Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1) During Obama's tenure, we were recovering from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, so I hardly think he was to blame for more people on food stamps during that period
2) Trump has still been charging his staffers and secret service to stay in and dine at Mar a Lago. He is actually profiting indirectly from going there as much as he does. He's not actually saving the taxpayer money by going to his own property.
Sidenote: as I said in a previous post, I was also displeased with Obama's vacations.
"During Obama's tenure, we were recovering from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression,"
AND he said that if he couldn't fix it in his 1st term he didn't deserve to be re-elected.
Yet, did NOT fix it in his 1st term (or his 2nd really) yet he ran anyway!
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,638,617 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
"During Obama's tenure, we were recovering from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression,"
AND he said that if he couldn't fix it in his 1st term he didn't deserve to be re-elected.
Yet, did NOT fix it in his 1st term (or his 2nd really) yet he ran anyway!
And YOU probably voted for him.
So, what does that say about him AND YOU?
Really? He didn't? Because from where I'm sitting, things improved dramatically over his two terms, I was doing better than ever by Obama's last year in office, while on his initial election, when W was still pres, I was unemployed due to construction tanking after 9/15/08.
Then why do we have to pay for him to go to Florida all the time?
Let's not pretend Trump is working. Watching TV and tweeting idiocy all day is not really work. Get back to me when he sits down and reads the intelligence briefings instead of getting his foreign policy from Fox and Friends.
" Get back to me when he sits down and reads the intelligence briefings"
You are correct, he does NOT read them.
" Breaking with tradition, Trump skips president’s written intelligence report and relies on oral briefings
"For much of the past year, President Trump has declined to participate in a practice followed by the past seven of his predecessors: He rarely if ever reads the President’s Daily Brief, a document that lays out the most pressing information collected by U.S. intelligence agencies from hot spots around the world.
Trump has opted to rely on an oral briefing of select intelligence issues in the Oval Office rather than getting the full written document delivered to review separately each day, according to three people familiar with his briefings. "
He would rather get the briefing in person so HE CAN ASK QUESTIONS and DISCUSS the issues with the experts.
What a novel idea!
MUCH BETTER then reading a report where you CAN'T ask questions immediately
Really? He didn't? Because from where I'm sitting, things improved dramatically over his two terms, I was doing better than ever by Obama's last year in office, while on his initial election, when W was still pres, I was unemployed due to construction tanking after 9/15/08.
It only started to improve to any real degree well into his 2nd term.
"when W was still pres, I was unemployed due to construction tanking after 9/15/08"
And how well were you doing AFTER the W. Bush tax cuts went into affect?
W. TRIED to get the dem run Congress to act concern the banking problem and both Barnie Frank, the House and Chris Dodd , the Senate said there was NO PROBLEM.
Funny the the economy tanked AFTER the dems took control of Congress.
As they said, 'If you didn't do good under W, Bush, you would NEVER do good"!
Especially in construction.
Let's look at the economy of W. BEFORE the dems took over.
" Publication: Business Wire
Date: Friday, January 4 2008
More Than 8.3 Million Jobs Created Since August 2003 In Longest Continuous Run Of Job Growth On Record
WASHINGTON -- Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released new jobs figures - 18,000 jobs created in December. Since August 2003, more than 8.3 million jobs have been created, with more than 1.3 million jobs created throughout 2007. Our economy has now added jobs for 52 straight months - the longest period of uninterrupted job growth on record. The unemployment rate remains low at 5 percent. The U.S. economy benefits from a solid foundation, but we cannot take economic growth for granted and economic indicators have become increasingly mixed. President Bush will continue working with Congress to address the challenges our economy faces and help facilitate long-term economic growth, job growth, and better standards of living for all Americans.
* Real GDP grew at a strong 4.9 percent annual rate in the third quarter of 2007. The economy has now experienced six years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 2.8 percent a year since 2001.
* Real after-tax per capita personal income has risen by 11.7 percent - an average of more than $3,550 per person - since President Bush took office.
* Over the course of this Administration, productivity growth has averaged 2.6 percent per year. This growth is well above average productivity growth in the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s.
By 2003, Mr. Bush grasped this lesson. In that year, he cut the dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent each, and the economy responded. In two years, stocks rose 20 percent. In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created. The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.
But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”
If too many are on food stamps (public charity) then the remedy is simple : abolish public charity (socialism).
Oh, and by the way, since participation is 100% voluntary, imagine what would happen if 51% of the American people withdrew from participation in FICA?
Same result - only with more political blow back as the "makers" leave the glorious socialist system behind with all the "takers" screaming for more.
BUT let's be fair, the REAL cause of the problem is money madness - and letting governments and bankers control the volume and value of the medium of exchange (as if they produce any thing useful for trade !)
Think about it - a government or bank issuing money is basically stealing other people's labor and property... legally.
On the other hand, if only productive people and businesses could emit liberty money (i.e. coupons), denominated in goods and services, for when barter is insufficient, then everything available for trade would have a money token in circulation with which to purchase it.
NO MORE MONEY DROUGHT.
NO MORE INFLATION / DEFLATION. (can't manipulate a coupon denominated in 'one mickyD burger')
NO MORE FIGHTING FOR MARKET SHARE (and a bigger piece of the scarce money pie)
NO MORE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (public charity) when any worker can "spend" his promises to work.
NO MORE BORROWING AT USURY. Who needs to borrow when you can "make your own money"?
NO MORE POVERTY. If you can work and have a good reputation for discharging your notes, you can spend as much as you want to work for. But you dasn't get a bad rep. Then you're stuck back in the 'hard money blues.'
Since prosperity is based on prodigious production of surplus usable goods and services, the more surplus available, the more private charity is available for those who are truly needy.
Oi!
Never happen, though.
The Collectivist / Usurer alliance would foment a massive civil war in a NY minute if ever people got the notion that they didn't need public charity or funny munny in order to prosper.
Dude, you can't seem to let this soda thing go. Every single time there is a thread that brings up food stamps, you bring up soda- sometimes over and over. I don't approve of food recipients being able to purchase soda/junk either, but I've noticed that you reitterate it almost to the point of obsession...
Are you ok?
With regards to illegal immigrants, I disagree that deporting them all will drive up wages. If it does in fact do that, it will also drive up costs.
I believe in a path to legalization to allow them to be taxpaying residents. However, I don't think they should be able to draw any kind of government welfare for say, 10 years.
Actually, I agree that it should consistently be brought up. It's not right, and that's just one of the things they can spend our money on that's not right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
