• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:01
CEST 22:01
KST 05:01
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202550RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams5Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 799 users

The US debt (proper debate) - Page 50

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 48 49 50 51 52 59 Next
Ghad
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Norway2551 Posts
August 03 2011 00:07 GMT
#981
On August 02 2011 17:56 ZeaL. wrote:
That second graph is pretty misleading as it measures deficits instead of net expenditures, revenue dropped significantly in '09 and '10 as a result of the recession.


Ah thanks, i was looking at that graph and couldnt think of a satisfying explanation for it.
forgottendreams: One underage girl, two drunk guys, one gogo dancer and starcraft 2. Apparently just another day in Europe.
stevarius
Profile Joined August 2010
United States1394 Posts
August 03 2011 00:07 GMT
#982
On August 03 2011 09:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-02/u-s-aaa-rating-faces-moody-s-downgrade-on-debt-economic-slowdown-concern.html

I am concerned we may have already passed the point where no matter who is president or in control of the congress that we are not going to be able to keep our AAA rating. Which would suck less than a default but that's like saying breaking both your wrists isn't as bad as breaking both your legs so don't worry about it.


What I find ironic is that Moody and the other companies are doing the same thing are politicians are doing....

If the politicians can put off actual problem solving, so can those who decide our country's credit status.... lol....
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
VIB
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Brazil3567 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 00:17:33
August 03 2011 00:11 GMT
#983
I didn't see this posted on TL yet, it's floating all over the internets:
[image loading]

And if you're spending too much. Make sure you cut spending from the right place:
U.S. House approves $649 bln for defense in 2012

* Pentagon primary budget is $18 billion more than 2011

* $119 included for Afghanistan, Iraq wars

* Effort to eliminate Afghanistan combat funding defeated
- http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/08/usa-budget-defense-idUSN1E7670UA20110708
Great people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Small people talk about other people.
SnK-Arcbound
Profile Joined March 2005
United States4423 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 00:58:14
August 03 2011 00:56 GMT
#984
On August 02 2011 17:53 kwizach wrote:
No, you're an idiot for ignoring evidence that Republicans were the ones who turned surpluses into deficits, crippled government revenues through the Bush tax cuts and increased spending through the two wars (notably). The recession had to be addressed, whether you like it or not. It is sound economic policy to spend during a recession - in fact, the stimulus should probably have been even bigger. The point is that spending would not have been a problem had the Republicans not already crippled the finances of the US beforehand.
You are also an idiot for comparing not wanting to raise taxes for the top 2% to not wanting to cut Medicare and Medicaid. These two programs make a huge difference in people's lives, the taxes don't and are not sound policy because of their impact on government revenue.

Medicare and SS have current deficits of 49.2 trillion dollars (this might be the combined figure of government obligations + ss medicare, I can't find the numbers right now). Future obligations are about $114 trillion. You are completely correct, clearly it's Republicans fault that the government might go bankrupt over the 14.5 trillion. Taxing the top 2% clearly is the best solution, they clearly have a net worth 128 trillion x4% increase= $3.2 quadrillian. You are right, we should follow the Democrat plan, taxes can pay off the entire burden of government spending.

But I'll make a deal, we return to Clinton levels of taxes, if we also return to the same level of spending (including inflation of course). How about right in the middle of his presidency, 1996.
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 01:16:32
August 03 2011 01:12 GMT
#985
This infograph is BS. Attributing the ENTIRE economic downturn to Bush Jr. is a crock of shit.
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
Shiori
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
3815 Posts
August 03 2011 01:16 GMT
#986
There's no debate worth having. It's pretty simple: you either raise taxes or cut services. In my books a state with a moral conscience is better than a state which cuts corners, and therefore I think it's better to just raise taxes (something most Americans are okay with). But instead we have the GOP legitimizing anti-social disorder because of their fetish for Randian free markets. I honestly feel bad for Americans (I'm Canadian). To actually believe that welfare is worth cutting because people are "exploiting it" (despite no such statistics existing) is to be in a truly deep delusion.
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
August 03 2011 01:22 GMT
#987
On August 03 2011 10:16 Shiori wrote:
There's no debate worth having. It's pretty simple: you either raise taxes or cut services. In my books a state with a moral conscience is better than a state which cuts corners, and therefore I think it's better to just raise taxes (something most Americans are okay with). But instead we have the GOP legitimizing anti-social disorder because of their fetish for Randian free markets. I honestly feel bad for Americans (I'm Canadian). To actually believe that welfare is worth cutting because people are "exploiting it" (despite no such statistics existing) is to be in a truly deep delusion.


You are wrong. Democrats have made as many mistakes as the GOP, if not more, and I am NOT okay with paying out of pocket for those mistakes. It's not "either raise taxes or cut services," it's BOTH.

