Trump to Propose $4.8 Trillion Budget With More Border Wall Funding (1 Viewer)

[Conservative]

Another example of you trying to make this discussion about me.



You don't have a point... You're hopelessly flailing in an attempt to divert from reality. Infrastructure is underfunded in the U.S., and is in major need of modernization. You've not addressed this point because you're not capable of having a genuine discussion.

The discussion will always be about you as long as you ignore context including the taxes you pay and their purpose. My point is that you are book smart but very street stupid when it comes to understanding data and results. You do not appear to understand the role of the federal, state and local governments nor what an under employed person is. My point remains you post pretty charts with color but no context and it is context that destroys your credibility

 

[VanceMack]

Flying spit anger.

As usual.

Incredible you pretend to be an independent when you’re virtually always going on explicative laden rants and raves about and I’m just gonna impersonate you here for a minute:

Llllllliiiiiiiiiibbbbbbbeeeeerrrrrraaaaaalllllllssssss!!!!!!!!!!!! **** **** ****!!!!!!

At the end of the day who were the people who bitched for 8 years under Obama that despite the economic crisis he was spending like a drunken sailor and the debt and the deficit had to be solved right that instant and he if he didn’t solve it he was the worst person ever trying to make the country like Greece and everyone was gonna be enslaved to the Chinese?

Republicans and many Trump supporters on this board that completely and totally shut up about the deficit as of January 20th, 2017.

Odd that.

:lamo

You lot are a funny group. Pointing out the foolishness of your comments is not anger. It IS however a lot of fun.

Your comments however are no less stupid than his. If you look at any of my comments on trumps actual ACTIONS on the debt you will see that I have stated that his failure to control debt and deficit spending is perhaps his greatest failure to date in his presidency.

But this is not about that. This is about the sheer stupidity of a group of people ****ting themselves over a proposal that is nothing more than that...a proposal...a starting point...while that same group of people ignore the fact that the party they mindlessly cheer on...who's job it is to actually WRITE the budget, DEBATE the budget, and ultimately PASS the budget...have done **** all.

You **** yourself...again...because of TTTTRRRRRRRRUUUUUUUUUMMMPPPPPPPPP!!!!

Not odd at all, that. Just another day. Just another one of your posts.

 

[Kushinator]

A budget proposal by this or any other president....

Let's just stop there... i don't need for you to pretend to be an expert in this subject. If you were mildly familiar with budgetary finance and legislation, you wouldn't be trying to punt. The Presidential budget requests turn out to be very close to actual expenditures, outside of exogenous shocks like war or recession. In fiscal year 2018, the Trump administration requested $4.094 trillion and actual outlays came in at $4.109 trillion. In fiscal year 2019, the Trump administration requested $4.407 trillion and actual outlays came in at $4.448 trillion. For fiscal year 2020, the Trump administration has requested $4.75 trillion. What the **** are you even trying to argue... that budget authority resides in the House of Representatives? That fact has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. History shows the GOP to be the party of hypocrisy. Spending, deficits, and debt are only important when Democrats win elections.

there really isnt much more to talk about.

You haven't added anything of value to this discussion... so it's best you stop talking.

 

[Kushinator]

The discussion will always be about you

No... you will always try to make every exchange about the person you're attempting (and failing) to debate. It's a sign of a weakness.

as long as you ignore context

I haven't ignored anything. Funding is inadequate.

My point is that you are book smart but very street stupid

Again you shift to making this about me.

You do not appear to understand the role of the federal, state and local governments

Your opinions on the role of government are not up for discussion. Nobody gives a ****.

My point remains

You've never had a point.

 

[VanceMack]

Let's just stop there... i don't need for you to pretend to be an expert in this subject. If you were mildly familiar with budgetary finance and legislation, you wouldn't be trying to punt. The Presidential budget requests turn out to be very close to actual expenditures, outside of exogenous shocks like war or recession. In fiscal year 2018, the Trump administration requested $4.094 trillion and actual outlays came in at $4.109 trillion. In fiscal year 2019, the Trump administration requested $4.407 trillion and actual outlays came in at $4.448 trillion. For fiscal year 2020, the Trump administration has requested $4.75 trillion. What the **** are you even trying to argue... that budget authority resides in the House of Representatives? That fact has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. History shows the GOP to be the party of hypocrisy. Spending, deficits, and debt are only important when Democrats win elections.



You haven't added anything of value to this discussion... so it's best you stop talking.

:lamo

You go ahead and keep ****ting yourself over a budget proposal while you ignore the fact that the rats you support have literally done **** all.

Its a lot of fun to watch. Seriously.

 

[Conservative]

No... you will always try to make every exchange about the person you're attempting (and failing) to debate. It's a sign of a weakness.



I haven't ignored anything. Funding is inadequate.



Again you shift to making this about me.



