What Has Republican Policy Actually Done For You?

Intlwaters

Help Support Intlwaters:

Don Ferrette

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Supporting Member
Vendor
Joined
Nov 25, 2003
Messages
15,588
Ad Fontes Media is owned by Colorado attorney Vanessa Otero, a hard line leftist. She employs 8 other people and they generate about 1/2 million profit annually from donations and contributions typically sent to them from the very media sources they rate. Nothing like buying your position on the chessboard.........
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
Ad Fontes Media is owned by Colorado attorney Vanessa Otero, a hard line leftist. She employs 8 other people and they generate about 1/2 million profit annually from donations and contributions typically sent to them from the very media sources they rate. Nothing like buying your position on the chessboard.........
That's right Don and it's standard operating procedure for any "Rating" entity. From Cigar Aficionado to Consumer Reports - money talks in the world we live in.
 

kyleboyer

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
36
MIchael, you forgot the left's obsession with CRT and trying to force green energy and electric vehicles down our throats. What they didn't(and won't) take into account is that the electrical grid can't handle the load, it takes fossil fuel fired generator plants to get the electricity to feed the grid or, what the Biden administration wants, total dependance on China for the solar panels, wind mills and batteries to power all of the green energy stuff they are raving about. Too bad they don't remember what happened it Texas last winter, people died due to lack of electricity due to a freak storm that froze the wind farms and crippled the solar panel fields.
As for what has the Republican Party done for me, Florida Scale Boater and Grimracer hit a majority of them but they did miss one. The Democrats are trying to take my job away. With their green energy pipedreams, it would wipe out the transportation industry. Trucking, trains and aircraft can't work without fossil fuels. Trucks deliver everything to the stores we shop in and the raw materials to the facilities that make the things we buy. Trains transport the materials and finished goods to terminals where it's loaded on the trucks for delivery. Aircraft fly us to where we want to go at least seven times faster than what it would take us to drive the same distance in petroleum powered vehicles. Change that to electric cars, you just added at least an hour for recharging every 250-300 miles. If I were to take a Ford F150 Lightning and use it to pull my 26ft trailer to Mobile Alabama, it's 2713 miles each way. I would have to recharge every 100 or so miles for at least an hour(yes this is a known distance as tested by The Fast Lane Truck) They got 88 miles on a full charge before having to stop and recharge as shown here:
That said, it would take me, at least, an additional 28 hours EACH WAY to go from my house to Mobile Alabama. Since I can make the same trip with my gas fueled Tahoe with a range of over 200 miles per 26 gallon tank(again, a known number as found traveling cross country with my trailer multiple times at speeds of 60-70MPH on the freeway) AND a fill up time of under 10 minutes, it would take me less than half as many fuel stops and let me travel more than twice as far between them while taking at least an hour less per refueling stop

One of the dumbest things people believe in politics, is that somehow we get a new economic policy with every new president elected. When in fact we have had the exact same economic policies for over 40 years, called Reaganomics. And you not understanding this, is testament to how well the MSM and Republicans and Democrats has brainwashed you...
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
One of the dumbest things people believe in politics, is that somehow we get a new economic policy with every new president elected. When in fact we have had the exact same economic policies for over 40 years, called Reaganomics. And you not understanding this, is testament to how well the MSM and Republicans and Democrats has brainwashed you...
Actually for the Democrats the concept is "Taxonomics"...
 

kyleboyer

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
36
Actually for the Democrats the concept is "Taxonomics"...
No. That's cute, but no. Democrats (DNC) adopted Reaganomics in the 90's when Bill Clinton ran on Reaganomics, and won. Bill Clinton did more to expand neo-liberal economic policy then even Reagan did.
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
No. That's cute, but no. Democrats (DNC) adopted Reaganomics in the 90's when Bill Clinton ran on Reaganomics, and won. Bill Clinton did more to expand neo-liberal economic policy then even Reagan did.
Agreed, Taxonomics and spending on frivolous "Social Programs" is what the democrats do - anything to grow government and subsequent dependence.

Clinton rode the wave of defense cutbacks and the economy readjusting to a post cold-war posture - nothing more.
 

kyleboyer

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
36
Agreed, Taxonomics and spending on frivolous "Social Programs" is what the democrats do - anything to grow government and subsequent dependence.

