Two Questions To Fix Fake News

davethehedgehog said:
What you say is definitely true and I completely agree, but I feel the true root of the problem is that the media has long since become a puppet for whomever pays them the most, whatever is the populist opinion of the day. Most journalists haven't had any kind of integrity for so long now that they've lost all credibility they ever had. I think the last time I felt like I could trust the media was probably 30 years ago. This applies to both "sides" if you can call them that (really there's only one "side"). Most people I speak to out there just ignore most of the news they come across these days.
Click to expand...

I moved to the states a few years ago (Texas to be exact) and it saddens me to see how news are handled on tv. i stopped watching news myself pretty fast when I felt the news was trying aim for teeanger/kids mentality.
First time I clearly remember when the news had to explain that 29% was 3/10 and in my head I was going " yeah I know that I went to "middle school".
New interviewer that think they are doing their jobs by constantly cutting off the interviewed person answers and repeating their own statement and asking for answers. Or the way they try to hype themselves up.
First I thought "OK maybe its just FOX " but looking at MSNBC was pretty much the same. The entire way news are handled in the states reminds me of teenagers trying to argue by popularity rather than adults arguing with well arguments.

It a sad that the news are presented at such a low IQ level.
 
The only thing that is actually "fake" news are those fake propaganda sites that are shared via social media. The sites that say very outlandish things with no sources that your aunts and uncles share(at least in my experience). Those sites generally were the ones created in Russia. I saw a lot of trump supporters sharing those fake news pages. Very few anti-trump supporters sharing them, maybe because I have more trump supporting family members. I know it's not a real statistic but it is what I saw from my perspective.
What people perceive as fake news is actually opinion pieces presented as news on a news entertainment channel, see fox/cnn/msnbc. All of those channels do report news, but they also have their opinion time slots and the general public cannot discern between opinions and actual journalism with facts and sources. On top of that, our president yells fake news everytime someone says it was reported you did xyz and he doesn't want to admit to something even with video/audio evidence.

My take away on this fake news crap is people need to do some critical thinking when they see something and never accept it as fact. Research it, learn about it. If you're watching a news entertainment channel, realize most of those hosts are hosts, not journalists, they're opinion pieces. During the prime time(evening) on network news is almost always opinion shows. During the day is usually actual news with sources.
 
dgingeri said:
Someone's been listening to the wrong people again.
Click to expand...

Well it's direct from the cheetos face anus, also his lawyers/press secretaries backtracking for 'clarification' of what the cheeto actually meant with his unarticulated verbal diarrhea. So you are technically correct, I AM listening to the wrong people.......
 
Biznatch said:
Well it's direct from the cheetos face anus, also his lawyers/press secretaries backtracking for 'clarification' of what the cheeto actually meant with his unarticulated verbal diarrhea. So you are technically correct, I AM listening to the wrong people.......
Click to expand...
To quote our host: Devolving into personal insults does not help shore up your position.

I believe in a conservative libertarian, mainly called "minarchist", philosophy because it fits my experiences with people. (I'll spare the details.) I know Trump is a blowhard and at times says some pretty idiotic things. However, what his actions have done over the last year fit far more with my experience with making things better than any Democrat has done. In short, I judge President Trump by his actions, and I consider them good, not by his words alone, and NOT be what someone else has told me to believe.

I used to listen to the news and the education system, in short all the Democrats supporters, and I believed their platform, until I experienced enough of life to realize just how much they lied to me. Now, I swear I will NEVER believe ANYTHING a Democrat tells me.
 
I
jnemesh said:
Once Trump is impeached, we wont have half the problems with "fake news" as we do now.
Click to expand...
I literally can't wait for all of you never-Trumpers to eat your words. Your tears are delicious. Enjoy CNN, MSNBC, and Huffington Post.
 
dgingeri said:
To quote our host: Devolving into personal insults does not help shore up your position.

I believe in a conservative libertarian, mainly called "minarchist", philosophy because it fits my experiences with people. (I'll spare the details.) I know Trump is a blowhard and at times says some pretty idiotic things. However, what his actions have done over the last year fit far more with my experience with making things better than any Democrat has done. In short, I judge President Trump by his actions, and I consider them good, not by his words alone, and NOT be what someone else has told me to believe.

I used to listen to the news and the education system, in short all the Democrats supporters, and I believed their platform, until I experienced enough of life to realize just how much they lied to me. Now, I swear I will NEVER believe ANYTHING a Democrat tells me.
Click to expand...


