Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 314: USPSBS

(+) Yeah! (+)

red sox 777 posted...

Trump actually did call Hillary a liar during a debate. It was when Hillary tried to justify having a private position and a public position by arguing that she learned the strategy of saying different things to different people from Abraham Lincoln. And Trump said (paraphrasing): "She lied, she got caught in the lie, and now she's blaming the late, great, Abraham Lincoln. Honest Abe. Honest Abe never lied. That's the difference between Abraham Lincoln - and you. That's a big big difference. That's some difference."

oh yeah, i'm sure trump accused hillary of being a liar multiple times in debates. another example is when he said that she was lying when she claimed he said that climate change is a hoax created by china. he didn't say "hillary is a liar because she disagrees with me on economics," though. apparently, even trump gets that that's ridiculous.

now, to go back to corrik's analogy, would hillary be justified in saying "you're an asshole" after that quote you posted? i'd say so, yeah. corrik was saying "when that's your approach, it's impossible to have a debate," but what debate is there to be had anyway? trump just said "you're a liar (unlike lincoln)." not many places you can go from there.

i really don't give a crap if politicians are rude or use profanity tbqh. i thought the "BETO USED THE F-WORD" thing was stupid as fuck.

---

If Joe Biden had said the 1917 pandemic ended World War II Fox News would be jumping on his mental acuity. Trump says it, and *crickets*

---

Trump is just speaking from his home timeline where the Brits had airports in the revolution

We got to two World Wars much earlier in that universe
---

Dancedreamer posted...

If Joe Biden had said the 1917 pandemic ended World War II Fox News would be jumping on his mental acuity. Trump says it, and *crickets*

Sigh....do I have to ask if Trump actually just said that?

---

Seanchan posted...

Sigh....do I have to ask if Trump actually just said that?

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1292956445944606721

---

https://mobile.twitter.com/josheidelson/status/1292917077028663296

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Trump is just speaking from his home timeline where the Brits had airports in the revolution

We got to two World Wars much earlier in that universe

what is the divergence point in this timeline anyway?

library of alexandria doesn't burn down?

---

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mnuchin-idUSKCN2561LE

Let's get this shit done. I am laid off Sept 5th.

---

Corrik7 posted...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mnuchin-idUSKCN2561LE

Let's get this shit done. I am laid off Sept 5th.

No deal is coming. Just trying to shift blame

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

oh yeah, i'm sure trump accused hillary of being a liar multiple times in debates. another example is when he said that she was lying when she claimed he said that climate change is a hoax created by china. he didn't say "hillary is a liar because she disagrees with me on economics," though. apparently, even trump gets that that's ridiculous.

now, to go back to corrik's analogy, would hillary be justified in saying "you're an asshole" after that quote you posted? i'd say so, yeah. corrik was saying "when that's your approach, it's impossible to have a debate," but what debate is there to be had anyway? trump just said "you're a liar (unlike lincoln)." not many places you can go from there.

i really don't give a crap if politicians are rude or use profanity tbqh. i thought the "BETO USED THE F-WORD" thing was stupid as fuck.

The comparison is bad, because there are at least 2 big differences between you and Hillary in this situation:

1. Hillary lied and got caught in a lie. You were not lying.
2. Hillary was a politician at a debate and you aren't.

So yes, you have a lot more reason to express anger at being accused of lying than Hillary. You also have less reason to be civil about it as you aren't worried about losing support for being uncivil.

That said, I think it would be beneficial to everyone if people took things said here a little less personally.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

No deal is coming. Just trying to shift blame

Impossible. The only way no deal is coming is if the Dems really want to see the American people suffer to expose Trump's actions as phony. Which in case it's destroying your stated positions to prove someone else was full of shit.

---

Or the Republicans can give Americans proper support instead of being evil douchebags. Democrat passed house bill is just fine

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Or the Republicans can give Americans proper support instead of being evil douchebags. Democrat passed house bill is just fine

No it isn't and you know it isnt

---

Corrik7 posted...

No it isn't and you know it isnt

Whats wrong with it?

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Whats wrong with it?

It is bloated with a lot of left wing nonsense. Even a liberal should realize that's nonsense.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Or the Republicans can give Americans proper support instead of being evil douchebags.

let's see how that's going

https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1292956939706609665

"It's very good news for future generations. I hope the talks remain broken down." - Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI)

---

what an incredible piece of shit
---

Corrik7 posted...

It is bloated with a lot of left wing nonsense. Even a liberal should realize that's nonsense.

Given how many times the Democrats have backed down and allowed for a whole bunch of conservative bullshit in order to pass bills that should've been purely designed to help the American people (because Democrats are the ones who actually give a shit about the American people, and have that empathy weaponized against them), I think it's only fair that the GOP reaps what they've sewn for years, and deal with giving the Democrats what they want for once.

---

Corrik7 posted...

It is bloated with a lot of left wing nonsense. Even a liberal should realize that's nonsense.

Like what? What specifically is bad?

---

Corrik7 posted...

