US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3770

On September 02 2022 02:54 Gorsameth wrote:
Yes, its also very telling that Trump never mentioned the classified documents weren't actually classified anymore to the FBI all the way back to February when this ball started rolling.

On September 02 2022 01:05 oBlade wrote:

Maybe I'm overthinking but from a personal finance perspective, when your revenue decreases, and you spend more, it suggests you can't pay your debts. Perhaps this doesn't apply to cutting taxes while increasing spending for countries.


The Democrats controlled the House as they still do. It would have cleared any presidential veto no matter who was in power. You seem more interested in political football than me, it was extremely bipartisan cronyism with everyone jumping in to get a piece of the pie. However, had the Democratic party been in total control of everything, let's just say I doubt there would have been less waste and fraud.

You're quite correct though, thank you for reminding me so much of the CARES waste was itemized in the bill itself, handouts for everyone with connections, and the PPP loan applications for actual small business that needed relief were insufficient, confusing, and had quotas that got capped quickly because companies that didn't need help were organized enough to move fast and apply and get approved first, leaving Joe Blow with scraps. That was 2 years ago now but it's coming back to me.


There WAS a moratorium on evictions, not a suspension or forgiveness of rent or mortgages.

You say medical debt can be discharged in bankruptcy so it's not an issue, then tell me we shouldn't apply that to student loans.
Look.
Student loan relief is going to people who may or may not be hurting, but aren't in bankruptcy.
What's wrong with medical debt relief to the same thing, if we can literally wipe away ALL of it for cheaper?

A) Give $10,000 in student debt relief to young people who potentially have bright futures, gainful employment, financial security, and also to people over $100k-200k in the hole who despite working are prioritizing their mortgage, maybe car, and children.
B) Erase ALL debt of people suffering from diseases, people who having recovered, are nevertheless crippled by debt due to insurance nonsense, hospital greed.


Yale has more administrators than students.


Look at the ratio of phd recipients to positions in academia. My point is very simple - delete administration and spend that money on actual competent people graduated from competent programs doing the job of education. Give the phds jobs instead.

Doctors - Look - Basic economics - Supply up, demand down, price down. What was the last doctor's appointment you made? Or someone you know? What were the last 5 doctor's appointments of anyone in your circle, how long did you wait, how long did you get with the doctor, what did it cost, what value did you get? How are nurses the bottleneck here?


Yeah, I know what the executive order does, you again have me confused with a political footballer, I said it because it's a good idea not because I was angry at "Brandon" for not doing it. Good idea or bad, it's Congress's job.

When you declare bankruptcy, your assets are liquidated to pay what creditors you can, and the rest is discharged (meaning erased, no obligation exists). The advantage is you don't have to pay when you have claims greatly exceeding your assets. The disadvantage is nobody trusts your financial situation later because they put your name in a computer and it says you declared bankruptcy, meaning good luck getting credit or loans for anything in the future. Most people don't declare bankruptcy, it's to be avoided. Do you have any source or evidence? Like, do you think the current rate of people who declare bankruptcy hold more than $300-500billion in student loans? Or are you just supposing that everyone who goes to school would declare strategic bankruptcy after 4 years or something? Because they wouldn't, because it's not that simple.

If the product, an education, can't lead to a paying job, what is its value that it costs over $100,000 and some people deserve it for free despite no prospects that would have allowed them to repay it? How about this, we already have 12 years of public education and we should educate children there, not wait until they're at the age of maturity for signing six figure loans to say it's time to get serious? The university should care very much not about their own profitability, but about the financial security of THEIR CLIENTS, THE STUDENTS.

If people could discharge student loans in normal bankruptcy, lenders might be more cautious about giving loans to every Tom, Dick, and Harry, even raising interest rates, causing less people to be interested in the product that lenders are providing loans for. That would in turn cause universities to reconsider the value proposition of their product, and reduce cost, improve their product, or both. If you just forgive loans, it incentivizes nothing except more predatory or irresponsible lending, and the economy knows where that leads.



? Would you say you SUPPORT or OPPOSE Chelsea Manning's leaking of hundreds of thousands of classified documents?

You can't execute people because of an executive order, I think you're having an episode of etymological confusion. The laws that prescribe the death penalty for treason are laws, passed by Congress (again), basically independent of the system of classification that has been established by executive order. Otherwise the president could just shoot people. Congress writes laws.