Any bullshit philosophy that honestly believes it can fix this situation by doing one or the other is delusional.
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
August 03 2011 01:32 GMT
#988
On August 03 2011 10:22 Rybka wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2011 10:16 Shiori wrote:
There's no debate worth having. It's pretty simple: you either raise taxes or cut services. In my books a state with a moral conscience is better than a state which cuts corners, and therefore I think it's better to just raise taxes (something most Americans are okay with). But instead we have the GOP legitimizing anti-social disorder because of their fetish for Randian free markets. I honestly feel bad for Americans (I'm Canadian). To actually believe that welfare is worth cutting because people are "exploiting it" (despite no such statistics existing) is to be in a truly deep delusion.


You are wrong. Democrats have made as many mistakes as the GOP, if not more, and I am NOT okay with paying out of pocket for those mistakes. It's not "either raise taxes or cut services," it's BOTH.

Any bullshit philosophy that honestly believes it can fix this situation by doing one or the other is delusional.


He isn't thinking black & white. He's insinuating that there should be greater focus on the tax side of the issue. This stance is something that GOP members adamantly stand against, thus his remarks are understandable. What is your argument against that taxes should be the focus? I agree that "services" must also be cut to some extent given the size of the problem, but still... You are even more incorrect by taking a perfect middle ground and saying a simple "both".
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
August 03 2011 01:49 GMT
#989
On August 03 2011 10:32 FallDownMarigold wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2011 10:22 Rybka wrote:
On August 03 2011 10:16 Shiori wrote:
There's no debate worth having. It's pretty simple: you either raise taxes or cut services. In my books a state with a moral conscience is better than a state which cuts corners, and therefore I think it's better to just raise taxes (something most Americans are okay with). But instead we have the GOP legitimizing anti-social disorder because of their fetish for Randian free markets. I honestly feel bad for Americans (I'm Canadian). To actually believe that welfare is worth cutting because people are "exploiting it" (despite no such statistics existing) is to be in a truly deep delusion.


You are wrong. Democrats have made as many mistakes as the GOP, if not more, and I am NOT okay with paying out of pocket for those mistakes. It's not "either raise taxes or cut services," it's BOTH.

Any bullshit philosophy that honestly believes it can fix this situation by doing one or the other is delusional.


He isn't thinking black & white. He's insinuating that there should be greater focus on the tax side of the issue. This stance is something that GOP members adamantly stand against, thus his remarks are understandable. What is your argument against that taxes should be the focus? I agree that "services" must also be cut to some extent given the size of the problem, but still... You are even more incorrect by taking a perfect middle ground and saying a simple "both".


Taxing can't possibly get you to a balanced budget. It is mathematically impossible to get to a balanced budget without extreme cuts to major federal entitlement programs.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704621304576267113524583554.html

That's why my argument is against a focus on taxes. A greater focus on taxes is wrong. It will not work.
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 01:57:15
August 03 2011 01:51 GMT
#990
A conservative opinion WSJ article doesn't prove much, sorry buddy.

Here's one random response to it:
Statistics are misquoted, and arithmetic is incorrect within this article; hopefully the WSJ will issue a correction. Set any decent 8th grader to the task and they'll have it completed in the hour. The fundamental error though is discussing income tax dollars as if they are all equal. If you take 20% of the $20,000 income of a person supporting a family of three, clearly the impact is much greater on their lives than taking 20% of the $2,000,000 income of a person supporting a family of three. If we tax the rich person another 1%, what can they no longer do now that they could do before? Compare that to the impact of taking 1%, $200, from each of 1,000 poor families. Failing to consider the marginal value of tax dollars to the taxed is a mistake repeated in every discussion about taxes. The other fundamental oversight is failing to see that the rich are only rich because of a healthy economy in a healthy society; no one has more to gain by investing in the basic welfare of Americans than rich people. Solid infrastructure, good basic health care, good education, social stability; nothing else will beat the return on investment in these areas. If those earning in the top 10% of all incomes really want more money in years to come, then as a group, they should be very happy to pay a little more in taxes today to reap the fruits of their privileged position in a healthy, vibrant society tomorrow.


And here's a conservative's counter-response:
So now you're not talking about figures Erdman. You're talking about "fairness". You're talking about the fact that you and your liberal cohorts know what a "rich" person can "afford" or should be required to contribute. You're also talking about how much to gain "rich" people have by being forced to contribute to good infrastructure. "Rich" people are quite happy to use the infrastructure of this country. God knows they pay more for it than anyone else despite being the beneficiary of it the least. Or perhaps you think "rich" people drive on our roads and bridges more while using our public schools more? Here's a radical idea. Everybody in this country pays something including those 50% that pay nothing currently?