Clinton rode the wave of defense cutbacks and the economy readjusting to a post cold-war posture - nothing more.
So, healthcare, retirement, food, housing and education are "frivolous"?
Clinton over saw the biggest reduction in welfare spending and benefits so far, in US history.
A big part of the tax policy of Reaganomics is to shift the tax burden from the top 1% and big corporations, onto the working class. Any tax cut for the "rich" is an eventual tax increase on the middle class, as it forces localities to make up for lost federal revenue.
 

kyleboyer

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
36
Ad Fontes Media is owned by Colorado attorney Vanessa Otero, a hard line leftist. She employs 8 other people and they generate about 1/2 million profit annually from donations and contributions typically sent to them from the very media sources they rate. Nothing like buying your position on the chessboard.........
What in your mind is a " a hard line leftist"? I can assure you, no corporate business owner is a leftist. Being pro-gay doesn't make one a leftist. Gays are in fact historically notorious class traitors.
 

Don Ferrette

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Supporting Member
Vendor
Joined
Nov 25, 2003
Messages
15,588
What in your mind is a " a hard line leftist"? I can assure you, no corporate business owner is a leftist. Being pro-gay doesn't make one a leftist. Gays are in fact historically notorious class traitors.
She's a lawyer who employs a paltry 8 other people, hardly a "corporate business owner". Regardless you are way wrong with "corporate business owners" not being leftist. You can start with Zuckerberg and Bezos..........
 

Blair Warren

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
215
So, healthcare, retirement, food, housing and education are "frivolous"?
Clinton over saw the biggest reduction in welfare spending and benefits so far, in US history.
A big part of the tax policy of Reaganomics is to shift the tax burden from the top 1% and big corporations, onto the working class. Any tax cut for the "rich" is an eventual tax increase on the middle class, as it forces localities to make up for lost federal revenue.
He had budget surpluses for fiscal years 1998–2001, the only such years from 1970 to 2018. Clinton's final four budgets were balanced budgets with surpluses, beginning with the 1997 budget. The ratio of debt held by the public to GDP, a primary measure of U.S. federal debt, fell from 47.8% in 1993 to 33.6% by 2000.
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
He had budget surpluses for fiscal years 1998–2001, the only such years from 1970 to 2018. Clinton's final four budgets were balanced budgets with surpluses, beginning with the 1997 budget. The ratio of debt held by the public to GDP, a primary measure of U.S. federal debt, fell from 47.8% in 1993 to 33.6% by 2000.
.....and then came Obama..... ROFL!
 

Blair Warren

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
215
....and Nancy what's her drunken husband's last name that rammed through the "first you'll have to pass it to see what's in it" disaster?

Spindoctoring deflection ain't workin.
No deflection here....Pelosi's husband is irrelevant. If he was arrested for a DUI, and convicted he should pay the price. As should anybody who breaks the law.

So she said, "first you'll have to pass it to see what's in it"... yep pretty foolish.

Just in case you want to bring it up:

As for Hunter's laptop, if it is really his laptop, and can be proven to be his, then whatever crap is on there is his responsibility. He should be held accountable as well. If it happens to snag Joe Biden, and if he did anything that can be proven to be illegal, he should be prosecuted as well. If it really is his (Hunter's) laptop, he's a dumba** for losing it. :)

ANY person who has held office of any type and breaks the law, should be prosecuted and held accountable.....Period

We were talking balanced budget.....

And tax cuts:

Between Clinton and Obama... George W. (The decider) Bush tax cuts:

“Bush tax cuts” but formally named the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA). High-income taxpayers benefitted most from these tax cuts, with the top 1 percent of households receiving an average tax cut of over $570,000 between 2004-2012 (increasing their after-tax income by more than 5 percent each year). Despite promises from proponents of the tax cuts, evidence suggests that they did not improve economic growth or pay for themselves, but instead ballooned deficits and debt and contributed to a rise in income inequality.

How'd those tax cuts work out for you?

Went from a balanced budget to a deficit.
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
No deflection here....Pelosi's husband is irrelevant. If he was arrested for a DUI, and convicted he should pay the price. As should anybody who breaks the law.

So she said, "first you'll have to pass it to see what's in it"... yep pretty foolish.