Your opinions on the role of government are not up for discussion. Nobody gives a ****.



You've never had a point.

Your ignorance of the taxes you pay isn't personal, it is reality. Your state has responsibility for state highways and bridges not the federal taxpayers who have control over Federal Highways predominantly the interstate highways.

You are right though, I finally agree with you, liberals don't give a **** about state and local responsibilities because liberals cannot sell their ideology to the citizens of the state. You will always ignore where the states get their money, property and sales taxes mostly which come from people spending more of what they earn

 

[Kushinator]

:lamo

You go ahead and keep ****ting yourself over a budget proposal

I'm pointing out hypocrisy. Spending was projected to be at these levels more than a decade ago. Are you here to foam at the mouth?

 

[Moonglow]

A waste of money on a wall when Trump does this:


U.S. Released 375,000 Illegal Immigrants Who Arrived With Family Members into Interior in 2019


I hope Trump's suckers like being played...

 

[Kushinator]

Your ignorance of the taxes you pay isn't personal, it is reality. Your state has responsibility for state highways and bridges not the federal taxpayers who have control over Federal Highways predominantly the interstate highways.

Your opinion of me is of no consequence to the discussion. Our infrastructure is underfunded and in need of overhaul.

 

[Conservative]

Your opinion of me is of no consequence to the discussion. Our infrastructure is underfunded and in need of overhaul.

"OUR" is the issue, state or federal highways and bridges? Learn who funds what and who has responsibility for those repairs. You have no idea what taxes you pay or their purpose

 

[Kushinator]

"OUR" is the issue, state or federal highways and bridges? Learn who funds what and who has responsibility for those repairs. You have no idea what taxes you pay or their purpose

Your opinion of what or who should fund infrastructure, which is much much more than roads and bridges (which are in dire need as well), is irrelevant and just a deflection.

 

[Conservative]

Your opinion of what or who should fund infrastructure, which is much much more than roads and bridges (which are in dire need as well), is irrelevant and just a deflection.

Yes that is true but the funding for airports etc is a foreign concept to you as well. It isn't my opinion it is what the Congress created for funding. You don't like it, take it up with Congress. The unified budget is the problem as is your desire for a massive central gov't funding everything. You have no understanding of state and local responsibilities and for someone in Chicago, I find your attitude typical

Infrastructure is generally funded by user fees: the gas tax pays for roads. ... People understand that freeways aren't free and that revenue paid by users for infrastructure are different than generic taxes. Republicans embraced the small 'c' conservative idea that people who used public assets ought to pay for them.

Here are three ways to pay for new investments in infrastructure and end partisan gridlock

 

[VanceMack]

I'm pointing out hypocrisy. Spending was projected to be at these levels more than a decade ago. Are you here to foam at the mouth?

:lamo

Hypocrisy. You are ****ting yourself over an extraneous budget proposal and skipping along joyfully at the fact that the party you shill for hasnt done their job at all with regard to the budget.

Yeah...you are doing a GREAT job of calling attention to hypocrisy. Yes you are!

 

[Kushinator]

You are ****ting yourself over an extraneous budget proposal

False. I've merely highlighted your attempt to divert from the GOP record. You may continue to defend hypocrisy and exhibit great ignorance on matters pertaining to governmentl finance.

 

[Kushinator]

Yes that is true but the funding for airports etc is a foreign concept to you as well.

Government finance is not a foreign concept... you're just pretending to be an expert because you have nothing to refute my original statement: U.S. infrastructure is severely underfunded and in need of a serious overhaul.

Here are three ways to pay for new investments in infrastructure and end partisan gridlock

You left something out... because you are not an honest person:

There are three ways to pay for new infrastructure investment: raise revenue, borrow, or pretend (gimmicks that mask borrowing as being paid for). Infrastructure is generally funded by user fees: the gas tax pays for roads. In the past this has had broad political support. People understand that freeways aren’t free and that revenue paid by users for infrastructure are different than generic taxes. Republicans embraced the small ‘c’ conservative idea that people who used public assets ought to pay for them. Democrats overcame objections regarding the inherently regressive nature of flat consumption taxes and the budgetary policy of segregating infrastructure revenue streams from other general revenue to support this system.

This bipartisan consensus lasted for decades, but has broken down on both ends. Republicans morphed from the party of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (who both raised the gas tax) to the party that signs Grover Norquist’s ‘no new taxes’ pledge which now includes the gas-tax. Democrats broke their end of the bargain in 1993 when they raised the gas tax, not to build more roads, but to reduce the deficit as a fallback option when their proposal for an increased energy tax failed. While those gas tax dollars were eventually restored to the highway trust fund, the glory days were over.

As a result, the federal gas tax, never indexed for inflation, has been stuck at 18.4 cents/gallon since 1993. Simply increasing the gas tax for inflation (32 cents today) and indexing it in the future would fund a large-scale new infrastructure initiative. That would require bipartisan political will that has been lacking for 25 years and a repudiation by the Republican controlled Senate of the pledge that most have signed.

