Donald Trump and US politics

"
Elynole wrote:


Regarding Financials and Unemployment, a fair assessment would be that Obama inherited the largest financial crisis in U.S. history since the Great Depression.

The Lehman Brothers collapse technically happened while Bush was still in office - albeit only for a few weeks. Going into a presidency right after the 5th largest bank in the world just collapsed is SSF HC.

Then again, this is what happens when you have a country built on a federal, central banking system that can wield capitalism :)



I don't say he had an easy mendate, but every president also faced their own challenge. Obama isn't the only president who had to deal with a financial crisis. Reality is, he was 8 years in office, right now there's no one else to blame. 8 years he failed on every single of his promise and only succeed at making things worse.
"
morbo wrote:
Millions of people will die anyway, because the welfare state cannot go on indefinitely (60%+ of US budget goes for welfare, iirc). The US would already be down under like Greece, if the dollar wasn't a world currency. Bush and Obama both doubled the debt and Trump will probably do it too, because he has no other "realistic" option.

But even so, someday this will have to crack and the dollar will become worthless paper overnight. All those millions of people who are now governmental heroin addicts, will then die killing each other for food. The "hoods" & ghettos will clean up themselves.

Say thanks to leftist liberalism, which has been working for decades on the destruction of families, the expansion of big government, the lowering of education standards... constructing this massive dependency on the government, to harness easy votes from stupid, lower class, dependent people. And guess which party / ideology also favors mass immigration from the 3rd world, to get some easy short-term votes and put more strain on your welfare system?


Uh, 60% of the federal budget does NOT go to welfare - that's a number you've pulled out of your ass.
"
Elynole wrote:
Uh, 60% of the federal budget does NOT go to welfare - that's a number you've pulled out of your ass.


It goes for "social expenditure" (sry, not a native speaker)

When night falls
She cloaks the world
In impenetrable darkness
"
morbo wrote:
"
Elynole wrote:
Uh, 60% of the federal budget does NOT go to welfare - that's a number you've pulled out of your ass.


It goes for "social expenditure" (sry, not a native speaker)




This isn't representing the entire budget, only Mandatory Expenditures - you still need to account for discretionary spending.

Additionally, the term "welfare" is used broadly here - what programs are we talking about exactly? Food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security? Are we including Medicare and Veteran's assistance programs? Are we including Foster care and adoption programs? What about grants for college?

All of these fall under the social expenditures category of mandatory spending - and while people are extremely vocal about social spending and the social safety net people pick and choose which programs are "welfare" programs.
Last edited by Elynole on May 5, 2017, 10:20:59 AM
"
Elynole wrote:
This isn't representing the entire budget, only Mandatory Expenditures - you still need to account for discretionary spending.

That's the total chart, it includes everything. Here you can see the breakdown

"
Elynole wrote:
Additionally, the term "welfare" is used broadly here - what programs are we talking about exactly? Food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security? Are we including Medicare and Veteran's assistance programs? Are we including Foster care and adoption programs? What about grants for college?

Well, social security, unemployment security & health-care (which I'd call the base of what constitutes "welfare") are already 60%, other categories only add up. Dunno where grants for college fall (education slice?), but if the state has to subsidize you, I'd call that welfare.

Ofc. its debatable. If you were paying taxes all your life, then the state owes you some kind of pension, so it's probably not fair to call pensions "welfare". But if you were mostly unemployed your whole life, paying no taxes, and you still get minimal "social" pension, that's "free money". But in any case, the social expenditures are the majority of the budget. Even the big bad Military pales in comparison.

This equation cannot continue indefinitely. The "welfare state" will die and dependent people with it, if not today, then tomorrow and in bigger numbers. My suggestion to kids these days would be: do not assume that the state will be able to pay your "social security" & pensions in the future, plan your life as if the state will go bankrupt. (basically: save money, invest money, do not consume more than you can afford, think long-term)
When night falls
She cloaks the world
In impenetrable darkness
Last edited by morbo on May 5, 2017, 10:44:37 AM
"
Elynole wrote:
Regarding Financials and Unemployment, a fair assessment would be that Obama inherited the largest financial crisis in U.S. history since the Great Depression.

The Lehman Brothers collapse technically happened while Bush was still in office - albeit only for a few weeks. Going into a presidency right after the 5th largest bank in the world just collapsed is SSF HC.

Then again, this is what happens when you have a country built on a federal, central banking system that can wield capitalism :)
Bush and Obama did not govern in significantly different ways. Bush was a neoconservative, Obama was a neoconservative with leftist virtue signalling. What's astonishing is that even now the so-called Left is still swallowing Obama's corporatist bullshit.

Like Obamacare: people are defending crony capitalism in the form of a bill written by cynical antipopulists like Dr. Jon Gruber on behalf of Big Pharma. I mean, seriously, it makes it a punishable offense not to purchase a product from non-government corporations, and the so-called Left supports this, because they've allowed themselves to be completely co-opted in exchange for feeling good about diversity.

So I ask you: what did Obama do about the collapse that is different from what Bush would have done?
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on May 5, 2017, 10:59:57 AM
"
morbo wrote:
"
Elynole wrote:
This isn't representing the entire budget, only Mandatory Expenditures - you still need to account for discretionary spending.

