Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 05 Jan 2023, 8:16 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023, 8:16 pm

This^ is not how you admit error, dick sucker. 

Stop panty dancing and admit that you were wrong and socialist to want to spend MY money in Ukraine, you weak piece of ****.

I am nearly always right.  You are a hard-head, but I'm fixing to learn you as much as that thick skull of yours can handle.
 

righteous » 05 Jan 2023, 10:12 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023, 10:12 pm

UKRAINE IS A **** COUNTRY THAT HARBORS NEO-NAZI TERRORISTS, LAUNDERS DARK MONEY, BENEFITS NO ONE BUT THE U.S. MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AND OLIGARCHS IN BOTH THE UKRAINE AND THE U.S.
RUSSIA SHOULD WASTE NO MORE TIME AND TARGET ZELENSKY IMMEDIATELY. THE ZIRCON IS UNSURPASSED IN TECHNOLOGY AND WILL EASILY FIND ITS WAY DOWN ZELENSKYS THROAT AT 6 TIMES THE SPEED OF SOUND UNDETECTED.
KILLING ZELENSKY AND THE REMAINING NEO-NAZIS IS A PRIORITY FOR RUSSIA.
THEN ENDING THE TRANSFER OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAXPAYER MONEY FROM GOING INTO THE HANDS OF THE U.S. M.I.C. 
 DESTROYING ANY THREAT OF THE CORRUPT NATO ENTERPRISE
THEN ARRESTING KOLOMOISKY, CONFISCATING THE STOLEN BILLIONS IN OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS TO HELP IN A REBUILD FOR THE PEACEFUL CIVILIANS.

I don't give a **** about "Neo-Nazi Terrorists" in Ukraine.  Russia has given them good reason to exist.
I am good with Ukraine benefiting the US Military Industrial Complex - Much better than the Russian Military Industrial complex.

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 7:31 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 7:31 am

When Grifty made "the military rich", he did so with Other People's Money.

Seriously, you're a **** idiot.

All US Military Industrial Complex stocks plummeted during Trump's term in office.  So.  Again.  YOU are wrong.
 

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 9:09 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 9:09 am

All US Military Industrial Complex stocks plummeted during Trump's term in office.  So.  Again.  YOU are wrong.

Stop making **** up, Skans..

We have secured record funding for our military — $700 billion this year, and $716 billion next year. Our military will soon be more powerful than it has ever been before.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... w-york-ny/
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 9:26 am

Stop making **** up, Skans..

We have secured record funding for our military — $700 billion this year, and $716 billion next year. Our military will soon be more powerful than it has ever been before.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... w-york-ny/

I know what the stocks did during Trump's term - they went down, and/or sideways.  It wasn't until Biden's Ukraine war that they all spiked.

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 9:09 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 9:09 am

All US Military Industrial Complex stocks plummeted during Trump's term in office.  So.  Again.  YOU are wrong.

ITA, vanguard's aerospace and defense ETF DOUBLED from 2016 to 2020.

Perhaps you should have diversified out of ACME. 
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:18 am

ITA, vanguard's aerospace and defense ETF DOUBLED from 2016 to 2020.

Perhaps you should uave diversified out of ACME.

You are such a foolish dope.  Let's take one stock and look at it.  The most important one - Lockheed Martin.  Notice, that from 2018 - 2019, it fell substantially.  From 2019-2020 it was essentially flat.  And, from 2020-just about 2022, it was down or flat.  Then, once Biden got into office, it spiked 100 points. 
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/LMT/cha ... J9fX1dfQ--
 
 

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 10:27 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:27 am

You are such a foolish dope.  Let's take one stock and look at it.  The most important one - Lockheed Martin.  Notice, that from 2018 - 2019, it fell substantially.  From 2019-2020 it was essentially flat.  And, from 2020-just about 2022, it was down or flat.  Then, once Biden got into office, it spiked 100 points. 
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/LMT/cha ... J9fX1dfQ--

Do you have any idea what an indexed ETF is?

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 10:28 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:28 am

Do you have any idea what an indexed ETF is?

Yes, it's ****.  It's not a military industrial complex COMPANY, like Lockheed Martin is. Look at companies - because its companies, not etf's, that get government dollars from wars. It would do you some good to read a book or two by Warren Buffett, a **** Democrat, but a very smart one.
 

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:31 am

Yes, it's ****.  It's not a military industrial complex COMPANY, like Lockheed Martin is. Look at companies - because its companies, not etf's, that get government dollars from wars. It would do you some good to read a book or two by Warren Buffett, a **** Democrat, but a very smart one.

You have no idea...

In 2023.
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:18 am

ITA, vanguard's aerospace and defense ETF DOUBLED from 2016 to 2020.

Perhaps you should uave diversified out of ACME.

https://youtu.be/9m7evoFF83c

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 9:07 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 9:07 am

I don't give a **** about "Neo-Nazi Terrorists" in Ukraine.  Russia has given them good reason to exist.
I am good with Ukraine benefiting the US Military Industrial Complex - Much better than the Russian Military Industrial complex.