 

[Conservative]

Government finance is not a foreign concept... you're just pretending to be an expert because you have nothing to refute my original statement: U.S. infrastructure is severely underfunded and in need of a serious overhaul.



You left something out... because you are not an honest person:

As usual selective reading of a link, You are an embarrassment, state excise taxes fund state and local infrastructure costs. Don't use the money for things other than infrastructure and you won't have a problem

 

[Kushinator]

As usual selective reading of a link

You quoted a single sentence and you have the audacity to claim selective reading?

You are an embarrassment

Personal attack noted.

state excise taxes fund state and local infrastructure costs. Don't use the money for things other than infrastructure and you won't have a problem

The revenue generated from state excise taxes isn't enough. The article you chose as your support actually addresses the funding shortfall issues pertaining to the fuel tax and inflation.

 

[Conservative]

You quoted a single sentence and you have the audacity to claim selective reading?



Personal attack noted.



The revenue generated from state excise taxes isn't enough. The article you chose as your support actually addresses the funding shortfall issues pertaining to the fuel tax and inflation.

What I continue to point out is that there are state excises taxes created to fund state roads and highways but you don't seem to be able to grasp the state and local responsibility and their failures. how do you know the revenue isn't enough? What has that revenue been used to fund in the past?? You cannot seem to grasp the reality that there are specific taxes for specific line items but that dollars going into the general fund are used for things other than the specific item they were created to fund, thus the UNIFIED BUDGET

 

[Kushinator]

how do you know the revenue isn't enough?

I've already addressed the funding shortfall in the post you quoted days ago.

What has that revenue been used to fund in the past??

If you want to make a point, there is nobody stopping you other than yourself.

 

[Conservative]

I've already addressed the funding shortfall in the post you quoted days ago.



If you want to make a point, there is nobody stopping you other than yourself.

You made your typical out of context claims none of which address the responsibility for state and local highways and bridges

 

[Kushinator]

You made your typical out of context claims

Wrong.

I linked to an organization that studies and assesses macro-infrastructure, maintenance, innovation, funding, etc.... You're being argumentative for the sake pettiness because i happen to own you in every single discussion. You've failed to address a single point that i've raised.

none of which address the responsibility for state and local highways and bridges

You're tying to shift blame. It won't work. You're not here to have a discussion... you're here strictly to push an empty partisan agenda.

 

[Conservative]

Wrong.

I linked to an organization that studies and assesses macro-infrastructure, maintenance, innovation, funding, etc.... You're being argumentative for the sake pettiness because i happen to own you in every single discussion. You've failed to address a single point that i've raised.



You're tying to shift blame. It won't work. You're not here to have a discussion... you're here strictly to push an empty partisan agenda.

great, another gov't agency that hasn't provided any context to the revenue received, Typical of you. I don't shift blame I focus the blame on where it belongs, your state is a nightmare and still you don't get it. owning me?? ROFLMAO, you own your own ignorance of the taxes you pay and their purpose. You have no understanding of state and local responsibilities and obviously are in need of a massive central gov't that takes power away from the states. You are also pissed off at no longer being able to deduct fully your high state, local and city taxes from your federal return. It is about damn time the cost of liberalism is on full display

 

[Kushinator]

great, another gov't agency that hasn't provided any context to the revenue received, Typical of you.

You prove my point exactly. I posted a study from the American Society of Civil Engineers that explains, in great detail, the funding and replacement shortfall that continues to drive economic inefficiency. You clearly didn't even attempt to read the paper, and therefore you continue to be outmatched in this discussion.

I don't shift blame I focus the blame on where it belongs

You shift blame to push your empty partisan agenda.

owning me??

I am your master.

You are also pissed off at no longer being able to deduct fully your high state, local and city taxes from your federal return.

And then you explode with hypocrisy. You don't care about people keeping more of what they earn. It's party and ideology over country... it's all you've ever been from day one.

 

[Conservative]

You prove my point exactly. I posted a study from the American Society of Civil Engineers that explains, in great detail, the funding and replacement shortfall that continues to drive economic inefficiency. You clearly didn't even attempt to read the paper, and therefore you continue to be outmatched in this discussion.



You shift blame to push your empty partisan agenda.



I am your master.



And then you explode with hypocrisy. You don't care about people keeping more of what they earn. It's party and ideology over country... it's all you've ever been from day one.

Sorry saw no funding information in that study or an accounting of where the excise tax dollars have gone which is the issue that you want to ignore.

 

[Kushinator]

Sorry saw no funding information in that study or an accounting of where the excise tax dollars have gone which is the issue that you want to ignore.

I cannot help it that you refuse to read the materiel pertinent to this discussion. It does however explain the weakness of your posts.