By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Donald Trump: How Do You Feel about Him Now? (Poll)

 

Last November,

I supported him and I still do - Americas 91 15.77%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Americas 16 2.77%
 
I supported him and I still do - Europe 37 6.41%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Europe 7 1.21%
 
I supported him and I still do - Asia 6 1.04%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Asia 1 0.17%
 
I supported him and I still do - RoW 15 2.60%
 
I supported him and I now don't - RoW 2 0.35%
 
I didn't support him and still don't. 373 64.64%
 
I didn't support him and now do. 29 5.03%
 
Total:577
Pemalite on 11 March 2019
EricHiggin said:
Pemalite said:

Didn't it get downgraded to just a fence anyway?

Well the funds aren't guaranteed as of yet so depending on how much they can get, if any above the small amount from the budget, will determine what kind of structure and what dimensions it can be. Trying to build a home with 10 grand will get you a shack and an outhouse.

The USA has a 20~ Trillion dollar economy and is addicted to debt. I am sure where there is a will, there is a way.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

jason1637 on 11 March 2019
Pemalite said:
jason1637 said:

3. I wish he would have cut spending more honestly. Not a big fan of social security anyway.

Why is that? What is wrong with it?

jason1637 said:

8. Yup, Obamacare needs to be replaced asap.

Wish you guys would just do it once and do it right. This flip-flopping on health is just costing the taxpayer cash for no good reason.
Plenty of other Nations that have better and cheaper healthcare than the US, look towards those and emulate them.

Personally I feel like the government has grown too big than what it was intended to be. There are definitely some government programs that are necessary but something like social security and retirement should be left up to that person and their family.

Yeah we should try to implement a universal health care system since it will save us money. The arguement that some Republicans use is that it cost too much but it can be implemented in a way that would actually cost us less.



EricHiggin on 11 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-trade-deficit-how-much-does-it-matter

The first portion explains it in a nutshell. Some economists think it's bad, some think it's good, some think it should be balanced. Overall it's fine unless it swings to far in either direction. Since it's tied into many things, like imports, exports, savings and investment rates, spending, etc, as long as it all matches up in the end is all that matters. When it all doesn't, that's when you have problems. Pointing out only trade is like pointing out only negatives without taking everything into account.

Then you can use trade deals with Mexico as a way to say Mexico is going to pay for it.

If the wall ever actually gets fully built, as intended, Mexico is going to pay for it in many ways indirectly over time. The U.S. will pay directly up front.

Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

Well the funds aren't guaranteed as of yet so depending on how much they can get, if any above the small amount from the budget, will determine what kind of structure and what dimensions it can be. Trying to build a home with 10 grand will get you a shack and an outhouse.

The USA has a 20~ Trillion dollar economy and is addicted to debt. I am sure where there is a will, there is a way.

Knowing the U.S. and Canadian Gov mentality, it wouldn't be a surprise whatsoever, if Trump wins in 2020, for him to get 50bil for the wall next time and then tear down the 8bil wall that just got built and replace it.



Bofferbrauer2 on 12 March 2019
jason1637 said:
The new budget is soo bad. There is no point in increasing military spending since its already too high. The drops to government programs are good but it should have been a more severe cut across the board so that we can work in our debt. The proposed budget won't even be balanced for 15 years which is ridiculous. Reagan really fucked us over when it came to our debt and every President since him has just continued to make it worse.

What's worse to that is that's based on a prediction of a yearly 3% growth, whereas all indicators only give the US 1.6-1.8% over the next years - and any potential recession would destroy any hope of balancing that off.

Edit: That's the hypocrisy of the GOP: They label themselves "fiscal conservative" ,as in less spending and more income, but all they do whenever they are in power is raise the military budget to new heights and cut taxes (especially for the rich and super rich), ensuring that the budget will never get balanced. Once the democrats are back in power or just show theur policies, they'll get immediately accused of spendthrift - while they are themselves to blame.

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - on 12 March 2019

The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454 List as Google Doc:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aW2hXQT1TheElVS7z-F3pP-7nbqdrDqWNTxl6JoJWBY/edit?usp=sharing

The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/ 

Free Pc Games thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/248138/free-pc-games/1/

EricHiggin on 12 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

If the wall ever actually gets fully built, as intended, Mexico is going to pay for it in many ways indirectly over time. The U.S. will pay directly up front.

And yet the current deficits don't matter?  Our global trade deficit hit a record $891 billion last year with $71 billion of that being Mexico.  But somehow we are going to magically surplus with Mexico AND that is going to be considered paying for the wall despite current deficits?

