|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 05 2022 15:25 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2022 13:30 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 10:58 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 10:51 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 09:02 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 08:46 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 08:25 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 05:43 Mohdoo wrote:
This is honestly infuriating. No one cares about the debt. Spending and tax reduction is how each party throws meat to their base. Biden trying to pay off the debt makes me feel like he's truly just trying to speed run sub-30 approval. Who in the fucking world is going to vote for Biden now that he has reduced debt?
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR THIS
If this is cover to forgive a shit load of student debt, whatever, sure. But if he's really pulling this bullshit "tighten the belt!!!" 90s bullshit, I am enraged. A country is not a check book. If the country is actually being fiscally responsible, no reason not to take credit for it. There's a reason besides "winning elections" to attempt to stop the debt from ballooning. Also, if the current times (or recent times) were not good times to reverse the debt trends, when is the right time? Will you not be happy until the country defaults? There will be no default. There will be nothing close to a default. The entire idea is non-real and we have zero reason to think it would happen. Even if you are technically correct, the way you made your case comes across as delusional, and doesn't even address the rest of my post.... so I take it you agree? No, I don’t agree. I think you are applying ideas to federal debt that don’t readily or reasonably apply. The US could triple its debt and it would not default. If you told someone in the 90s what the US debt in 2022 would be, they’d assume the world collapsed and the US was a 3rd world nation. The fact is that none of the ideas surrounding “but what about the debt” are valid or realistic. I meant, agree with the rest of my post, which you still have not addressed. And your argument that risk associated with the debt is not valid/realistic is generally yet to be presented. If you don't want to agree with me, that's fine, but it seems like you think you've demonstrated that your position is the correct one. I don't think he is being fiscally responsible. Investing money is better than sitting on money. I am saying your position is not demonstrated as the correct one. I have not seen any reason to believe paying down the debt is a positive for the US as a whole. In the most basic case, the money should have been spent on SNAP instead, per here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/july/quantifying-the-impact-of-snap-benefits-on-the-u-s-economy-and-jobs/ This is fun, when we pointed out that instead of forgiving student debt there are many other ways to spend money spending, such as SNAP, that would be a lot more beneficial than forgiving student debt, you claimed that Biden couldn't bypass Congress to spend on such programs, but could do that to forgive student debt, so it was the best program of those he can actually do by E.O. Now it turns out he can pay down US debt by E.O. (or not even, I think a surplus in income gets used automatically to pay down the debt... I don't think Biden even *did* anything here) and you say he should spend that money on SNAP instead. What is it? Can Biden increase SNAP spending unilaterally? Or is he bound by what Congress allows him to spend it on? I think paying down US debt is probably a better use of money than forgiving rich people's student debt in the absence of further education reform.
Biden can’t increase snap but he’s also not the reason the debt is being paid off. Executive order can’t increase SNAP. Executive order can forgive loans. I’m saying the idea of jacking off to paying off debt when we can point to reasons spending more money is better, is dumb.
|
On May 06 2022 04:16 NewSunshine wrote:
I personally find Tucker's call to tan my testicles, drown myself, and milk cows so that I can be a true man very compelling.
Correction: fondle cows. To milk a cow you need a bucket.
|
On May 06 2022 04:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2022 15:25 Acrofales wrote:On May 05 2022 13:30 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 10:58 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 10:51 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 09:02 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 08:46 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 08:25 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 05:43 Mohdoo wrote:https://twitter.com/EmilieSimons46/status/1521850521350516739This is honestly infuriating. No one cares about the debt. Spending and tax reduction is how each party throws meat to their base. Biden trying to pay off the debt makes me feel like he's truly just trying to speed run sub-30 approval. Who in the fucking world is going to vote for Biden now that he has reduced debt? NO ONE IS ASKING FOR THIS If this is cover to forgive a shit load of student debt, whatever, sure. But if he's really pulling this bullshit "tighten the belt!!!" 90s bullshit, I am enraged. A country is not a check book. If the country is actually being fiscally responsible, no reason not to take credit for it. There's a reason besides "winning elections" to attempt to stop the debt from ballooning. Also, if the current times (or recent times) were not good times to reverse the debt trends, when is the right time? Will you not be happy until the country defaults? There will be no default. There will be nothing close to a default. The entire idea is non-real and we have zero reason to think it would happen. Even if you are technically correct, the way you made your case comes across as delusional, and doesn't even address the rest of my post.... so I take it you agree? No, I don’t agree. I think you are applying ideas to federal debt that don’t readily or reasonably apply. The US could triple its debt and it would not default. If you told someone in the 90s what the US debt in 2022 would be, they’d assume the world collapsed and the US was a 3rd world nation. The fact is that none of the ideas surrounding “but what about the debt” are valid or realistic. I meant, agree with the rest of my post, which you still have not addressed. And your argument that risk associated with the debt is not valid/realistic is generally yet to be presented. If you don't want to agree with me, that's fine, but it seems like you