[W:2475] Ariz. State Senate Hears Preliminary Audit Report

[Plasmaball]

My response to you on this statement again is that you have no idea what Biden even stood for, what his policies were, who was going to pay for them and what actual effect they would have on the U.S. economy? why is it that Biden rhetoric never reconciles with the liberal results. You bought the hate rhetoric, ignored the positive results never answering the direct question what exactly did Trump implement that hurt you, this family or the country? Ever been to court?? Rhetoric doesn't win court cases, facts do and rhetoric never hurt anyone, actions do. Now answer the question and stop with the personal opinions, exactly what Policies did Biden propose that is going to benefit you?

Ugh this is just so boring. So uninspired drivel.

 

[MTAtech]

"Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country", who said that

Thanks for the attempt at a history lesson but that doesn't change the reality that the left of today makes and keeps people dependent, diverts from failures never accepting responsibility, and always charging high state and local taxes then blaming the Federal Gov't when the citizens aren't getting what they deserve. The states had no problem with high state and local taxes before because citizens were able to lower their federal returns fully deducting them. Trump changed that and that pisses liberal elites off as finally the true cost of liberalism was on display causing taxpayers to flee the blue states.

It is quite interesting how you ignore that California has had a Democrat controlled legislature since the 60's with the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world but I don't see any concern about money in the hands of the liberal elites in California and none of that getting to those in need, only people like you calling Republicans the party of the rich?

You have that backwards. Increasing income inequality -- the policies Republicans push, increases dependency. The Democratic policies, that decrease income inequality, allow people to be independent.

 

[Carl Young]

JFK, great President even though he was a Democrat.

Harry Truman was another.

But what would Truman or Kennedy think of the Democratic Party today?

 

[pamak]

There is no question Trump will be proven right, Biden/Harris are radical leftists that will do everything positive to make people in this country totally dependent as neither have an ounce of credibility when it comes to this private sector economy that we have in this country. Why don't you tell us what metric you are going to use to judge Presidential performance since none of those metrics were used in judging Trump? It is quite telling how radical the left has become, ever hear of JFK and "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country?" Don't expect foreigners like you to understand history or the foundation upon which this country was built, certainly not the entitlement mentality you promote

Irrelevant nonsense. We are talking about the elections and neither Biden nor Harris were the ones who claimed that the elections were won in a very legitimate, legal and clear way. Even conservative judges did not support Trump's claims. Stick to the claim you made and stop changing the conversation.

 

[MTAtech]

Harry Truman was another.

But what would Truman or Kennedy think of the Democratic Party today?

The Democratic Party today, unlike your narrative, is more conservative than during the days of Kennedy and Johnson.

It's the Republican Party that has gone far right. Republican Nixon, considered conservative at the time, instituted wage and price controls and established the EPA. Eisenhower said this:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish Social Security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt, a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

 

[Carl Young]

You claim that conservative policies are better than liberal policies. Let's review the last 100 years of economic history. From around 1900 to the New Deal, public policy did little to limit extremes of wealth and poverty, mainly because the political dominance of the elite remained intact; the politics of the era, in which working Americans were divided by racial, religious, and cultural issues, have recognizable parallels with modern politics. The result was that income remained about as unequally distributed as it had been the late 19th century – or as it is today, with the bulk of income going to the top sliver.

The later period didn’t evolve gradually or automatically. It was created, in a remarkably short period of time, by FDR and the New Deal. As the below chart shows, income inequality declined drastically from the late 1930s to the mid 1940s, with the rich losing ground while working Americans saw unprecedented gains. This is a seminal episode in American history.

In the 1960s to much of the 1970s, we had a society of broadly shared prosperity, partly because strong unions, a high minimum wage, and a progressive tax system helped limit inequality. It was also a society in which political bipartisanship meant something: in spite of all the turmoil of Vietnam and the civil rights movement, in spite of the sinister machinations of Nixon and his henchmen, it was an era in which Democrats and Republicans agreed on basic values and could cooperate across party lines.

Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13%, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296% and is still getting even wider. Why? The great reduction of inequality that created middle-class America between 1935 and 1945 was driven by political change; Likewise, the undoing the gains won from the New Deal and the Great Society evaporated those gains. It’s important to know that no other advanced economy has seen a comparable surge in inequality – even the rising inequality of Thatcherite Britain was a faint echo of trends in America.

So, which policies help the most people? The New Deal policies that reduced income inequality or conservative policies that ever increase the amount of money into fewer hands?

These programs may or may not have been beneficial to the American people but whatever their success or failure they had the best interests of the American people at heart, That is no longer the case.