You shouldn't believe anything EITHER party says..... You say you judge trump by his actions, not what he says, but hate democrats because what they said were lies.....

And just judging the 'actions' of the gop/pres, I feel they are doing FAAAAR more damage than good. They are proper fucking the poor/middle class, and completely ignoring the constituents they are supposed to be representing. Biggest deficit in the history of the country? Well our party who campaigned all last year against gov spending just agreed to add 1.5T to that in order to pay for tax break on the corps/rich, who already use their lobbied loopholes to avoid paying our countries ridiculous tax rate. I could go on and on, but would most likely be wasting my breath.

*edit* For the trumpanzies, no I do not watch any MSM because it's all partisan bullshit at this point. So you can drop the 'ur just a mad lib'ral get'n fake nooz from MSN/CNN etc *as they are glued to faux news'
 
Biznatch said:
You shouldn't believe anything EITHER party says..... You say you judge trump by his actions, not what he says, but hate democrats because what they said were lies.....

And just judging the 'actions' of the gop/pres, I feel they are doing FAAAAR more damage than good. They are proper fucking the poor/middle class, and completely ignoring the constituents they are supposed to be representing. Biggest deficit in the history of the country? Well our party who campaigned all last year against gov spending just agreed to add 1.5T to that in order to pay for tax break on the corps/rich, who already use their lobbied loopholes to avoid paying our countries ridiculous tax rate. I could go on and on, but would most likely be wasting my breath.

*edit* For the trumpanzies, no I do not watch any MSM because it's all partisan bullshit at this point. So you can drop the 'ur just a mad lib'ral get'n fake nooz from MSN/CNN etc *as they are glued to faux news'
Click to expand...

On the contrary, what Trump and the Republicans have done in the last year is bringing about more economic growth and opportunity than we have seen in the last 20 year, in just a year. In case you missed out on an education in economics, the government cutting taxes is allowing the economy to grow, and we'll see more tax revenue by the end of 2018 than we say in 2017 BECAUSE of the tax cut. It's called the Laffer curve.

Where we need to cut spending is the massive numbers of useless government workers and the massive layers of useless management within government departments, and Trump is already working on that as well.

...and I'm not glued to Fox News, mainly because I don't even have cable or watch TV. I gather information from many sources and judge its truthfulness on the actual disclosed information. There are many, many "news" sources that leave out massive amounts of information, and Fox News' web site is about the most honest in that arena, but still with only about 2/3 of stories actually disclosing all the information on the matter.
 
dgingeri said:
On the contrary, what Trump and the Republicans have done in the last year is bringing about more economic growth and opportunity than we have seen in the last 20 year, in just a year. In case you missed out on an education in economics, the government cutting taxes is allowing the economy to grow, and we'll see more tax revenue by the end of 2018 than we say in 2017 BECAUSE of the tax cut. It's called the Laffer curve.

Where we need to cut spending is the massive numbers of useless government workers and the massive layers of useless management within government departments, and Trump is already working on that as well.

...and I'm not glued to Fox News, mainly because I don't even have cable or watch TV. I gather information from many sources and judge its truthfulness on the actual disclosed information. There are many, many "news" sources that leave out massive amounts of information, and Fox News' web site is about the most honest in that arena, but still with only about 2/3 of stories actually disclosing all the information on the matter.
Click to expand...


So trickle down, which has been proven to not work and has the exact opposite effect. Look at our history, tax cuts do not fuel growth. Our country grew economically far quicker during times with higher taxes. Look at Canadas current growth, which is not due to them lowering taxes on the rich/corporations. Mark my words, we will not see more tax revenue this year than last, BECAUSE of the tax cut. They asked management of corporations if they planned to put that extra money back into the company, and got mostly no's. Guess we'll see in 12 months.

Yes, government is bloated an inefficient, but GOP is targeting the wrong departments to cut. Who the fuck benefits from cutting CFPB, EPA etc? I'll give you a hint, it's not the people. How about we cut back on the absolutely insane amount of money we spend on millitary....

But you pretty much lost any credibility with me by saying fox news site is the most honest...... That trump fan club isn't even the most honest of the steaming pile we get to call MSM.
 
Relying on which sources people report trust seems like it would just exacerbate the echo chambers we already have. Lots of people will report that they fully trust such junk sources as Red State, Breitbart and Infowars on the right, and the likes of Natural News, Addicting Info and US Uncut on the left.