Just in case you want to bring it up:

As for Hunter's laptop, if it is really his laptop, and can be proven to be his, then whatever crap is on there is his responsibility. He should be held accountable as well. If it happens to snag Joe Biden, and if he did anything that can be proven to be illegal, he should be prosecuted as well. If it really is his (Hunter's) laptop, he's a dumba** for losing it. :)

ANY person who has held office of any type and breaks the law, should be prosecuted and held accountable.....Period

We were talking balanced budget.....

And tax cuts:

Between Clinton and Obama... George W. (The decider) Bush tax cuts:

“Bush tax cuts” but formally named the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA). High-income taxpayers benefitted most from these tax cuts, with the top 1 percent of households receiving an average tax cut of over $570,000 between 2004-2012 (increasing their after-tax income by more than 5 percent each year). Despite promises from proponents of the tax cuts, evidence suggests that they did not improve economic growth or pay for themselves, but instead ballooned deficits and debt and contributed to a rise in income inequality.

How'd those tax cuts work out for you?

Went from a balanced budget to a deficit.
"Went from a balanced budget to a deficit"

Correct, so please explain how the democrats current Spend-O-Rama is going to help and not drive the country of the debt cliff into default on the Trillions upon Trillions....
 

Blair Warren

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
215
"Went from a balanced budget to a deficit"

Correct, so please explain how the democrats current Spend-O-Rama is going to help and not drive the country of the debt cliff into default on the Trillions upon Trillions....
Deficit caused by the "Bush tax cuts"...

The Inflation Reduction Act... put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. :) You and I know that it probably won't reduce inflation, but time will tell.

But at least there was an attempt to do some good things....

Moody's Take

from the Moody's article:

Prescription drug savings Besides higher taxes on large corporations and well-to-do households, the Inflation Reduction Act includes several provisions that will, on net, reduce federal healthcare costs. Most notably, it allows Medicare to negotiate lower prices for single-source prescription drugs—drugs only available as the original brand without competing generic equivalents from other manufacturers—on which it spends the most. From 2026 to 2029, the number of important drugs subject to negotiations with Medicare would double from 10 to 20.

Moreover, all of this is more than paid for and will thus reduce the government’s future budget deficits, which seems sure to soon become a more pressing economic problem. While modest legislation, there is plenty to like in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Smart Asset

from the Smart Asset article:

  • Cheaper drug prescriptions. Proposed legislation would cap your out-of-pocket spending at $2,000 and limit drug price increases for Medicare and private insurance. For reference, in 2022, the catastrophic threshold that Medicare recipients must pay out-of-pocket before getting most of their prescription costs covered is $7,050.
Democrats (it's their bill after all) estimate that they could raise $725 billion from three main provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. These would leverage taxes on corporations and the ultra wealthy, save billions in Medicare and enforce the tax code. Though families making under $400,000 would not see any tax hikes and small businesses would also avoid new taxes. Here’s a breakdown:

  • Imposing a 15% corporate minimum tax rate ($313 billion). The legislation would impose a tax rate of 15% on corporations with at least $1 billion in profits. When compared with the Build Back Better Act, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said on November 18 that it could raise comparably $320 billion.
  • Prescription drug pricing reform ($288 billion). The Inflation Reduction Act would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates could save Medicare $101.8 billion. The legislation would also establish “an excise tax on drug manufacturers, producers, and importers who fail to enter into drug pricing agreements.”
  • IRS tax enforcement ($124 billion). This provision would invest $80 billion in the tax agency over the next decade to strengthen tax enforcement and reduce the growing gap between what taxpayers owe and what the agency is collecting. For reference, a 2021 study estimated that the top 1% of Americans hid more than 20% of their income from the IRS and additional resources would help the agency collect another $175 billion from high-income tax evaders.
Like any bill passed by either party, time will tell what will actually happen.

The intent is not trillions and trillions of debt and over the cliff.....
 

Steve White

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
483
Health Care is wonderful for those that are employed and those unable to work. Not for welfare queens and illegals.

"The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."

- Ronald Reagan

Only a fool would not understand that simple truth.

Blair I wish you well sir. Time for me to step off the dance floor.
 

Steve Seebold

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
1,181
I just looked it up. The military has a mandatory retirement age of the first of the month following your 62nd birthday.

Why don’t politicians have the same rule?

If that was the law, we wouldn’t have these senile old politicians like Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein or Nancy Pelosi (just to name a few) trying to run this great country.
 

Latest posts

Top