Impossible. The only way no deal is coming is if the Dems really want to see the American people suffer to expose Trump's actions as phony. Which in case it's destroying your stated positions to prove someone else was full of shit.

20+ Republicans are a no to any sort of a stimulus at all. They want to spend $0.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Like what? What specifically is bad?

Billions of dollars in handouts to California and New York.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Billions of dollars in handouts to California and New York.

That's not specific. Also, since those two states combined are nearly 1/4th of the country's economy it'd be a really good idea to make sure they recover as quickly as possible.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Billions of dollars in handouts to California and New York.

The SALT stuff probably shouldn't be in there (and if Pelosi has to make concessions, trading away that's an easy one), but the federal government absolutely needs to bail out the states. They have had to take on the enormous burden of dealing with the pandemic since Trump has been worse than useless and has abdicated all responsibility for something that any other administration would have dealt with on a federal level, and states don't have the flexibility to borrow trillions of dollars for less than free like Congress can.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The SALT stuff probably shouldn't be in there (and if Pelosi has to make concessions, trading away that's an easy one), but the federal government absolutely needs to bail out the states. They have had to take on the enormous burden of dealing with the pandemic since Trump has been worse than useless and has abdicated all responsibility for something that any other administration would have dealt with on a federal level, and states don't have the flexibility to borrow trillions of dollars for less than free like Congress can.

That's the sticking point - these blue states want a lot of money they can spend with no oversight. California has blown the highest tax revenues of any state in the Union building.......prisons? I feel like CA has just about the WORST infrastructure of any state, the slowest courts, the slowest DMVs, the highest traffic, a lot of the worst schools (and some of the best), state universities that charge tuition like private schools, and extremely high incarceration rates.

I do not want the Federal government giving CA any more money when they've proven to be totally incompetent at using it. Would much prefer the Feds directly handle the situation.

---

red sox 777 posted...

That's the sticking point - these blue states want a lot of money they can spend with no oversight. California has blown the highest tax revenues of any state in the Union building.......prisons? I feel like CA has just about the WORST infrastructure of any state, the slowest courts, the slowest DMVs, the highest traffic, a lot of the worst schools (and some of the best), state universities that charge tuition like private schools, and extremely high incarceration rates.

I do not want the Federal government giving CA any more money when they've proven to be totally incompetent at using it. Would much prefer the Feds directly handle the situation.

How good or bad a job any state has been at managing its budget (or whatever) is completely irrelevant. This money is a reimbursement for the states covering the Federal government's responsibility in dealing with COVID since Trump totally abdicated responsibility. They should never have had to incur those costs in the first place, and the government not making them whole will further devastate states' economies as they're forced to enact heavy austerity. This isn't just a blue state thing, either. Lots of red states have been hit hard by COVID and should be bailed out as well.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

How good or bad a job any state has been at managing its budget (or whatever) is completely irrelevant. This money is a reimbursement for the states covering the Federal government's responsibility in dealing with COVID since Trump totally abdicated responsibility. They should never have had to incur those costs in the first place, and the government not making them whole will further devastate states' economies as they're forced to enact heavy austerity. This isn't just a blue state thing, either. Lots of red states have been hit hard by COVID and should be bailed out as well.

Trump has been handling it. You may not like his strategy but he is handling it. Time will show whether it is a good one or not. But giving out money to states so they can implement strategies that go against the national strategy and could jeopardize it is a problem.

---

And bailouts ALWAYS reward the most profligate spenders. Let's look at two hypothetical casinos in Atlantic City (no claim being made about the real Trump Taj Mahal).

Trump Taj Mahal:

Revenue: 500 million
Regular operating expenses: 300 million
Licensing fee to Donald Trump: 200 million
Net income: 0
Retained earnings (after 10 years): 0

Responsible Casino

Revenue: 500 million
Regular operating expenses: 300 million
Net income: 200 million
Dividends to shareholders: 100 million
Retained earnings (after 10 years): 1 billion

Now a hurricane hits and casinos close for a month or two. Both casinos lose 100 million in revenue. Responsible Casino continues operations as normal, and uses 10% of its retained earnings of $1 billion to ride it out. Trump Taj Mahal has no retained earnings because thanks to the 200 million annual licensing fee to DJT, it's never turned a profit. Trump Taj Mahal announces that if they don't get a bailout, all of their employees will immediately be fired. The bailout comes and.....40% of it is used to continue paying that licensing fee to DJT.

The solution is to send the bailout money directly to the people who deserve it - the employees.


---

red sox 777 posted...

That said, I think it would be beneficial to everyone if people took things said here a little less personally.

i should take insults less personally?

---

red sox 777 posted...

Trump has been handling it. You may not like his strategy but he is handling it. Time will show whether it is a good one or not. But giving out money to states so they can implement strategies that go against the national strategy and could jeopardize it is a problem.

Would you mind outlining what that strategy is?

---

Remember children, taking a stand on policy is only ok when a Republican does it, and only Democrats should ever be expected to compromise.