It would seem to me this would make things worse, not better.

The problem becomes, who do you trust to rate if what is being presented as news is factual or not. This is not an easy problem to solve, especially in today's hyper-partisan climate where everything anyone says that is contrary to the far lefts agenda is called fake news by the far left and everything that is contrary to the far rights agenda is called fake news by the far right.

There IS truth. Some sort of bipartisan panel of subject matter experts from both sides of the political spectrum rating stories from outlets purporting to sell news might be the best choice, but even that is highly problematic and would be very difficult to properly staff.
 
spacecowboy863 said:
still on that 2017 bandwagon eh? everyone already jumped off LOL MAGA!!!
Click to expand...

Wait...What?
dgingeri said:
On the contrary, what Trump and the Republicans have done in the last year is bringing about more economic growth and opportunity than we have seen in the last 20 year, in just a year. In case you missed out on an education in economics, the government cutting taxes is allowing the economy to grow, and we'll see more tax revenue by the end of 2018 than we say in 2017 BECAUSE of the tax cut. It's called the Laffer curve.

Where we need to cut spending is the massive numbers of useless government workers and the massive layers of useless management within government departments, and Trump is already working on that as well.

...and I'm not glued to Fox News, mainly because I don't even have cable or watch TV. I gather information from many sources and judge its truthfulness on the actual disclosed information. There are many, many "news" sources that leave out massive amounts of information, and Fox News' web site is about the most honest in that arena, but still with only about 2/3 of stories actually disclosing all the information on the matter.[/QUOT
Click to expand...
mysticdrew said:
The only thing that is actually "fake" news are those fake propaganda sites that are shared via social media. The sites that say very outlandish things with no sources that your aunts and uncles share(at least in my experience). Those sites generally were the ones created in Russia. I saw a lot of trump supporters sharing those fake news pages. Very few anti-trump supporters sharing them, maybe because I have more trump supporting family members. I know it's not a real statistic but it is what I saw from my perspective.
What people perceive as fake news is actually opinion pieces presented as news on a news entertainment channel, see fox/cnn/msnbc. All of those channels do report news, but they also have their opinion time slots and the general public cannot discern between opinions and actual journalism with facts and sources. On top of that, our president yells fake news everytime someone says it was reported you did xyz and he doesn't want to admit to something even with video/audio evidence.

My take away on this fake news crap is people need to do some critical thinking when they see something and never accept it as fact. Research it, learn about it. If you're watching a news entertainment channel, realize most of those hosts are hosts, not journalists, they're opinion pieces. During the prime time(evening) on network news is almost always opinion shows. During the day is usually actual news with sources.
Click to expand...

I observed the exact same thing. My friends and family sharing meme after meme with anything from misleading to blatantly 100% fiction. I saw shares that Clinton was the coming of the antichrist. I saw articles that said she coordinated with the benghazi attackers. Pizzagate, bipolar meds, and the list goes on and on. I DIDN'T see anywhere near the same amount of these types of memes against trump. A few here and there but it was nothing compared to the avalanche of lies against Clinton. And to be honest, I despise the Clintons. They are what's wrong with America and that is money buys influence. Trump is no different.

I had friends who shared hundreds of posts from The Heart of Texas which was a Russian account. It's dead now after Facebook shut it down but anyone who says the Russians didn't play a role in this election is flat o u t full of it. I saw the effect first hand. Millions of people were sharing lie after lie. They buried the truth in a pile of lies.
 
dgingeri said:
On the contrary, what Trump and the Republicans have done in the last year is bringing about more economic growth and opportunity than we have seen in the last 20 year, in just a year. In case you missed out on an education in economics, the government cutting taxes is allowing the economy to grow, and we'll see more tax revenue by the end of 2018 than we say in 2017 BECAUSE of the tax cut. It's called the Laffer curve.

Where we need to cut spending is the massive numbers of useless government workers and the massive layers of useless management within government departments, and Trump is already working on that as well.

...and I'm not glued to Fox News, mainly because I don't even have cable or watch TV. I gather information from many sources and judge its truthfulness on the actual disclosed information. There are many, many "news" sources that leave out massive amounts of information, and Fox News' web site is about the most honest in that arena, but still with only about 2/3 of stories actually disclosing all the information on the matter.
Click to expand...


