If you truly believe that how can you be a Trump supporter?

Nick, easy for him as long as his 401K is OK and he can afford guards for his gated community his life is OK.

---

Not willing to 'let it go'? Can't turn the other cheek?

.....THAT'S the problem.

I'm a Trump POLICY supporter. I don't agree with everything he says, or the way he says it sometimes.

.....keep on fanning those flames instead of throwing water on them.....

....but then you don't have any 'skin in the game'..........do you?

How about letting AMERICANS settle AMERICAN issues?

@betreger....yup, I guess the Liberal leadership in Detroit and Baltimore have all taken the same Economics courses you have.......and they have failed their communities miserably.
But you will blame those failures on the mythical Oligarchs................

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Not willing to 'let it go'? Can't turn the other cheek?

.....THAT'S the problem.

I'm a Trump POLICY supporter. I don't agree with everything he says, or the way he says it sometimes.

.....keep on fanning those flames instead of throwing water on them.....

....but then you don't have any 'skin in the game'..........do you?

How about letting AMERICANS settle AMERICAN issues?

Because some of those Americans are my friends and relatives.

or the way he says it sometimes.

That is the problem. His supporters need to jump on him when he does that. Then the others will see it isn't necessary to get out pitchforks.

But you will blame those failures on the mythical Oligarchs................

Sure the Oligarchs are a myth ...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/01/22/forty-two-people-hold-wealth-half-world-oxfam-says/

Oxfam has claimed, with a report by the charity revealing that 42 people hold the same amount of wealth as the 3.7bn people who make up the poorest half of the world’s population.

Even if they are wrong by 100% that is still less than 100 people who own 1/2 the world. That is the problem in a nutshell.

How about letting AMERICANS settle AMERICAN issues?

Since the US President is "the leader of the free world" what would you expect?
The popularity of the phrase's use in publications over time

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-President-of-the-United-States-of-America-sometimes-referred-to-as-the-leader-of-the-free-world-Is-this-term-still-true-today
We who lives in a free country and some are even allies to the US, have the right and sometimes an obligation to discuss "American issues"!
And for that matter. How about letting NON-AMERICANS settle NON-AMERICAN issues?
Whenever there is a crisis in the world, the US is always there poking in politics trying to change it to the "American Way".

And for that matter. How about letting NON-AMERICANS settle NON-AMERICAN issues?

..........that is closer to happening than you think...........

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Donald doesn't have a very good memory does he? One would assume that as a boy from New York city he would know that after 9/11 the NYSE stayed closed until the 17th. The longest shutdown in recent times.
And that the professional baseball games were cancelled that night and the whole season put back a week.

Well apparently not, makes you wonder about the sizeable proportion of the US that thought this joker is worthy of their votes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/28/no-president-trump-nyse-did-not-open-day-after-sept-attacks/?utm_term=.1904dc09d135

Won't happen for decades!
The US has to much interest abroad to protect.
Why do you think that the US have the biggest military in the world?
To protect US citizens in their homeland?
Give me a break!

btw. Why are 18 US Air Force F16 stationed here at Luleå Airbase (Kallax) during Trident Juncture 18?

For the first time, the United States has based an entire flight division in Sweden during an exercise.
Video English spoken https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/natos-jatteovning-har-inletts

And why have US Air Force B52s practicing bombing in Skåne?

we now know the source of all fake news

Oh, isn't lie all the time what a politician does? So he is just more swamp rat politician, no change.

Oh my. https://www.dw.com/en/understanding-the-populist-narrative/a-46038484

Won't happen for decades!
The US has to much interest abroad to protect.
Why do you think that the US have the biggest military in the world?
To protect US citizens in their homeland?
Give me a break!

btw. Why are 18 US Air Force F16 stationed here at Luleå Airbase (Kallax) during Trident Juncture 18?

For the first time, the United States has based an entire flight division in Sweden during an exercise.
Video English spoken https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/natos-jatteovning-har-inletts

And why have US Air Force B52s practicing bombing in Skåne?

We needed a place to dump our outdated equipment.....

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

ROTFLMAO

APEWorld Lovin' 'IT'

ORANG ORANGE YAPe

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Oh

---

Neither side understands that the news media is and has always been very partisan in their reporting.

It wasn't that way always. Before Wall Street invaded the news rooms it was non-partisan, except on the editorial and op-ed pages. After Wall street, it isn't news any more, it is sell advertising a/k/a the Fiduciary Duty.

