Jet White said:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Who called Elon a bad guy? I called his tweets disloyal. They are.
and there it is
What? Calling a spade a spade?
If you think his tweets demonstrate loyalty to Trump then its a take... a bizarre one.
Some of us value loyalty to the American people and working to solve absolutely undeniable massive problems over loyalty to the man currently in office. Crazy, I know.
So cutting waste, fraud and abuse in entitlement programs, strengthening border security, and tax cuts and other economic growth incentives are being DISLOYAL to American people? That is a crazy take. Good luck with that.
Quote:
Quote:
The disconnect you're having is that this spat between Trump and Elon are about something other than what you care most about, which is border and tax cuts. You fail to understand that there are other issues that are important to other people.
This isn't about getting every single thing you want in the bill. It's about cutting the budget. That's what the majority of the US has wanted for generations.
You are never going to cut the budget. The sure scale of Country, inflation and other factors will mean that outside of post-war or post-pandemic years the budget will always increase.
More pragmatic is to limit growth in spending, increase efficiencies and curtail WFA.
You are correct, some CBO scoring showing TRILLIONS of "spending" increases cause people to lose sight of the positives. That's fine.
I completely agree the BBB is a disappointment in depth and scope. But its where we wound up and its preferrable to no bill or to multiple bills of which only the 1st will ever have a chance of making a difference.
Do you have a budget line for waste, fraud and abuse?
One would think it obvious that cutting waste, fraud and abuse and reducing budgeted expenditures are two separate things. But bad assumption by me.
If I budget $1,000 for new shirts and $200 is stolen and $400 went to shirts that do not fit, then I have to spend $1,600 on shirts. It is not "cutting the budget" to remove the $600 but it does save money.
If I say we have 40% more people to buy shirts for then logic tells you to budget $1,400 for new shirts. If that is not possible, increase efficiency, reduce people or such. But saying the budget must be less than $1,000 not matter what or else your bill is a failure, is piss arse logic that is not feasible.
Sorry, your gotchya fails again. Try and discuss the topic instead of trying to "dunk" on your fellow posters cause you disagree with them.