That's the total chart, it includes everything. Here you can see the breakdown

"
Elynole wrote:
Additionally, the term "welfare" is used broadly here - what programs are we talking about exactly? Food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security? Are we including Medicare and Veteran's assistance programs? Are we including Foster care and adoption programs? What about grants for college?

Well, social security, unemployment security & health-care (which I'd call the base of what constitutes "welfare") are already 60%, other categories only add up. Dunno where grants for college fall (education slice?), but if the state has to subsidize you, I'd call that welfare.

Ofc. its debatable. If you were paying taxes all your life, then the state owes you some kind of pension, so it's probably not fair to call pensions "welfare". But if you were mostly unemployed your whole life, paying no taxes, and you still get minimal "social" pension, that's "free money". But in any case, the social expenditures are the majority of the budget. Even the big bad Military pales in comparison.

This equation cannot continue indefinitely. The "welfare state" will die and dependent people with it, if not today, then tomorrow and in bigger numbers. My suggestion to kids these days would be: do not assume that the state will be able to pay your "social security" & pensions in the future, plan your life as if the state will go bankrupt. (basically: save money, invest money, do not consume more than you can afford, think long-term)


In the USA Welfare is programs like food stamps, free housing and medicaid, these are free handouts for poor people.

Unemployment, Social security and medicare are entitlements, as in taxpayers pay into the programs and are entitled to the benefits.

This should clear up your confusion about US programs.

The problem with entitlements is not their existence. The problem is the criminal and/or idiot gov't mismanages them. As long as we keep voting in idiots & criminals, they will continue to be mismanaged.
Last edited by Kamchatka on May 5, 2017, 11:04:51 AM
"
Kamchatka wrote:
"
morbo wrote:
"
Elynole wrote:
This isn't representing the entire budget, only Mandatory Expenditures - you still need to account for discretionary spending.

That's the total chart, it includes everything. Here you can see the breakdown

"
Elynole wrote:
Additionally, the term "welfare" is used broadly here - what programs are we talking about exactly? Food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security? Are we including Medicare and Veteran's assistance programs? Are we including Foster care and adoption programs? What about grants for college?

Well, social security, unemployment security & health-care (which I'd call the base of what constitutes "welfare") are already 60%, other categories only add up. Dunno where grants for college fall (education slice?), but if the state has to subsidize you, I'd call that welfare.

Ofc. its debatable. If you were paying taxes all your life, then the state owes you some kind of pension, so it's probably not fair to call pensions "welfare". But if you were mostly unemployed your whole life, paying no taxes, and you still get minimal "social" pension, that's "free money". But in any case, the social expenditures are the majority of the budget. Even the big bad Military pales in comparison.

This equation cannot continue indefinitely. The "welfare state" will die and dependent people with it, if not today, then tomorrow and in bigger numbers. My suggestion to kids these days would be: do not assume that the state will be able to pay your "social security" & pensions in the future, plan your life as if the state will go bankrupt. (basically: save money, invest money, do not consume more than you can afford, think long-term)


In the USA Welfare is programs like food stamps, free housing and medicaid, these are free handouts for poor people.

Unemployment, Social security and medicare are entitlements, as in taxpayers pay into the programs and are entitled to the benefits.

This should clear up your confusion about US programs.

The problem with entitlements is not their existence. The problem is the criminal and/or idiot gov't mismanages them. As long as we keep voting in idiots & criminals, they will continue to be mismanaged.


This was the separation I was actually trying to make but you said it better. Many like to include Social Security and Medicare and lump up their percentages with that of the welfare programs - making it to where the welfare piece of the pie looks drastically bigger than it really is.

I personally think all of these programs are mismanaged, but the alternative is people not getting the help they need or people not getting the social programs they've paid for all of their lives.

I'm a social anarchist though, so I tend to sneer away from any forms of government.
"
Elynole wrote:


This was the separation I was actually trying to make but you said it better. Many like to include Social Security and Medicare and lump up their percentages with that of the welfare programs - making it to where the welfare piece of the pie looks drastically bigger than it really is.

I personally think all of these programs are mismanaged, but the alternative is people not getting the help they need or people not getting the social programs they've paid for all of their lives.

I'm a social anarchist though, so I tend to sneer away from any forms of government.


As long as the USA continues to have a pile of criminals and idiots running the federal gov't, the financial situation will just continue to get worse.

You get what you vote for, that will never change.
"
Kamchatka wrote:
"
Elynole wrote:


This was the separation I was actually trying to make but you said it better. Many like to include Social Security and Medicare and lump up their percentages with that of the welfare programs - making it to where the welfare piece of the pie looks drastically bigger than it really is.

I personally think all of these programs are mismanaged, but the alternative is people not getting the help they need or people not getting the social programs they've paid for all of their lives.

I'm a social anarchist though, so I tend to sneer away from any forms of government.


As long as the USA continues to have a pile of criminals and idiots running the federal gov't, the financial situation will just continue to get worse.

You get what you vote for, that will never change.


Unfortunately that's just a consequence of a Republic. Especially a Republic that has positions of government that don't have term limits, or have no limits to gubernatorial positions.

The people get the illusion of choosing their leadership - but, not really.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info