YOU'VE GOT A LOT TO LEARN ABOUT THE GEOPOLITICAL LANDSCAPE, BOY.
BILLIONS TO AMERICAS MIC DOES NOTHING FOR YOU OR MAINSTREAM AMERICA.
NATO DOES NOTHING FOR YOU OR MAINSTREAM AMERICA.
THESE ENTITIES PRIDE THEMSELVES ON WEALTH OVER WHAT THEIR EXISTENCE HAS YOU LEADING TO BELIEVE. THE PROXY WAR IN UKRAINE WAS ANOTHER NOTCH IN THEIR BELT.
RUSSIAS EXISTENCE MAINTAINS A WORLD BALANCE OF POWER, PREVENTING THE COMING OF A NEW WORLD ORDER, ONE THAT WILL TURN YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING TO THAT OF A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY. 
 THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON CHINA AND THE OLIGARCHS SUCH AS KLAUS SCHWAB WHO MAINTAIN CHINA SHOULD NOW BE THE WORLDS NUMBER ONE SUPERPOWER. 
 

righteous » 06 Jan 2023, 10:49 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:49 am

YOU'VE GOT A LOT TO LEARN ABOUT THE GEOPOLITICAL LANDSCAPE, BOY.
BILLIONS TO AMERICAS MIC DOES NOTHING FOR YOU OR MAINSTREAM AMERICA.
NATO DOES NOTHING FOR YOU OR MAINSTREAM AMERICA.
THESE ENTITIES PRIDE THEMSELVES ON WEALTH OVER WHAT THEIR EXISTENCE HAS YOU LEADING TO BELIEVE. THE PROXY WAR IN UKRAINE WAS ANOTHER NOTCH IN THEIR BELT.
RUSSIAS EXISTENCE MAINTAINS A WORLD BALANCE OF POWER, PREVENTING THE COMING OF A NEW WORLD ORDER, ONE THAT WILL TURN YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING TO THAT OF A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY. 
 THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON CHINA AND THE OLIGARCHS SUCH AS KLAUS SCHWAB WHO MAINTAIN CHINA SHOULD NOW BE THE WORLDS NUMBER ONE SUPERPOWER.

The one thing I agree on with you is that our focus should be China.  At least western Russians are white. Most are stupid as ****, though.  I'd nuke China the first chance I got.  Elect Skans for President, and I'm pressing the red button with every freaking nuke pointed at those cock-suckers. I might even twist Israel's arm to point some of their nukes their way as well. They owe us!
 

SJConspirator » 06 Jan 2023, 10:49 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 10:49 am

https://youtu.be/9m7evoFF83c

Can you find a chart?

Key Findings

67 percent of likely voters, including 53 percent of Republicans, think billionaires should be paying more in taxes.

Taxing billionaires' unrealized capital gains, as in Sen. Wyden’s Billionaires Income Tax, is hugely popular: 64 percent of voters support the outline of the proposal, compared to only 25 percent opposed.

This support is robust: after hearing arguments against the proposal, only 9 percent of supporters are persuaded to oppose the proposal. In contrast, after hearing arguments for the proposal, 24 percent of opponents are persuaded to support it.

A majority of Republican likely voters, 51 percent, support taxing billionaires' unrealized capital gains after hearing arguments for and against.

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/20 ... ly-popular

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 7:29 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 7:29 am

Finding his narrative athwart his own citation, Rog come up with...

More narrative.

The sequester was the consequence of another congressional debt ceiling tantrum...

Why was there a debt ceiling crisis?

Because the Carnicero de Surplus had just completed a 15 trillion dollar swing in the Federal Debt Held by the Public.

https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-paper ... fense-cuts

Budget sequestration is a provision of United States law that causes an across-the-board reduction in certain kinds of spending included in the federal budget. Sequestration involves setting a hard cap on the amount of government spending within broadly defined categories; if Congress enacts annual appropriations legislation that exceeds these caps, an across-the-board spending cut is automatically imposed on these categories, affecting all departments and programs by an equal percentage. The amount exceeding the budget limit is held back by the Treasury and not transferred to the agencies specified in the appropriation bills.

no mention of debt ceiling 'crises'...

ROG62 » 06 Jan 2023, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 3:11 pm

https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-paper ... fense-cuts

Budget sequestration is a provision of United States law that causes an across-the-board reduction in certain kinds of spending included in the federal budget. Sequestration involves setting a hard cap on the amount of government spending within broadly defined categories; if Congress enacts annual appropriations legislation that exceeds these caps, an across-the-board spending cut is automatically imposed on these categories, affecting all departments and programs by an equal percentage. The amount exceeding the budget limit is held back by the Treasury and not transferred to the agencies specified in the appropriation bills.

no mention of debt ceiling 'crises'...

The supercommittee sequestration was originally passed as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA), better known as the debt ceiling compromise.

 It was intended to serve as incentive for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (aka the "Supercommittee") to come to a deal to cut $1.5 trillion over 10 years. If the committee had done so, and Congress had passed it by Dec. 23, 2011, then the sequestration would have been averted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... n-one-faq/

Skans » 06 Jan 2023, 9:05 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 9:05 am

I am nearly always right.  You are a hard-head, but I'm fixing to learn you as much as that thick skull of yours can handle.

I won't learn to cosign your socialism, tranny supporting soros bedfellow. 
 

Skans » 04 Jan 2023, 3:02 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023, 3:02 pm

Biden and the Democrats are on a grand push to increase taxes on working class Americans.  They want your money and plan to take it anyway they can.

Well damn those billionaire will have to pass on that vacation to Europe.  

Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2023, 3:20 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023, 3:20 pm

The supercommittee sequestration was originally passed as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA), better known as the debt ceiling compromise.

 It was intended to serve as incentive for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (aka the "Supercommittee") to come to a deal to cut $1.5 trillion over 10 years. If the committee had done so, and Congress had passed it by Dec. 23, 2011, then the sequestration would have been averted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... n-one-faq/

yep... I know...the problem being it was designed to be across the board...but obummer's cuts took all or most of it out of the military budget...