---

red13n posted...

20+ Republicans are a no to any sort of a stimulus at all. They want to spend $0.

You don't need 20 Republicans to make a deal.

---

Inviso posted...

Given how many times the Democrats have backed down and allowed for a whole bunch of conservative bullshit in order to pass bills that should've been purely designed to help the American people (because Democrats are the ones who actually give a shit about the American people, and have that empathy weaponized against them), I think it's only fair that the GOP reaps what they've sewn for years, and deal with giving the Democrats what they want for once.

Well, even I will agree we deserve nothing if the Democrats will only go for what it is in their bill.

There is so much stuff about marijuana in there which is federally banned and not even a democratic platform.

---

Corrik7 posted...

You don't need 20 Republicans to make a deal.

I dont see Mitch putting it to a vote if 2/3rds of the yes votes are going to be Dems.

It would make the party look bad and Dems look good going into the election.

---

Mitch is worth 30-50 feral pigs

---

Maniac64 posted...

I dont see Mitch putting it to a vote if 2/3rds of the yes votes are going to be Dems.

It would make the party look bad and Dems look good going into the election.

He will because the up for election Republicans are gonna lose their elections without a bill passing.

---

I think he believes inaction will be fine if he just blames Dems.

It's a strategy that has worked in the past.

---

Maniac64 posted...

I think he believes inaction will be fine if he just blames Dems.

It's a strategy that has worked in the past.

If there is no bill, Republicans lose majority by maybe 5 seats.

---

I'm guessing there will be a bill, but it'll be in like a month after shit has already hit the fan.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I'm guessing there will be a bill, but it'll be in like a month after shit has already hit the fan.

It would have to be soon.

No way Trump went out there and did that without plans for a bill to Trump it over. He has already said his executive orders were done to spur them to make a real deal. He just wants credit for a deal being made. Now the question is do Dems want to call him on that and punish Americans or do they want to do their deal.

https://www.upi.com/amp/Top_News/US/2020/08/10/Democrats-Republicans-hope-for-COVID-19-relief-bill-this-week/5641597072749/

Republicans even offering to add more money now.

---

Republicans have been punishing America for 40 years, including their assault on USPS

I can take 3 months of hurt, make them bleed Nancy <_<

---

I'm not sure they need a bill. Trump's executive orders are probably enough. There's greater pressure on the Democrats now, because if there's no bill, all the relief will have come from Trump.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Republicans have been punishing America for 40 years, including their assault on USPS

I can take 3 months of hurt, make them bleed Nancy <_<

Then Trump should win the election and the republican retain the Senate and take the house. If you want to bleed Americans for 3 months before an election, that's what you deserve.

HeroicCrono posted...

I'm not sure they need a bill. Trump's executive orders are probably enough. There's greater pressure on the Democrats now, because if there's no bill, all the relief will have come from Trump.

Those executive orders are nonsense.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If you want to bleed Americans for 3 months before an election, that's what you deserve.

Mitch proved you can bleed Americans before an election and still win.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Then Trump should win the election and the republican retain the Senate and take the house. If you want to bleed Americans for 3 months before an election, that's what you deserve.

Those executive orders are nonsense.

Those executive orders are probably gonna save me about $5500, which is about the same as my total savings from the 2017 tax cuts that's been the GOP's signature achievement of the last 4 years. It's a lot more than I got from the 3 bills Congress passed in the spring and way more than the Heroes Act would do. They are a very big deal, even if sloppy or hasty.

HeroicCrono posted...

Those executive orders are probably gonna save me about $5500

how?

---

HeroicCrono posted...

Those executive orders are probably gonna save me about $5500, which is about the same as my total savings from the 2017 tax cuts that's been the GOP's signature achievement of the last 4 years. It's a lot more than I got from the 3 bills Congress passed in the spring and way more than the Heroes Act would do. They are a very big deal, even if sloppy or hasty.

You aren't going to save anything because no job is going to pass it onto you because it is a deferrment and it might be owed in January.

I do agree a payroll tax cut was a good idea though in addition to ue boost because it is an "essential worker" boost. People keep saying what about them, the payroll tax cut is for them.

That said, you aren't going to see it. (Though if you are gonna make $5500 from it... You alrdy making 174k? Per year. Which can't be right cuz it caps out at 137k.). So you hardly needed it.

---

https://twitter.com/wakeup2politics/status/1293161540435300352?s=21

lmao

(and obviously this counts as late)

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

how?

Between payroll tax and student loan payments. It might be a bit lower since I just read that the Medicare portion of payroll tax isn't being affected.

HeroicCrono posted...

Between payroll tax and student loan payments. It might be a bit lower since I just read that the Medicare portion of payroll tax isn't being affected.

The payroll tax thing will very likely only end up being a deferral, and the money that was not withheld this year is considered 2020 income on which you will then owe more tax (thread):

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1292887059749896193?s=21

---

Yeah if you're going to make me pay it back and possibly bump me into a higher bracket next year, just keep taking that shit now.

---