There is no benefit to the American by having their southern borders open to unskilled, diseased, and often dangerous illegal immigrants. That is deliberate Democratic policy and perhaps you can answer how that benefits the American people.

How does it benefit the American people to cut off their energy sources in order that they become dependent on foreigners?

Neither Truman or Kennedy would support either of these policies yet we have the Democrats of today either defending them or remaining silent.

Nominate either of these men today and they'd likely get full support of the American people. Instead the Dems are now the party of the ridiculous AOC, her 'Squad', Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. That's just pathetic.

 

[Carl Young]

The Democratic Party today, unlike your narrative, is more conservative than during the days of Kennedy and Johnson.

It's the Republican Party that has gone far right. Republican Nixon, considered conservative at the time, instituted wage and price controls and established the EPA. Eisenhower said this:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish Social Security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt, a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

How is the Republican Party today "far right" and how do you define the term?

 

[MTAtech]

There is no question Trump will be proven right, Biden/Harris are radical leftists that will do everything positive to make people in this country totally dependent as neither have an ounce of credibility when it comes to this private sector economy that we have in this country. Why don't you tell us what metric you are going to use to judge Presidential performance since none of those metrics were used in judging Trump? It is quite telling how radical the left has become, ever hear of JFK and "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country?" Don't expect foreigners like you to understand history or the foundation upon which this country was built, certainly not the entitlement mentality you promote

Biden and Harris are radical leftists? Perhaps compared to you -- a person so far right that you don't believe in anything but raw claw and tooth capitalism, with no regulations or government.

Both Biden and Harris are moderates, who believe in the free market but in a country that provides a safety net for those that fall through the cracks, funded by taxes on those who have done very well. They don't believe in taking over the means of production or even going as far as Denmark has.

 

[MaryP]

They have subpoenaed the routers.

 

[Carl Young]

You have that backwards. Increasing income inequality -- the policies Republicans push, increases dependency. The Democratic policies, that decrease income inequality, allow people to be independent.

Is it your understanding that either BHO, or now Joe Biden, has done anything to establish 'income equality'? Will the open southern borders encourage income equality or will it bring labor costs down?

 

[MTAtech]

How is the Republican Party today "far right" and how do you define the term?

They have devolved into cult that bows down to one person, as every fascist dictatorship does.
They want to eliminate social programs -- in favor of taking that money and lowering taxes on the rich.
They don't believe in science and are prone to be dominated by fanatical religious zealots.
They believe in Party before country and side with insurrectionists instead of law enforcement. It’s now an autocratic party.

 

[mike2810]

Harry Truman was another.

But what would Truman or Kennedy think of the Democratic Party today?

I suspect they would be disappointed. As would Regan and Ike would be with todays Republican Party.

 

[LostInSeattle]

Conversion to the radical ideology where when you get what you want voter integrity isn't an issue. Why is going door to door to convince people to get vaccinated different than going door to door to ask how they voted, you have personal choice either way. You really don't get it do you, going door to door regarding vaccinations isn't the role of the federal gov't nor a valid expense to pay those people. Voter integrity in the state is indeed an issue for the citizens of the state since states run the elections

Public health measures during a pandemic that has killed more Americans than the deadliest war in history is not an issue for citizens? It's not legitimate concern for the government? I'm having trouble understanding that logic.

 

[Carl Young]

A few rich Democrats, who remember their roots, doesn't undo the fact that Republicans are the party of the rich, because of the policies they push. The rich Democrats you mentioned want to raise taxes on the rich, increase environmental regulations and help the poor. Republicans want to lower taxes on the rich because their donors demand it. They want to scrap environmental regulations because the corporations that donate to them demand it and they try, at every chance, to slash help for the poor and middle class.

The 'rich' are those heading up Facebook, Twitter, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, the entertainment industry, the MSM $$ trillion corporations, and so on. That's where the serious and influential money is. The World Economic Forum is home base for these people and the membership is like a who's who of the heavyweight leftists of today, the same ones who are toadying up to China. They do ot have your interests at heart.

Maybe your point was valid 40 years ago but not today.

 

[rahl]

Job creation during Obama term was mostly part time for economic reasons, people not able to find a full time job but wanting one.

how many times do you need this laughably false bullshit refuted?

Those jobs skew the unemployment rate(U3) downward whereas they are captured in the U6 which is more meaningful to measure economic success. The U3 is what the media posts

Your post is objectively false.

 

[Carl Young]

I suspect they would be disappointed. As would Regan and Ike would be with todays Republican Party.

We can easily see why past Democrats would be ashamed of their party today but why would the same be said of Republicans?

