I was being obviously facetious as the time of Reagan, Bush, and Trump are when the deficits were increasing despite economic good times.
US continues to go backward...
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
No it is an I'll say for me it's those in the middle that want the status quo have either stayed home or voted for third parties. That is part of what the issue is. And I understand why people do both things so I'm not really trying to take a shot but it's just a fact that that helped trump get in power. Also those in the middle tend be uncomfortable being to mean to people on either side. But at some point you have to take a stand. And the both sides crap get really old when one's sides tactics are much more violent and fraudulent while actively taking rights away and stealing from them.
JTOSU
Ranger
From Van Jones today (posted on Twitter and Facebook):
When we’re arguing about I.C.E., we’re not actually arguing about immigration policy. We’re arguing about legitimacy. And we’re doing it while watching two completely different movies…
I spent the last week really listening to the voices on all sides of this conflict. ICE agents. Protesters. Conservatives. Progressives. Undocumented families. Police Officers. Gov’t officials. Here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Each side thinks it is the reasonable one. Each side thinks the other side is lying or insane. And each side—at SOME level—actually has a point.
Conservatives see law enforcement under attack. Progressives see unchecked federal power running roughshod over neighborhoods. Same events. Totally different data sets and frameworks.
This outcome isn’t by accident. Algorithms are feeding us different videos, headlines and emotional cues. Again: we are not watching the same movie!
From inside the conservative worldview: If enforcement fails, we lose the country. Blocking ICE looks like blocking firefighters.
From inside the progressive worldview: If ICE overreach isn’t resisted now, authoritarianism becomes normal. NOT protesting feels like surrendering democracy.
Neither side is pretending. Both are reacting to real fears. But both are missing critical parts of the picture. Here’s a test of good faith when discussing the I.C.E. issue: Can you name the other side’s deepest fear in a way they’d agree is fair?
We can have constitutional enforcement and legitimate protest. Safety and freedom. But not if we keep letting social media trick us into believing the absolute worst about everyone who disagrees with us.
When we’re arguing about I.C.E., we’re not actually arguing about immigration policy. We’re arguing about legitimacy. And we’re doing it while watching two completely different movies…
I spent the last week really listening to the voices on all sides of this conflict. ICE agents. Protesters. Conservatives. Progressives. Undocumented families. Police Officers. Gov’t officials. Here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Each side thinks it is the reasonable one. Each side thinks the other side is lying or insane. And each side—at SOME level—actually has a point.
Conservatives see law enforcement under attack. Progressives see unchecked federal power running roughshod over neighborhoods. Same events. Totally different data sets and frameworks.
This outcome isn’t by accident. Algorithms are feeding us different videos, headlines and emotional cues. Again: we are not watching the same movie!
From inside the conservative worldview: If enforcement fails, we lose the country. Blocking ICE looks like blocking firefighters.
From inside the progressive worldview: If ICE overreach isn’t resisted now, authoritarianism becomes normal. NOT protesting feels like surrendering democracy.
Neither side is pretending. Both are reacting to real fears. But both are missing critical parts of the picture. Here’s a test of good faith when discussing the I.C.E. issue: Can you name the other side’s deepest fear in a way they’d agree is fair?
We can have constitutional enforcement and legitimate protest. Safety and freedom. But not if we keep letting social media trick us into believing the absolute worst about everyone who disagrees with us.
Pretty scary thought that this is even in the realm of possibilities.
Both trade deficits and spending have to outpace income (taxes) gathered due to the Triffen Dillemma, so your AI generated points don't really mean much here. And they don't address the elephant in the room, which is the largest wealth discrepancy in the modern era. That is why democratic institutions are breaking down and why the working class are so angry. Hell, its the ultra wealthy that are openly opposing democracy now, both in words and action since it cannot bring them more power than they already have.
And Austerity didn't just fail in Greece, but also in Spain, Portugal and right now they are failing in Argentina. Hence the $40 Billion trump bailout to them. It isn't as easy as just cutting spending.
Do our tax dollars go towards other taxpayers' tax credits?
Why should I have to pay more because I already had kids and don't plan on having any more? Also if this was available a decade ago when I was married why should I have been penalized for only have two kids instead of 3 or more? Why should families that decide to have large families (and Im Catholic so I know a few of them) get more benefits for having more kids? They already get more money back because of their larger amount of dependants.
Im saying this tongue in cheek. More kids = more expenses so idk if they get something I don't. Just trying to apply the same logic others use when stuff like this comes up.
Well, I mean, if those countries would actually stop spending…
I'm not sure I understand.
Part of the post is about a rising tax credit for children and that's your focus. A child tax credit increase is already a recent rising trend (2017 and 2021). In no way does that increase your taxes. Tax credits place no burden on the rest of the taxpayer base. Taxpayers all over the US from all types of background hammer the hell out of the child tax credit and it doesn't touch your wallet. You mentioned big Catholic families and that's a good example. The Hasidic Jews in upstate NY typically have over a dozen children to hammer the child tax credit.
You are missing the sarcasm in my posts about this. In Minnesota we have universal free lunch. Every kid regardless of parents income gets a free meal. You should hear all the griping about it from not only people who don't have kids but also people with kids who never had to worry about filling out a free lunch form. I could afford to pay for my kids lunch but understand that the benefit is for everyone and if it ends up costing me an extra nickel a day to make sure my kids friends don't have to face the stigma of being on the free lunch list or go hungry because of their parents pride then so be it.
This is the same thing. People who gripe about welfare will gladly take a tax cut on stuff like this. We all get a cut one way or the other on a million tax breaks but if it's something that helps someone else you start hearing about the government stealing from you. Some of it I think is stupid-I don't know why we would want to start making government savings accounts for kids born during a certain time period as that does absolutely nothing to stimulate economic growth which is the whole point of tax credits. But Im not going to complain for real if someone is getting something I don't get because in the end Ill end up getting plenty myself.
Try interrupting those rattlesnake handling Pentecostals in North Georgia…
Yes, and when they attempted austerity, it went even worse.
They're not the same thing. Welfare benefits cost the taxpayer. Tax credits do not cost the taxpayer. A tax credit is an amount of your own money that the government is allowing you to keep.
The two are not comparable. I guess I don't understand though.
PF5
Sheriff
Remember January 6th!...feel like this is the new Remember the Alamo!...
PF5
Sheriff
Just to be clear, you can comment on a meme....understand now?
Similar threads