They do have their "good moments". The Pentagon Papers=Watergate=Nixon resigning. :-)

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/growing-deficit-revenue-spending-problem-181024121614209.html

Here's the most significant thing to know about the current version of government debt and deficits: it's not a spending problem, it's a revenue problem.

It's not terribly instructive to look at debt and deficits in straight-up nominative terms. It's much better to measure debt in relation to earnings because earnings are the way it gets paid back. If someone who makes $10,000 a year, has a personal debt of $100,000, it is probably quite problematic. If someone who makes $10,000,000 a year has the same debt, $10,000, it will probably disappear as soon as they pay their most recent Amex bill.

US debt as a percentage of the gross domestic product (the nation's earnings), shot up during World War II, then peaked in the immediate post-war years, at 120 percent. From then on, it headed down in a steep and mostly steady trajectory. In the '50s, in spite of the Korean War, it got down to about 65 percent of GDP. In the 1960s, during the Lyndon Johnson years, when Medicare and Medicaid got started, Social Security was increased, the war on poverty was launched, and the real war in Vietnam was escalating, it continued on down to about 40 percent of GDP. It began levelling out under Nixon, had a slight uptick under Ford, and down again under Carter to near just 30 percent of GDP.

Then came Ronald Reagan. It was Morning in America again. For debt. Tax cuts, tax cuts, merry tax cuts! The debt, as a percentage of GDP more than doubled under Reagan and Bush.

Clinton came next. He raised taxes. The result was exactly, logically, and mathematically what you would expect. Revenues rose! The deficit declined. So significantly, that the conventional wisdom was that deficits were done with and America's debt crisis was over. Ahh! An almost universal sigh of relief.

Then along came Bush. Bush the younger, the lesser, the second. New tax cuts! The deficits shot up. Surpassing even the great morning in America for debt that had been accomplished by Ronald Reagan! Wow!

As a matter of actual history, after the bubble-crash-Great Depression sequence of the 1920s and 1930s, and after the bubble-crash-recession sequence of the late 1980s, recovery came about after tax increases. The bubble-crash-recession sequence of the early 2000s, had been met with a tax cut. The recession continued. There was a second tax cut, the recession continued for most of the economy with a new set of bubbles at the top for Wall Street, real estate, and banking.

Trump claimed that his tax cuts were for everyone, not just the rich and that they would grow the economy so hugely that they would pay for themselves. Those were the same claims made long ago by presidents Coolidge and Hoover and more recently by Reagan and by Bush the Lesser. (Bush the Elder, quite correctly called it Voodoo economics. Though he stopped saying so as Reagan's running mate and successor, he obviously never stopped believing in reality, as evidenced by his tax cuts to fix the deficits he inherited.)

You may have noted, at the start of the article, that America's debt/GDP ratio peaked in WWII. If we look at it as spending on survival and then in becoming the only modern industrial nation left standing, it was a great investment. Businesses are constantly borrowing in order to grow. Even our poor friend, making but $10,000 a year with a $100,000 debt, might have made a sound choice if it's a home mortgage with payments he can afford on a property increasing in value. It is important to consider what the debt buys us. With Trump tax cuts we found out almost instantly: stock buybacks and other utterly non-productive transfers of wealth to the already rich.

The first and most important thing to remember is that for nearly a half a century, the problem of debt and deficits has been, and remains, a revenue problem.

As I have been saying for years in this forum

---

The top 10 percent pay two-thirds of the income tax.

The top 0.1% — just 115,000 households, whose average income is more than $9.4 million — pay more than 20% of it.

The top 0.1% of American households hold the same amount of wealth as the bottom 90%

The bottom 50 percent — all Americans with an income below the median — pay just 3 percent of the income tax.

The 3 Richest Americans Hold More Wealth Than Bottom 50% Of The Country

Raising taxes on those on the bottom and the middle is an interesting 'solution'.

That's true, reducing their disposable income would really help.[/quote]

Perhaps reducing spending would be a better solution.

Which spending?
Benefits?
Health care?
Infrastructure?
Military?
Border security?
Disaster relief?
Other?
All of the above?

Edit] Forgot a couple
Education?
Law enforcement?

How inconvenient that the mean income is so far from the median income.
The beatings will continue until morale improves or the pitchforks come out.

---