I loled so hard at this. The Laffer curve has been disproven by every serious economist out there. Arthur Laffer is considered a complete and total joke in the industry. Never in the history of mankind, has growth ever offset the revenues of a tax cut. It simply does not work that way. Sure, lower taxes can have a stimulating effect on the economy, but unless associated with spending cuts they are guaranteed to increase the deficit. Arthur Laffers made up theory is nothing but wishful make believe.

The economy has been on a historically long period of growth ever since about a year or two after the financial collapse (depending on which metric you go by).

If we take the Dow Jones as an example, it has been on non-stop growth since early march 2009.

If you recall, the Dow Jones had just hit a historic high of 14,000 right before the financial collapse. Right after the collapse it hit a low of 6,600. Today, as of me writing this it is at 26,616.71. Most of that growth came before Trump even took office.

If we take unemployment as an example, it has also been steadily improving since 2009. Again, most of the improvement coming before Trump ever set foot in the white house.

There is typically a delay between policy enactment and real large effects in the economy. Trumps policies may wind up having a real effect, but it is still to early to say what that effect will be. I'm leaning towards not very large though, as according to all simulated calculations the Tax bill simply isn't enough of a change to do anything but have impacts at the margins, at the same time as it will drive deficits, and something will need to be done about that sooner rather than later.
 
dgingeri said:
On the contrary, what Trump and the Republicans have done in the last year is bringing about more economic growth and opportunity than we have seen in the last 20 year, in just a year. In case you missed out on an education in economics,
Click to expand...

Literally everyone on the planet knows that cutting corporate taxes to practically nothing and promising to deregulate everything will cause the economy (and especially the stock market) to grow. It's not some secret. The problem is the potential consequences of it.

Also annualized GDP growth for the last quarter was like 2.6% which is nothing special. More growth in the last year than the previous 20 is pure delusion.

we'll see more tax revenue by the end of 2018 than we say in 2017 BECAUSE of the tax cut. It's called the Laffer curve.
Click to expand...

No we won't.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I loled so hard at this. The Laffer curve has been disproven by every serious economist out there. Arthur Laffer is considered a complete and total joke in the industry. Never in the history of mankind, has growth ever offset the revenues of a tax cut. It simply does not work that way. Sure, lower taxes can have a stimulating effect on the economy, but unless associated with spending cuts they are guaranteed to increase the deficit. Arthur Laffers made up theory is nothing but wishful make believe.

The economy has been on a historically long period of growth ever since about a year or two after the financial collapse (depending on which metric you go by).

If we take the Dow Jones as an example, it has been on non-stop growth since early march 2009.

If you recall, the Dow Jones had just hit a historic high of 14,000 right before the financial collapse. Right after the collapse it hit a low of 6,600. Today, as of me writing this it is at 26,616.71. Most of that growth came before Trump even took office.

If we take unemployment as an example, it has also been steadily improving since 2009. Again, most of the improvement coming before Trump ever set foot in the white house.

There is typically a delay between policy enactment and real large effects in the economy. Trumps policies may wind up having a real effect, but it is still to early to say what that effect will be. I'm leaning towards not very large though, as according to all simulated calculations the Tax bill simply isn't enough of a change to do anything but have impacts at the margins, at the same time as it will drive deficits, and something will need to be done about that sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

Because of your post, I decided to look up "has the laffer curve been disproven" in Google to see what comes up. Page after page of news agencies, proven to be left leaning (Newsweek) to totally left fallen (NY Times), saying that it has been and NOT A SINGLE reputable economic source. Not only that, but repeatedly cited certain numbers, identical numbers, from a Democrat source that has been proven to be complete lies. The numbers cited came from a "study" that pulled corporate income tax numbers, completely ignored personal income tax numbers that completely offset the drop in corporate taxes collected, and claimed to be total income tax numbers. The Laffer curve has been proven with tax cuts from Kennedy to Reagan over and over, if the true numbers are used. If properly credible sources are used. Guess what: Democrat propaganda claiming to be news sources are NOT credible economic sources.

The "growth" of the Obama era didn't even match the true rate of inflation. Obama removed several items from the inflation calculations, from electricity and housing prices to food prices, while adding things that have always been falling in price, such as electronics, to hide the real inflation numbers. (One area Trump has not corrected things, yet.) While he simultaneously pumped up the money supply, causing true inflation we haven't seen since Carter. No, the economy has not been in a growth cycle, it has been steadily depressed, and the cost of living has gone up massively (fast food meals are almost double what they were in 2008 and rent is over double) while average income steadily went down for the entire Obama era.

Which brings us to...