think you've demonstrated that your position is the correct one. I don't think he is being fiscally responsible. Investing money is better than sitting on money. I am saying your position is not demonstrated as the correct one. I have not seen any reason to believe paying down the debt is a positive for the US as a whole. In the most basic case, the money should have been spent on SNAP instead, per here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/july/quantifying-the-impact-of-snap-benefits-on-the-u-s-economy-and-jobs/ This is fun, when we pointed out that instead of forgiving student debt there are many other ways to spend money spending, such as SNAP, that would be a lot more beneficial than forgiving student debt, you claimed that Biden couldn't bypass Congress to spend on such programs, but could do that to forgive student debt, so it was the best program of those he can actually do by E.O. Now it turns out he can pay down US debt by E.O. (or not even, I think a surplus in income gets used automatically to pay down the debt... I don't think Biden even *did* anything here) and you say he should spend that money on SNAP instead. What is it? Can Biden increase SNAP spending unilaterally? Or is he bound by what Congress allows him to spend it on? I think paying down US debt is probably a better use of money than forgiving rich people's student debt in the absence of further education reform. Biden can’t increase snap but he’s also not the reason the debt is being paid off. Executive order can’t increase SNAP. Executive order can forgive loans. I’m saying the idea of jacking off to paying off debt when we can point to reasons spending more money is better, is dumb.
So you're saying his hands are tied, the debt will be paid down and he has no power to do anything, but he *shouldn't* try to make political hay out of it? Just seems silly to let that opportunity pass. He may very well agree with you that money could be spent better... for instance the BBB bill (or whatever it was that Manchin torpedoed), but he doesn't have that power. So he's making lemonade with the lemons he does have.
|
On May 06 2022 04:55 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 04:18 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 15:25 Acrofales wrote:On May 05 2022 13:30 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 10:58 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 10:51 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 09:02 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 08:46 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 08:25 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 05:43 Mohdoo wrote:https://twitter.com/EmilieSimons46/status/1521850521350516739This is honestly infuriating. No one cares about the debt. Spending and tax reduction is how each party throws meat to their base. Biden trying to pay off the debt makes me feel like he's truly just trying to speed run sub-30 approval. Who in the fucking world is going to vote for Biden now that he has reduced debt? NO ONE IS ASKING FOR THIS If this is cover to forgive a shit load of student debt, whatever, sure. But if he's really pulling this bullshit "tighten the belt!!!" 90s bullshit, I am enraged. A country is not a check book. If the country is actually being fiscally responsible, no reason not to take credit for it. There's a reason besides "winning elections" to attempt to stop the debt from ballooning. Also, if the current times (or recent times) were not good times to reverse the debt trends, when is the right time? Will you not be happy until the country defaults? There will be no default. There will be nothing close to a default. The entire idea is non-real and we have zero reason to think it would happen. Even if you are technically correct, the way you made your case comes across as delusional, and doesn't even address the rest of my post.... so I take it you agree? No, I don’t agree. I think you are applying ideas to federal debt that don’t readily or reasonably apply. The US could triple its debt and it would not default. If you told someone in the 90s what the US debt in 2022 would be, they’d assume the world collapsed and the US was a 3rd world nation. The fact is that none of the ideas surrounding “but what about the debt” are valid or realistic. I meant, agree with the rest of my post, which you still have not addressed. And your argument that risk associated with the debt is not valid/realistic is generally yet to be presented. If you don't want to agree with me, that's fine, but it seems like you think you've demonstrated that your position is the correct one. I don't think he is being fiscally responsible. Investing money is better than sitting on money. I am saying your position is not demonstrated as the correct one. I have not seen any reason to believe paying down the debt is a positive for the US as a whole. In the most basic case, the money should have been spent on SNAP instead, per here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/july/quantifying-the-impact-of-snap-benefits-on-the-u-s-economy-and-jobs/ This is fun, when we pointed out that instead of forgiving student debt there are many other ways to spend money spending, such as SNAP, that would be a lot more beneficial than forgiving student debt, you claimed that Biden couldn't bypass Congress to spend on such programs, but could do that to forgive student debt, so it was the best program of those he can actually do by E.O. Now it turns out he can pay down US debt by E.O. (or not even, I think a surplus in income gets used automatically to pay down the debt... I don't think Biden even *did* anything here) and you say he should spend that money on SNAP instead. What is it? Can Biden increase SNAP spending unilaterally? Or is he bound by what Congress allows him to spend it on? I think paying down US debt is probably a better use of money than forgiving rich people's student debt in the absence of further education reform. Biden can’t increase snap but he’s also not the reason the debt is being paid off. Executive order can’t increase SNAP. Executive order can forgive loans. I’m saying the idea of jacking off to paying off debt when we can point to reasons spending more money is better, is dumb. So you're saying his hands are tied, the debt will be paid down and he has no power to do anything, but he *shouldn't* try to make political hay out of it? Just seems silly to let that opportunity pass. He may very well agree with you that money could be spent better... for instance the BBB bill (or whatever it was that Manchin torpedoed), but he doesn't have that power. So he's making lemonade with the lemons he does have.