To say nothing of the fact the entire concept of a trade deal adding money into the federal coffers to pay for the wall itself is silly because there are no tariffs involved and any changes to the import/export business by the US and Mexico are paid for by companies and eventually citizens.

It takes a massive stretch to suggest that increases in trade revenue (again...ignoring all the deficits now) is an indirect means of paying for the border wall.

 

Better still....for that new revenue by US companies to pay for the wall would require it be funded by........TAXES.  Didn't we just have a 35 day government shutdown because Congress said NO to using tax money for paying for a border wall? 

So you mean like if a country is in debt say trillions of dollars, that needs to be solved first before they can borrow any more? I wonder if there are any examples of that happening and continually dragging on over an extended period of time with no end in sight? Obviously not because how could that make any sense right?



Immersiveunreality on 12 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

What's worse to that is that's based on a prediction of a yearly 3% growth, whereas all indicators only give the US 1.6-1.8% over the next years - and any potential recession would destroy any hope of balancing that off.

Edit: That's the hypocrisy of the GOP: They label themselves "fiscal conservative" ,as in less spending and more income, but all they do whenever they are in power is raise the military budget to new heights and cut taxes (especially for the rich and super rich), ensuring that the budget will never get balanced. Once the democrats are back in power or just show theur policies, they'll get immediately accused of spendthrift - while they are themselves to blame.

I've seen a pattern in political party spending and ideologies.  It goes something like this:

 

Im sure all of them got good and bad things under their belt and its a matter of WHO is editing this silly list.



Pemalite on 12 March 2019
jason1637 said:
Pemalite said:

Why is that? What is wrong with it?

Wish you guys would just do it once and do it right. This flip-flopping on health is just costing the taxpayer cash for no good reason.
Plenty of other Nations that have better and cheaper healthcare than the US, look towards those and emulate them.

Personally I feel like the government has grown too big than what it was intended to be. There are definitely some government programs that are necessary but something like social security and retirement should be left up to that person and their family.

I have always thought that a Society's success should be judged on how it treats the disabled, poor and elderly.
Social security does help and protect those who are vulnerable... And well... That is something I can get behind.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Bofferbrauer2 on 12 March 2019
Immersiveunreality said:
SpokenTruth said:

I've seen a pattern in political party spending and ideologies.  It goes something like this:

 

Im sure all of them got good and bad things under their belt and its a matter of WHO is editing this silly list.

Yeah, but each of those Republicans made at least one Tax cut (Reagan made 2 cuts), and those always benefited the rich by far the most. Hence why we are now in a situation where the Top 0.1% own 20% of the nation's money, more than the bottom 50%.



The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454 List as Google Doc:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aW2hXQT1TheElVS7z-F3pP-7nbqdrDqWNTxl6JoJWBY/edit?usp=sharing

The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/ 

Free Pc Games thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/248138/free-pc-games/1/

jason1637 on 12 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

What's worse to that is that's based on a prediction of a yearly 3% growth, whereas all indicators only give the US 1.6-1.8% over the next years - and any potential recession would destroy any hope of balancing that off.

Edit: That's the hypocrisy of the GOP: They label themselves "fiscal conservative" ,as in less spending and more income, but all they do whenever they are in power is raise the military budget to new heights and cut taxes (especially for the rich and super rich), ensuring that the budget will never get balanced. Once the democrats are back in power or just show theur policies, they'll get immediately accused of spendthrift - while they are themselves to blame.

I've seen a pattern in political party spending and ideologies.  It goes something like this:

 

Poor HW. But this list is pretty biased considering that ot states a good thing for Dems and a bad one fo Reps when they both do good and bad. I don't even like Reagan but is foreign policy wasn't that bad.



jason1637 on 12 March 2019
Pemalite said:
jason1637 said:

Personally I feel like the government has grown too big than what it was intended to be. There are definitely some government programs that are necessary but something like social security and retirement should be left up to that person and their family.

I have always thought that a Society's success should be judged on how it treats the disabled, poor and elderly.
Social security does help and protect those who are vulnerable... And well... That is something I can get behind.

There are many ways we can help those who are disabled, poor, and old without just giving them money. Maybe the disabled cold be an outlier if they're unable to do a lot of things by themselves. 

But for the poor the government can always invest more in poorer communities and fixing the criminal justice system.

For the elderly they should save whIle they're working for retirement and they have family to depend on.

The disabled  is more tricky since there are a ton of disabilites. But there are already anti discrimination laws for the disabled.

Also society does not always equal government. There are charitable organizations.