Unemployment has technically gone down, mostly because both many of the jobs lost in 2008 were replaced with low wage or minimum wage jobs and the fact that millions of people have quit looking for work and sat back collecting welfare. The real demonstration of how bad the economy has become was the constant rise of recipients of welfare, food stamps, and Social Security Disability, which more than doubled under Obama's watch.

Obama tried everything he could to suppress and topple our economy, from the inflating the money supply to the "Affordable" Care Act to misspending the stimulus package on his political allies who took the money and ran to massive unconstitutional increases in regulations and government oppression. It was only the strength of US businesses and the 2014 election that prevented us from being worse off than Venezuela by now. His actions were entirely intended to destroy this country, with years of premeditation.

Typically, there is a delay, unless many businesses were anxiously awaiting being freed from government oppression. They were prepped at the starting line with tens of billions of dollars held overseas to escape the oppressive regime. Businesses and investors have taken off at a sprint at the new freedom we have attained with Trump's election...

...and the next 3 years are going to be SPECTACULAR!
 
dgingeri said:
.......Wall of misinformed text ......
Click to expand...


I didn't want to quote your whole post and clog up the thread more, but holy fucking shit..... It's like I was reading a F(au)x new article..... Dems are bad, everything is Obama's fault and he manipulated numbers to look good, thank god the GOP is fixing it..... You truly are guzzling that Gop koolaid by the gallon.

Only thing missing from your trumpanzee shill post is 'but what about her emails and Uranium One'....
 
dgingeri said:
http://www.macrotrends.net/2505/dow-jones-ytd-performance
Click to expand...
If we want to use the Dow Jones as an indicator of economic health, I would argue that's a poor metric, but fine, your statement still doesn't hold up. You're saying it's increased more in 1 year under Trump under one than it has in the past 20. Let's look at the Dow Jones numbers from your link:

Jan 2017 - Jan 2018 (Rise under Trump) = rise of 6230
Jan 1997 - Jan 2017 (Rise from the past 20 years, prior to Trump entering office) = rise of 9609
Jan 2009 - Jan 2017 (Obama's term in office) = rise of 10817

So no, what you said is incorrect based on the metrics you've provided. Now he HAS outperformed Obama's first year in office, although if you look at the graph, there's a lot of upward momentum prior to him entering office, whereas Obama had downward momentum entering. Personally, I think both parties have set us up for another bubble similar to 2008 and Trump's mainly inheriting that, but he's sure as hell not going to slow it down either.

And if there's any confusion, I'm not defending Obama, I'm calling out what is a demonstrably false statement, something the news doesn't do much of anymore. For the record, I think Trump, Obama, Bush, and Clinton have all been pretty awful presidents undermining the stability of our whole country, they're just good at obfuscating just how much damage they've done (though the Democrats are better at hiding it).
 
jnemesh said:
All you gotta do is read the news. There are multiple reports of real estate fraud involving Trump properties, multiple reports of money laundering, Pence is going to get nailed for obstruction of justice and perjury due to what he knew about Flynn and when. McConnell and Ryan have both taken hundreds of thousands from Russians in campaign contributions...I could go on and on and on. (or you could just, you know, google it)
Click to expand...

No, what I don't have to do is read the news, because a lot of what I do IS read the news. Please provide links to each instance and how you feel impeachment would be derived.
 
jnemesh said:
Doubt all you want, the pieces are falling into place, and even if he's not impeached, he will be disgraced...and the REST of his group, including McConnell, Ryan, Nunes, Gowdy and the rest WILL be criminally charged. I don't thing The Orange One can provide cover (or pardons) for htem all.
Click to expand...

LOL....still holding on to hope eh? Good for you..... I like your tenacity.
 
dgingeri said:
Because of your post, I decided to look up "has the laffer curve been disproven" in Google to see what comes up. Page after page of news agencies, proven to be left leaning (Newsweek) to totally left fallen (NY Times), saying that it has been and NOT A SINGLE reputable economic source. Not only that, but repeatedly cited certain numbers, identical numbers, from a Democrat source that has been proven to be complete lies. The numbers cited came from a "study" that pulled corporate income tax numbers, completely ignored personal income tax numbers that completely offset the drop in corporate taxes collected, and claimed to be total income tax numbers. The Laffer curve has been proven with tax cuts from Kennedy to Reagan over and over, if the true numbers are used. If properly credible sources are used. Guess what: Democrat propaganda claiming to be news sources are NOT credible economic sources.