I think he's saying that Biden has the power to cancel student loans and the reason he should do that is because money would be better spent on SNAP than paying down the debt
|
On May 06 2022 04:52 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 04:16 NewSunshine wrote:
I personally find Tucker's call to tan my testicles, drown myself, and milk cows so that I can be a true man very compelling. Correction: fondle cows. To milk a cow you need a bucket.
Well, it's still milking, it's just for the love of the game 
|
On May 06 2022 04:55 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 04:18 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 15:25 Acrofales wrote:On May 05 2022 13:30 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 10:58 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 10:51 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 09:02 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 08:46 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2022 08:25 micronesia wrote:On May 05 2022 05:43 Mohdoo wrote:https://twitter.com/EmilieSimons46/status/1521850521350516739This is honestly infuriating. No one cares about the debt. Spending and tax reduction is how each party throws meat to their base. Biden trying to pay off the debt makes me feel like he's truly just trying to speed run sub-30 approval. Who in the fucking world is going to vote for Biden now that he has reduced debt? NO ONE IS ASKING FOR THIS If this is cover to forgive a shit load of student debt, whatever, sure. But if he's really pulling this bullshit "tighten the belt!!!" 90s bullshit, I am enraged. A country is not a check book. If the country is actually being fiscally responsible, no reason not to take credit for it. There's a reason besides "winning elections" to attempt to stop the debt from ballooning. Also, if the current times (or recent times) were not good times to reverse the debt trends, when is the right time? Will you not be happy until the country defaults? There will be no default. There will be nothing close to a default. The entire idea is non-real and we have zero reason to think it would happen. Even if you are technically correct, the way you made your case comes across as delusional, and doesn't even address the rest of my post.... so I take it you agree? No, I don’t agree. I think you are applying ideas to federal debt that don’t readily or reasonably apply. The US could triple its debt and it would not default. If you told someone in the 90s what the US debt in 2022 would be, they’d assume the world collapsed and the US was a 3rd world nation. The fact is that none of the ideas surrounding “but what about the debt” are valid or realistic. I meant, agree with the rest of my post, which you still have not addressed. And your argument that risk associated with the debt is not valid/realistic is generally yet to be presented. If you don't want to agree with me, that's fine, but it seems like you think you've demonstrated that your position is the correct one. I don't think he is being fiscally responsible. Investing money is better than sitting on money. I am saying your position is not demonstrated as the correct one. I have not seen any reason to believe paying down the debt is a positive for the US as a whole. In the most basic case, the money should have been spent on SNAP instead, per here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/july/quantifying-the-impact-of-snap-benefits-on-the-u-s-economy-and-jobs/ This is fun, when we pointed out that instead of forgiving student debt there are many other ways to spend money spending, such as SNAP, that would be a lot more beneficial than forgiving student debt, you claimed that Biden couldn't bypass Congress to spend on such programs, but could do that to forgive student debt, so it was the best program of those he can actually do by E.O. Now it turns out he can pay down US debt by E.O. (or not even, I think a surplus in income gets used automatically to pay down the debt... I don't think Biden even *did* anything here) and you say he should spend that money on SNAP instead. What is it? Can Biden increase SNAP spending unilaterally? Or is he bound by what Congress allows him to spend it on? I think paying down US debt is probably a better use of money than forgiving rich people's student debt in the absence of further education reform. Biden can’t increase snap but he’s also not the reason the debt is being paid off. Executive order can’t increase SNAP. Executive order can forgive loans. I’m saying the idea of jacking off to paying off debt when we can point to reasons spending more money is better, is dumb. So you're saying his hands are tied, the debt will be paid down and he has no power to do anything, but he *shouldn't* try to make political hay out of it? Just seems silly to let that opportunity pass. He may very well agree with you that money could be spent better... for instance the BBB bill (or whatever it was that Manchin torpedoed), but he doesn't have that power. So he's making lemonade with the lemons he does have.