Your credulity here is situational - You'd have to believe Trump has things that identify people based on classified documents and redacted subpoenas from trustworthy people who you just told me want to kill someone who revealed hundreds of thousands of classified logs documenting abuse.

Like I realize there's no point to go back and forth on points we won't agree on but I'm interested now where you stand on Manning since you brought that up, and one of the exact criticisms of Wikileaks, or of any leaking and declassification, is that it harms national security, gets people hurt or killed. What's your thought process there? Was there harm or not, if so, was it justified, if not, was she certain of that before leaking, should she have been or not, etc...?


I see it often, fake patriotism from people going "Oh no he denigrated the brave men and women of blahblah..." every time he criticizes someone, someone who usually shat all over him first.

Also you're facing cognitive dissonance here, or I want to know where you are, or if you have no answer to 2020. In 2016 they influenced the election by NOT recommending charging a candidate, but in 2020 when they warned social media that the laptop story was "Russian propaganda/disinformation," this isn't direct interference in democracy from inside? Why is Thibault, the guy who it turns out stonewalled investigation of the Biden laptop, out of the FBI suddenly? The government CANNOT use private companies as proxies to abridge the 1st amendment, that's established legal precedent.


It gives help to a select group of people, who don't need it, at the expense of people who do need it, based on demographic voting tendencies. Let me give you some examples.

2020 Trump campaign program for half a trillion to black businesses -> Vote buying
2022 sudden appearance of presidential power to forgive $300-500b in a very specific kind of loan for $10,000 to 13% of population paid for by 87% of population -> Vote buying
Universal stimulus check based on income -> Possibly fiscally irresponsible, not vote buying
Targeted relief based on need/severity -> Not vote buying
Erasure of all medical debt -> Not vote buying
Erasure of women's medical debt -> Vote buying


We should definitely address trillions of waste, fraud, and corrupt redistribution of wealth. It's a constitutional republic, not the Oprah show, this "You get a trillion and you get a trillion and you get a trillion" can't continue.

The border wall would have cost 10-50 times less than this student loan band-aid, 2-5 times less than aid sent to securing Ukraine's border.


Things are classified thanks to a system created by executive order (and the tradition of bureaucratic machinery), the power of which ultimately comes from the executive, meaning president. An order that also specifically addresses cases where people with no official position can have access (Not to say that its content supports Trump in his current situation). Or maybe Obama should be arrested because he called citizen Bush to tell him about the raid on bin Laden.


Would you consider it good or bad faith to equate the (as far as I know unprecedented) spending of up to half a trillion dollars by one man's signature, to a bunch of boxes with maybe ~100 documents of different levels of classification by agencies that overclassify and have millions of such documents, locked in the house of a man upon whose authority they were classified to begin with?

The only other comparable program that I know of would be the undeclared wars of Iraq and Afghanistan (come to think of it, every undeclared war), the difference being that again at least Congress approved budgets to cover defense activities in those.

You'd have to believe Trump has things that identify people based on classified documents and redacted subpoenas from trustworthy people who you just told me want to kill someone who revealed hundreds of thousands of classified logs documenting abuse.

On September 02 2022 02:54 Gorsameth wrote:
Yes, its also very telling that Trump never mentioned the classified documents weren't actually classified anymore to the FBI all the way back to February when this ball started rolling.

On September 02 2022 14:06 WombaT wrote:
Fuckkkkk meeeeee

I’d laugh but a disturbing amount of people actually swallow this patent, utter bollocks

On September 02 2022 14:13 Slydie wrote:


He just spews out whatever comes to mind to distract from the facts of the case. In this matter, I think his audience is his supporters only, as there isn't even worth it to fight the claims anymore.

What is really weird to me is that Trump can change his story 10 times a week, but the base still eats it. How is that? Are they so eager to believe him they don't even care what he said yesterday? Or do they think it is clever that he talks so much BS to distract the enemy?

On September 02 2022 12:16 Gahlo wrote:
My favorite nonsense of this is that the evidence pictures are faked to make the room look messier than he kept it.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1565154301101703175

On September 02 2022 19:08 Velr wrote:



Did anyone state or even think the documents weren't put on the ground for the picture?

On September 02 2022 22:06 JimmiC wrote:

I wonder if this one, or the lawyer who signed the sworn affidavit that there was no classified documents on site will end uo not being able to practice law or jail. It seens like that is how many of Trumps lawyers end up.