The "growth" of the Obama era didn't even match the true rate of inflation. Obama removed several items from the inflation calculations, from electricity and housing prices to food prices, while adding things that have always been falling in price, such as electronics, to hide the real inflation numbers. (One area Trump has not corrected things, yet.) While he simultaneously pumped up the money supply, causing true inflation we haven't seen since Carter. No, the economy has not been in a growth cycle, it has been steadily depressed, and the cost of living has gone up massively (fast food meals are almost double what they were in 2008 and rent is over double) while average income steadily went down for the entire Obama era.

Which brings us to...

Unemployment has technically gone down, mostly because both many of the jobs lost in 2008 were replaced with low wage or minimum wage jobs and the fact that millions of people have quit looking for work and sat back collecting welfare. The real demonstration of how bad the economy has become was the constant rise of recipients of welfare, food stamps, and Social Security Disability, which more than doubled under Obama's watch.

Obama tried everything he could to suppress and topple our economy, from the inflating the money supply to the "Affordable" Care Act to misspending the stimulus package on his political allies who took the money and ran to massive unconstitutional increases in regulations and government oppression. It was only the strength of US businesses and the 2014 election that prevented us from being worse off than Venezuela by now. His actions were entirely intended to destroy this country, with years of premeditation.

Typically, there is a delay, unless many businesses were anxiously awaiting being freed from government oppression. They were prepped at the starting line with tens of billions of dollars held overseas to escape the oppressive regime. Businesses and investors have taken off at a sprint at the new freedom we have attained with Trump's election...

...and the next 3 years are going to be SPECTACULAR!
Click to expand...


You must not be very good at Google.

But lets look at a real world example. Sam Brownback's Kansas.

Following Laffer principles of supply side economics there was supposed to enact the Kansas Miracle. Instead it has resulted in the absolute Kansas Collapse.

The thing is, the logic behind it just doesn't hold up. I have never seen any real evidence that the Laffer curve is real, just a lot of assumptions by sloppy think tanks without actual data to back them up, but lets assume for a moment that the Laffer curve is real.

The theory is that since tax receipts are zero at 0 at 0% taxes, and also 0 at 100% (since no one would work if they had to pay all their income to the government) that tax revenue exists on a somewhat parabolic chart that has a maximum somewhere between 0% and 100%. I don't question the very basic premise here. I have no proof that it is parabolic, the shape may be very different, but the basic premise that there is a maximum somewhere between 0% and 100% makes perfect sense.


If parabolic then, it looks like this:

the-laffer-curve-07272016.png


But it could also have any kind of shape between 0% and 100%, and the promoters of this philosophy have never adequately proven its shape.

upload_2018-1-26_18-56-3.png


The problem comes after this. The conclusion that dropping taxes will always produce enough growth to offset revenue, based on looking at the Laffer curve, and this is just plain wrong, even when you assume the Laffer curve to be true.

It assumes that we find ourselves in the "prohibitive" portion of the curve, but does so with no data at all. We could very well find ourselves in the Optimal portion of the curve, and if that is the case, RAISING taxes would actually be the thing to do, and most econometric data suggests this is actually true. In the post war period our top income tax brackets were in the 90's percent wise and we saw tremendous growth.

So, the problem with the whole concept is this:

1.) It makes up a curve based on some elementary and solid logic, but has no further evidence to prove that the curve actually looks like it is suggested, and thus makes a leap to suggest that it is parabolic.

2.) It then further makes a leap by placing us on the side of the curve to forward the argument of lowering taxes with absolutely no data to back that up, (and lots of data that would suggest otherwise)

essentially, like most of Austrian school supply side economics, it is based on very reasonable logic, but then makes huge leaps without evidence and any way to prove it to be true. In the end it is a truck load of wishful thinking.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-1-26_18-55-46.png
    upload_2018-1-26_18-55-46.png
    60.7 KB · Views: 5
MrDeaf said:
hah... GL with the impeaching part.
Not that I don't think Trump is impeachment worthy, but the vice-president is even worse than Trump.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with you on the VP thing.
The puppet master is to be feared more than the puppet i.e Dick Cheney.
 
There is so much brain damage
Biznatch said:
I didn't want to quote your whole post and clog up the thread more, but holy fucking shit..... It's like I was reading a F(au)x new article..... Dems are bad, everything is Obama's fault and he manipulated numbers to look good, thank god the GOP is fixing it..... You truly are guzzling that Gop koolaid by the gallon.