I am saying I reject the idea that debt going down while the poor suffer is a good thing. Tightening the belt while children starve is not something to run a victory lap about. It is depraved.
Separately, since Biden has every capability to instruct the department of education to set all student loan balances to 0, pull all federal funding from universities which have tuition which rise above inflation, and set all future student loan interest to 0%, he should do that yesterday. These are non-competing, unrelated ideas.
|
Interesting thread on abortion framed as a religious right, has anyone in the US ever tried this?
|
|
|
The first question that comes to my mind is whether his take is corroborated by leading jewish teologians and rabbis or whether it's just a fringe opinion. Religious texts can often be vague or ambiguous.
|
The second one is a stunt designed to rile up his base. He knows full well it is never going to pass so there is no cost to him. Despicable, but really just grandstanding.
|
On May 06 2022 11:55 gobbledydook wrote:The second one is a stunt designed to rile up his base. He knows full well it is never going to pass so there is no cost to him. Despicable, but really just grandstanding.
You can't safely say that anymore.
|
Yeah there's really no reason Texas wouldn't be able to give someone the death penalty for an abortion at this point.
|
On May 06 2022 09:14 Sbrubbles wrote:The first question that comes to my mind is whether his take is corroborated by leading jewish teologians and rabbis or whether it's just a fringe opinion. Religious texts can often be vague or ambiguous.
I follow Reform Judaism and we widely believe that abortion is allowed in any circumstance and sometimes required in certain cases.
For conservative Judaism, they believe that while it is ultimately up to the choice of the pregnant person, consultations with their family, doctor(s), and rabbi to determine the moral and legal implications must be done, although some take issue with having an abortion for a reason that isn't because your life is in danger.
For nearly all followers of Orthodox Judaism, abortion is not allowed unless the life of the person pregnant is in danger.
With all of that said, the laws being passed in states in the US banning abortions for any reason, even if the pregnant person's life is in danger, violates Jewish law and if I had to guess, this belief is shared by 95+% of Jews in America
|
On May 06 2022 12:46 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 11:55 gobbledydook wrote:The second one is a stunt designed to rile up his base. He knows full well it is never going to pass so there is no cost to him. Despicable, but really just grandstanding. You can't safely say that anymore.
Exactly. We spent too much time saying "surely the republicans wouldn't actually do that idiotic and evil thing that they say they want to do". Except they do. They actually do the idiotic and evil thing.
|
That Louisiana abortion bill I posted earlier apparently also bans fucking IUDs, so if the Louisiana Governor signs it into law IUDs are not illegal in Louisiana.
Never assume Republicans are grandstanding with their evil, that sort of thinking should be left dead in the gutter by now.
|
|
|
On May 06 2022 14:09 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 09:14 Sbrubbles wrote:The first question that comes to my mind is whether his take is corroborated by leading jewish teologians and rabbis or whether it's just a fringe opinion. Religious texts can often be vague or ambiguous. I follow Reform Judaism and we widely believe that abortion is allowed in any circumstance and sometimes required in certain cases. For conservative Judaism, they believe that while it is ultimately up to the choice of the pregnant person, consultations with their family, doctor(s), and rabbi to determine the moral and legal implications must be done, although some take issue with having an abortion for a reason that isn't because your life is in danger. For nearly all followers of Orthodox Judaism, abortion is not allowed unless the life of the person pregnant is in danger. With all of that said, the laws being passed in states in the US banning abortions for any reason, even if the pregnant person's life is in danger, violates Jewish law and if I had to guess, this belief is shared by 95+% of Jews in America
Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what the Jewish, Muslim, non-theist, or other non-Christian communities care about, when it comes to conservative politics. Whether it's a conversation about secularist law or freedom of religion, everyone else's preferences are undermined by right-wing Christians.
|
The US in not a secular country and has not been for some time.
"In God We Trust" is literally the US's official motto since 1956.
|
Tightening the bolts on the fascist theocracy is all, they've always tried to push the religiosity but now we'll probably see it pushed a lot harder.
|
On May 06 2022 11:55 gobbledydook wrote:The second one is a stunt designed to rile up his base. He knows full well it is never going to pass so there is no cost to him. Despicable, but really just grandstanding.
I feel like there's lessons that can be learned from Trump being president...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