I mean, that pretty much spells it out. That type of logic is shit-brained. "Herp derp, how abouts ERRYONE contributes n' pays EQUALLY?" is essentially what he's about. That's such a callow approach, though, because everyone is not able to contribute the same. I don't know about 50%, but the lowest of the low cannot contribute much more than zero, like it or not. The upper 10% can contribute plenty. Why should everyone contribute the same hard amount, rather than based upon percentage?
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
August 03 2011 01:57 GMT
#991
There it is. Ad hominem "omg that source as a scent of conservative bias" is not an excuse. That's just whining because you don't have an educated answer. You want to make it about bullshit politics, rather than the facts. Repbulican this, GOP that. I immediately stop listening when I hear that shit.
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
August 03 2011 02:00 GMT
#992
On August 03 2011 10:57 Rybka wrote:
There it is. Ad hominem "omg that source as a scent of conservative bias" is not an excuse. That's just whining because you don't have an educated answer. You want to make it about bullshit politics, rather than the facts. Repbulican this, GOP that. I immediately stop listening when I hear that shit.


Oh horse shit. I can complain about bias if you post a random fucking biased article as "source". A FUCKING OPINION ARTICLE? GET REAL.

How about you post a rigorous journal article from a completely neutral publication, based upon research and hard fact - leave the opinion at the fucking door. I'd have said the same had you pulled a left-biased article. The fact you assume I'm anti-conservative is dumb. I'm anti-illogical. Perhaps I'm too much of a science nerd, but the type of article to which I refer as being IDEAL would be that of Nature, or Cell Developmental Biology. Neutral, research-based, non-opinionated findings. I'm know that shit exists within the world of economics etc, but unfortunately I'm not familiar with any. So why not support your arguments with THOSE types of articles rather than OPINION pieces.
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
August 03 2011 02:01 GMT
#993
On August 03 2011 10:51 FallDownMarigold wrote:
A conservative opinion WSJ article doesn't prove much, sorry buddy.

Here's one random response to it:
Show nested quote +
Statistics are misquoted, and arithmetic is incorrect within this article; hopefully the WSJ will issue a correction. Set any decent 8th grader to the task and they'll have it completed in the hour. The fundamental error though is discussing income tax dollars as if they are all equal. If you take 20% of the $20,000 income of a person supporting a family of three, clearly the impact is much greater on their lives than taking 20% of the $2,000,000 income of a person supporting a family of three. If we tax the rich person another 1%, what can they no longer do now that they could do before? Compare that to the impact of taking 1%, $200, from each of 1,000 poor families. Failing to consider the marginal value of tax dollars to the taxed is a mistake repeated in every discussion about taxes. The other fundamental oversight is failing to see that the rich are only rich because of a healthy economy in a healthy society; no one has more to gain by investing in the basic welfare of Americans than rich people. Solid infrastructure, good basic health care, good education, social stability; nothing else will beat the return on investment in these areas. If those earning in the top 10% of all incomes really want more money in years to come, then as a group, they should be very happy to pay a little more in taxes today to reap the fruits of their privileged position in a healthy, vibrant society tomorrow.


And here's a conservative's counter-response:
Show nested quote +
So now you're not talking about figures Erdman. You're talking about "fairness". You're talking about the fact that you and your liberal cohorts know what a "rich" person can "afford" or should be required to contribute. You're also talking about how much to gain "rich" people have by being forced to contribute to good infrastructure. "Rich" people are quite happy to use the infrastructure of this country. God knows they pay more for it than anyone else despite being the beneficiary of it the least. Or perhaps you think "rich" people drive on our roads and bridges more while using our public schools more? Here's a radical idea. Everybody in this country pays something including those 50% that pay nothing currently?


I mean, that pretty much spells it out. That type of logic is shit-brained. "Herp derp, how abouts ERRYONE contributes n' pays EQUALLY?" is essentially what he's about. That's such a callow approach, though, because everyone is not able to contribute the same. I don't know about 50%, but the lowest of the low cannot contribute much more than zero, like it or not. The upper 10% can contribute plenty. Why should everyone contribute the same hard amount, rather than based upon percentage?


Everyone contributing the same amount or different amounts? These are arguments about taxes, not about our budget as a whole. You seriously think you're going to get social security when you retire?? LMFAO. "Herp derp" indeed.
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 02:09:41
August 03 2011 02:05 GMT
#994
What the fuck are you talking about? Social Security? Retirement? You've lost me. After a career in otorhinolaryngology, I don't think I'll be relying on Social Security. Thanks.

By the way I find it quite ironic and silly that you call me out for alleged "ad homs" (when really all I was doing was poking fun at your use of an OPINION piece as factual evidence), then proceed to make dumb comments about how I'm going to be relying on welfare. Nothing short of just plain silly.
Rybka
Profile Joined March 2010
United States836 Posts
August 03 2011 02:09 GMT
#995
On August 03 2011 11:05 FallDownMarigold wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? Social Security? Retirement? You've lost me. After a career in otorhinolaryngology, I don't think I'll be relying on Social Security. Thanks.