Only thing missing from your trumpanzee shill post is 'but what about her emails and Uranium One'....
Click to expand...

Go president Donald J. Trump

2020 FTW. Build that wall baby!
 
dgingeri said:
No, he's a megalomaniac that wants to rule over us, like most of the Democratic party.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting comment. I saw nothing that would indicate the type of authoritarian ruler that one would expect based on your comment. Please explain how Obama "wants to rule over us". And please explain how Trump is less of an authoritarian than Obama.
 
TAP said:
This is an interesting comment. I saw nothing that would indicate the type of authoritarian ruler that one would expect based on your comment. Please explain how Obama "wants to rule over us". And please explain how Trump is less of an authoritarian than Obama.
Click to expand...

Obama worked his entire tenure as President to increase government power. Not a single thing he did decreased it. About 80% of what Trump has done has decreased government power.
 
I'm just pig bitin mad that we don't see real news at the checkout
line anymore, in glorious monochrome, and updated weekly!
 
Last edited:
dgingeri said:
Obama worked his entire tenure as President to increase government power. Not a single thing he did decreased it.
Click to expand...
That's not true, he ended a 40 year ban of oil exports, that's an example of government stepping down and ensured we'll have less reserves in the future. He also bailed out the banks with few strings attached. Loaning them trillions of dollars without much in the way of restrictions sure seems to shift the balance of power towards the banks, not government. Especially when they're far bigger now than they were before the crash. He also pushed hard for the TPP, which would have given global corporations a staggering amount of freedom with how they could have conducted business, almost certainly at the expense of American workers. He also had a very hands-off softball approach towards enforcing anti-trust laws, allowing some tech companies to become modern monopolies, and for persecuting people in the finance sector, hence none of the people engaged in fraudulent activity that led to the 2008 crash ever got indicted. I call not enforcing the law a pretty clear case of decreasing government power.

Of course this is the same president that also expanded the number of shooting wars we were in, fought for a right-wing healthcare plan, and expanded the surveillance state.

I think conservatives are upset because Obama increased government influence, and liberals are upset because a whole hell of a lot of what he did was clearly against the interests of the American people.
 
tetris42 said:
That's not true, he ended a 40 year ban of oil exports, that's an example of government stepping down and ensured we'll have less reserves in the future. He also bailed out the banks with few strings attached. Loaning them trillions of dollars without much in the way of restrictions sure seems to shift the balance of power towards the banks, not government. Especially when they're far bigger now than they were before the crash. He also pushed hard for the TPP, which would have given global corporations a staggering amount of freedom with how they could have conducted business, almost certainly at the expense of American workers. He also had a very hands-off softball approach towards enforcing anti-trust laws, allowing some tech companies to become modern monopolies, and for persecuting people in the finance sector, hence none of the people engaged in fraudulent activity that led to the 2008 crash ever got indicted. I call not enforcing the law a pretty clear case of decreasing government power.

Of course this is the same president that also expanded the number of shooting wars we were in, fought for a right-wing healthcare plan, and expanded the surveillance state.

I think conservatives are upset because Obama increased government influence, and liberals are upset because a whole hell of a lot of what he did was clearly against the interests of the American people.
Click to expand...

You think those things didn't undermine the power of his political opponents and increase the power of his political party? TPP was an increase of authority of the Chinese government over the US. The ban on oil exports was going to happen without him, he merely took credit for it. As for the banks, Bank of America and Citigroup have long been Democrat allies, and were the worst at the mortgage fraud that helped cause the 2008 market crash, and they also got the sweetest deals for "bail outs".
 
dgingeri said:
You think those things didn't undermine the power of his political opponents and increase the power of his political party? TPP was an increase of authority of the Chinese government over the US. The ban on oil exports was going to happen without him, he merely took credit for it. As for the banks, Bank of America and Citigroup have long been Democrat allies, and were the worst at the mortgage fraud that helped cause the 2008 market crash, and they also got the sweetest deals for "bail outs".
Click to expand...
Well first off, whether an act increases the power of a political party is not the same as whether it increases the power of government. For example, the republicans have reduced the effectiveness of the EPA massively. That scores them a lot of points for their political party and many of their donors, but effectively reduced the power of government. Of course Obama did things the Democrat party and its donors wanted him to do. Those were often at odds with what the American people wanted.

