

Oh good, that way you'll have riots when the forewarning goes into effect rather than when the cutting off of food stamps goes into effect. What world do you live in where families who haven't worked in generations are going to all of the sudden look for a job instead of lashing out against society?

I can tell you this, do you know what started the mini revolution in Chile? The increase of bus fair by 4%. I honestly hope we get to try what you want to to. Mainly because I'm in Abu Dhabi and won't get impacted by it. As the summer of Floyd part 2 writhes every metro area, you can say "why don't they realize that losing their food stamps is actually better for them?"

---

Let them revolt. It will be a great excuse to eliminate them from society.

---

Brother you've been saying stuff like that on here for a decade. The country burned during Mike Brown, the country burned during the summer of Floyd. Whether under Obama, or under Trump the country burned. Who has the will to do what needs to be done? No one.

---

If it means entitlements are gone, let it burn.

I won't affect me.

If we do not eliminate entitlements, it's going to collapse at some point anyway. Let's get it over with.

---

Nobody is seriously talking about cutting spending, much mess tackling entitlements


It won't be addressed by voters or elected officials until after the **** hits the fan

---

Therein lies the problem. Cutting entitlements should be the main thing we are discussing politically.

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically


None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

jamey said:

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically

None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

---

This has been my main beef with Republicans ever since Trump showed up on the scene. We've taken our eye off the ball. Most of Trump's solutions will cost us more rather than less - if not out of pocket then out of national debt.

We're supposed to be the fiscally responsible party. Now we're nearly on par with the Dems.

We've become a nation of hand outs and the only real fight is over who gets the hand outs and how they're given out.

And don't get me started on identity politics. It's such a waste of time. It doesn't fix anything. It's designed to manufacture problems to pretend like we need big solutions instead of addressing the ACTUAL problems because those problems are too hard to solve.

Jeeper79 said:

---

jamey said:

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically

None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

---

This has been my main beef with Republicans ever since Trump showed up on the scene. We've taken our eye off the ball. Most of Trump's solutions will cost us more rather than less - if not out of pocket then out of national debt.

We're supposed to be the fiscally responsible party. Now we're nearly on par with the Dems.

We've become a nation of hand outs and the only real fight is over who gets the hand outs and how they're given out.

And don't get me started on identity politics. It's such a waste of time. It doesn't fix anything. It's designed to manufacture problems to pretend like we need big solutions instead of addressing the ACTUAL problems because those problems are too hard to solve.

---

You left out who pays for them.

That is the difference between Trump and the dems. At least with Trump. if we are going to drive off a cliff, I get to keep more of my hard earned money to set my family up as best I can before we go over the cliff.

I am done paying for this idiocy.

Tom Fox said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

jamey said:

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically

None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

---

This has been my main beef with Republicans ever since Trump showed up on the scene. We've taken our eye off the ball. Most of Trump's solutions will cost us more rather than less - if not out of pocket then out of national debt.

We're supposed to be the fiscally responsible party. Now we're nearly on par with the Dems.

We've become a nation of hand outs and the only real fight is over who gets the hand outs and how they're given out.

And don't get me started on identity politics. It's such a waste of time. It doesn't fix anything. It's designed to manufacture problems to pretend like we need big solutions instead of addressing the ACTUAL problems because those problems are too hard to solve.

---

You left out who pays for them.

That is the difference between Trump and the dems. At least with Trump. if we are going to drive off a cliff, I get to keep more of my hard earned money to set my family up as best I can before we go over the cliff.

I am done paying for this idiocy.

---

With both of them, it's mostly our kids that are paying for it.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

jamey said:

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically

None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

---

This has been my main beef with Republicans ever since Trump showed up on the scene. We've taken our eye off the ball. Most of Trump's solutions will cost us more rather than less - if not out of pocket then out of national debt.

We're supposed to be the fiscally responsible party. Now we're nearly on par with the Dems.

We've become a nation of hand outs and the only real fight is over who gets the hand outs and how they're given out.

And don't get me started on identity politics. It's such a waste of time. It doesn't fix anything. It's designed to manufacture problems to pretend like we need big solutions instead of addressing the ACTUAL problems because those problems are too hard to solve.

---

You left out who pays for them.

That is the difference between Trump and the dems. At least with Trump. if we are going to drive off a cliff, I get to keep more of my hard earned money to set my family up as best I can before we go over the cliff.

I am done paying for this idiocy.

---

With both of them, it's mostly our kids that are paying for it.

---

I don't know about that. The Top 1% are the current ones paying for it with the rest pushed off to our kids.

And therein lies the issue. If we were all paying for them (the same net tax rate), they would stop. I'll pay > $250K in net federal income taxes this year. In no world is that ok.

Jeeper79 said:

---

jamey said:

---

There's lots of things that ahould.be talked about politically

None of them are talked about. Instead we get the dumb **** from CNN and FoxNews and a bunch of social bullcrap. As if there's nothing serious looming large

---

This has been my main beef with Republicans ever since Trump showed up on the scene. We've taken our eye off the ball. Most of Trump's solutions will cost us more rather than less - if not out of pocket then out of national debt.

We're supposed to be the fiscally responsible party. Now we're nearly on par with the Dems.

We've become a nation of hand outs and the only real fight is over who gets the hand outs and how they're given out.

And don't get me started on identity politics. It's such a waste of time. It doesn't fix anything. It's designed to manufacture problems to pretend like we need big solutions instead of addressing the ACTUAL problems because those problems are too hard to solve.

---

Exactly

Fiscal conservatism is dead

Most of what's left is social blah blah stuff or conspiracy theories.

Our country can't survive this way imo. We're going off the financial cliff