LMAO if you're an ORL surgeon how have I "lost" you? We cannot possibly balance the budget until we rectify the false promises of things like social security, medicare, and medicaid. There is not enough money, and these things will exponentially outpace the money that is feasibly taxable from the American people?

Get it?
"I like winter, you can put a beer outside of the window and come back later to have it nice and cold. But in Belgium, it'd better be the 3rd floor window." -Rowa
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 02:17:31
August 03 2011 02:13 GMT
#996
On August 03 2011 11:09 Rybka wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2011 11:05 FallDownMarigold wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? Social Security? Retirement? You've lost me. After a career in otorhinolaryngology, I don't think I'll be relying on Social Security. Thanks.


LMAO if you're an ORL surgeon how have I "lost" you? We cannot possibly balance the budget until we rectify the false promises of things like social security, medicare, and medicaid. There is not enough money, and these things will exponentially outpace the money that is feasibly taxable from the American people?

Get it?


Refer to my very first post. Indeed, certain programs require reform. That said, these services cannot be done away with completely - go ahead and attempt to explain to me why medicare or individual mandate should be done away with completely. As stands, NO FOCUS is being paid to taxes. Do you simply think that the majority of the United States is stupider than you, a strong conservative? Snap out of it. Don't you read the news? Don't you look at polls? Tax reform is not part of today's compromise, and many would have liked to see it. It is necessary. Pretending it's all about services and "welfare" is, well, sorry, RETARDED.

And no, your WSJ OPINION article does not change the fact.

And no, your explanation above does not absolve you of making a stupid comment to me about retirement and SS.
AcuWill
Profile Joined August 2010
United States281 Posts
August 03 2011 02:21 GMT
#997
[image loading]
Mykill
Profile Blog Joined February 2009
Canada3402 Posts
August 03 2011 02:22 GMT
#998
if people want medicare/medicaid then you need to start pitching in and pay more taxes, america pays a fraction of what most developed countries pay.
There is no way to fund it medicare/aid, so people need to start paying for healthcare themselves. If you cant afford it and society doesnt want to pay taxes then tough.
[~~The Impossible Leads To Invention~~] CJ Entusman #52 The problem with internet quotations is that they are hard to verify -Abraham Lincoln c.1863
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
August 03 2011 02:28 GMT
#999
On August 03 2011 11:21 AcuWill wrote:
[image loading]


Though I'm sure it's meant in-jest...that's nonsense. I also hated those overly-simplistic Bush Jr. caricatures from his terms. It's such childish behavior to be so scornful and bipartisan about issues so fundamental and important to everyone.

The top 10% reported $3,856 billion in AGI, equal to 46% of total reported income in the United States, almost 27 percent of GDP. On that, they paid $721 billion in personal federal income taxes, or an average of 18.7% of income. If the remaining 81% of income were paid in federal income taxes, the increment in tax revenues would be more than $3,100 billion, or roughly 21% of GDP. The budget deficit would obviously be closed many times over.

The real point is obvious. The money received by the richest households is vast, and higher taxes on the rich will make a major contribution to closing the deficit. Nobody says that the rich should carry the entire tax burden or that spending cuts shouldn't play a role. The waste in military spending alone is so large that we can and should save at least 2 percent of GDP per year from the defense budget alone.

But yeah, keep pretending that's is as simple as "but herpderp, wait, let's make us all pay equal!!! 50/50!!"
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
August 03 2011 02:30 GMT
#1000
On August 03 2011 11:22 Mykill wrote:
if people want medicare/medicaid then you need to start pitching in and pay more taxes, america pays a fraction of what most developed countries pay.
There is no way to fund it medicare/aid, so people need to start paying for healthcare themselves. If you cant afford it and society doesnt want to pay taxes then tough.


..? Not sure if serious.

To highlight one small example of many; if poor people end up in the emergency room and can't foot the bill, YOUR PREMIUMS GO UP. ADVERSE SELECTION: IT'S REAL. DEATH-SPIRAL: IT'S REAL.
Prev 1 48 49 50 51 52 59 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 14h 59m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Hui .263
Nathanias 134
BRAT_OK 111
ForJumy 103
ProTech76
StarCraft: Brood War
Mini 553
ivOry 5
Dota 2
monkeys_forever35
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K3158
Fnx 1012
Foxcn357
sgares343
oskar230
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu502
Other Games
FrodaN3033
Gorgc2805
qojqva936
Dendi713
C9.Mang0137
QueenE87
Trikslyr84
Sick35
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV34
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 11
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22073
• WagamamaTV706
Other Games
• imaqtpie1605
• Shiphtur444
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
14h 59m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
17h 59m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 13h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 17h
CSO Cup
1d 19h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 21h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.