The TPP would have been a nightmare for Americans, but it would have reduced a lot of government power and handed it to corporations instead. It was such a mess of an act, that it's debatable whether it would have given more power to Chinese or the Americans, but it was certainly reducing the power of the US government. Also you say the ban on oil exports was going to happen anyway, well he signed it into law and sure as hell didn't fight it. I call that reducing the influence of government. And yes, he absolutely gave sweetheart deals to various banks. So did Bush. It started under Bush and Obama sure as hell continued it. Wall Street enjoys support from BOTH parties. If you don't see that, you're blind. They may favor one over or another on certain issues, but by and large both parties are bought and paid for. I call giving tons of no strings attached money to major corporations and no prosecuting fraud a reduction in government power. You don't?
 
dgingeri said:
You think those things didn't undermine the power of his political opponents and increase the power of his political party? TPP was an increase of authority of the Chinese government over the US. The ban on oil exports was going to happen without him, he merely took credit for it. As for the banks, Bank of America and Citigroup have long been Democrat allies, and were the worst at the mortgage fraud that helped cause the 2008 market crash, and they also got the sweetest deals for "bail outs".
Click to expand...
The nations involved in the TPP were Australia Brunei Canada Chile Japan Malaysia Mexico New Zealand Peru Singapore United States (Withdrawn) Vietnam.

Now explain how that deal increases Chinese authority over the USA.
 
TAP said:
Wait...What?



I observed the exact same thing. My friends and family sharing meme after meme with anything from misleading to blatantly 100% fiction. I saw shares that Clinton was the coming of the antichrist. I saw articles that said she coordinated with the benghazi attackers. Pizzagate, bipolar meds, and the list goes on and on. I DIDN'T see anywhere near the same amount of these types of memes against trump. A few here and there but it was nothing compared to the avalanche of lies against Clinton. And to be honest, I despise the Clintons. They are what's wrong with America and that is money buys influence. Trump is no different.

I had friends who shared hundreds of posts from The Heart of Texas which was a Russian account. It's dead now after Facebook shut it down but anyone who says the Russians didn't play a role in this election is flat o u t full of it. I saw the effect first hand. Millions of people were sharing lie after lie. They buried the truth in a pile of lies.
Click to expand...


i try my best not to be biased but i cross reference news sources as well. we are flooded with "news" about trump in yahoo, cnn, msn, etc. it's gotten so bad cnn talks about the president's diet. they have nothing else on him so they attack personally. for some odd reason, the more the dems demand any type of investigation; it always backfires and then opens a can of worms on themselves.

i just wish the news sources stay unbiased and reporters/editors/columnists leave their political views out. just report the facts and news rather than pervert the story and narrate to their agenda. trump doesn't have a long history of political ties therefore makes him a wildcard. this drives the media crazy since they have no dirt on him. let the man do his job and see what he can accomplish.

had a good laugh when they pulled interviews on trump 10-15 yrs ago. if you heard me talk 10-15 yrs ago, it would be some dumb and vulgar things as well. lol grab them by the p0ssy.
 
kamikazi said:
I

I literally can't wait for all of you never-Trumpers to eat your words. Your tears are delicious. Enjoy CNN, MSNBC, and Huffington Post.
Click to expand...

Newsflash, there are more of US than of YOU! Have fun facing reality when your house of cards collapses! (soon, very very soon!)
 
jnemesh said:
Once Trump is impeached, we wont have half the problems with "fake news" as we do now.
Click to expand...

Nah, people will go back to burying the heads in the sand, once his 8 years are up. Alerting people to false news is not making false news but hey, let everyone sleep like they were before.
 
jnemesh said:
Newsflash, there are more of US than of YOU! Have fun facing reality when your house of cards collapses! (soon, very very soon!)
Click to expand...

Ha. I think not. One more year, and we'll have moderates convinced Trump is worthy of re-election.
 
dgingeri said:
Ha. I think not. One more year, and we'll have moderates convinced Trump is worthy of re-election.
Click to expand...

I would respond to this, but my thoughts on the matter would be a violation of the terms of service here.
 
dgingeri said:
Ha. I think not. One more year, and we'll have moderates convinced Trump is worthy of re-election.
Click to expand...
LOL. That must be a nice bubble you live in. In the real world his disapproval is (using the RCP average) is about 56% and approval is at 40% (the highest it's been in 4 months) and is frequently sub 40%.
Among independents that don't lean republican or democrat, his approval is at 26%

What happens is 3 years is unknown, but the current numbers are not favorable and there's no meaningful positive movement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top