 

[LostInSeattle]

These programs may or may not have been beneficial to the American people but whatever their success or failure they had the best interests of the American people at heart, That is no longer the case.

Based on what reasoning do you come to this conclusion?

There is no benefit to the American by having their southern borders open to unskilled, diseased, and often dangerous illegal immigrants.

Unskilled and diseased? The people from south of the border I see around doing tons of construction work, landscaping and cleaning seem neither unskilled nor diseased.

That is deliberate Democratic policy and perhaps you can answer how that benefits the American people.

They provide cheap labor, pay taxes without receiving benefits.

How does it benefit the American people to cut off their energy sources in order that they become dependent on foreigners?

That is definitely not happening. Already much discussed in other threads.

Neither Truman or Kennedy would support either of these policies yet we have the Democrats of today either defending them or remaining silent.

Nominate either of these men today and they'd likely get full support of the American people. Instead the Dems are now the party of the ridiculous AOC, her 'Squad', Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. That's just pathetic.

Well, it is certainly the party of Biden and Harris. AOC, not so much. She is one of the standard bearers for the progressive wing of the party, which is relatively small.

 

[mike2810]

We can easily see why past Democrats would be ashamed of their party today but why would the same be said of Republicans?

Interesting. You can easily see it about the Democratic Party and not the changes in the Republican Party?

Have you been listening to the likes of Greene?

 

[Carl Young]

They have devolved into cult that bows down to one person, as every fascist dictatorship does.
They want to eliminate social programs -- in favor of taking that money and lowering taxes on the rich.
They don't believe in science and are prone to be dominated by fanatical religious zealots.
They believe in Party before country and side with insurrectionists instead of law enforcement. It’s now an autocratic party.

You have no evidence to support any of these claims. It's all your feelings and appealing to those feelings has led to dramatic Democratic success.

Until more Americans look to reality rather than their emotional fantasies, the downhill slide of the USA will continue. That is dangerous for the country and the world.

 

[rahl]

Cool. What was it that you were asserting with regards to economic policies and associate outcomes. That's what I missed.

Conservative has me on ignore. Can you post this for him regarding his reply to you about part time/full time jobs during obama?

 

[Carl Young]

Interesting. You can easily see it about the Democratic Party and not the changes in the Republican Party?

Have you been listening to the likes of Greene?

No, I've only heard her name mentioned. However are you claiming that one newly elected Republican is representative of the entire party?

 

[Conservative]

Yes, all this rhetoric about Republicans being the party of the rich ignoring the rich liberal elites especially from Silicon Valley who have money and don't have a problem paying high state and local taxes.

Do you think today's Democrat Party thinks that? Doesn't appear that they buy into the JFK attitude and instead want to provide for every American from taxpayer dollars

 

[Conservative]

A few rich Democrats, who remember their roots, doesn't undo the fact that Republicans are the party of the rich, because of the policies they push. The rich Democrats you mentioned want to raise taxes on the rich, increase environmental regulations and help the poor. Republicans want to lower taxes on the rich because their donors demand it. They want to scrap environmental regulations because the corporations that donate to them demand it and they try, at every chance, to slash help for the poor and middle class.

That's because they can afford raising taxes on the rich, the problem is you will never get enough money to fund the liberal spending appetite and it makes for great rhetoric. It is stunning how you continue to ignore that the discretionary budget is funded by FIT, CIT, and Excise taxes and that budget was 1.5 trillion dollars, over 2 trillion dollars was generated by those taxes so even when you add debt service to the amount explain how that creates trillion dollar deficits?

Republicans lower taxes because that gives people more spendable income and less of a need for liberal social programs paid for in higher taxes. You are so full of liberal bs it is stunning. You still cannot explain why high state and local taxes haven't solved the poverty and homeless issue in California or any liberal state or city in the country. All it does is create a dependent society that apparently you are part of

 

[MTAtech]

You have no evidence to support any of these claims. It's all your feelings and appealing to those feelings has led to dramatic Democratic success.

Until more Americans look to reality rather than their emotional fantasies, the downhill slide of the USA will continue. That is dangerous for the country and the world.

Oh really.

Mitch McConnell Calls for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid Cuts After Passing Tax Cuts, Massive Defense Spending​

 

[Conservative]

You have that backwards. Increasing income inequality -- the policies Republicans push, increases dependency. The Democratic policies, that decrease income inequality, allow people to be independent.

Then how do you explain the California results where Democrats have controlled the legislature, thus the purse strings and legislative agenda for decades, since the 60's. Stop buying rhetoric and use your brain to think, the liberal results don't reconcile with the rhetoric, Rich liberal elites are the problem not Republicans

How does keeping more of what you earn create dependence?