Liberal Forum

Skans » 27 Mar 2023, 3:37 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:37 pm

• "They" - who exactly is "they"
• "had" - past tense of "have" - what happened?
• "something like 10 Trillion" - according to whom?  Did the Cayman Islands, Cook Island, Isle of Manu, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Bermuda and the Bahamas all get together and publish this information in USA Today?
• Can money in an "off-shore" account be spent in the United States?

trumpfools is nothing but a limp dicked blank shooter (LDBSr)...puts **** out there apparently thinking it'll stick...
 

Trumprules » 27 Mar 2023, 3:28 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:28 pm

Wealthy people put more in off shore bank accounts and its whisked out of the country and never gets spent in America.

They only do that when they are being attacked and have to shelter their money.
When they AREN'T being targeted, they don't have to hide their money and are free to actually use it.
 

Trumprules » 27 Mar 2023, 3:42 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:42 pm

At least $11.3 trillion is held “offshore,” according to a 2020 study by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

That's a global number then?
So, how much of it is American?

Skans » 27 Mar 2023, 6:02 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 6:02 pm

I'd nominate this post for post of the day, but as a "newly registered user" who's only been here over a freaking year, I am not allowed to access that function.

That's not what I see. Check that again.

DeezerShoove » 27 Mar 2023, 10:32 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 10:32 pm

That's a global number then?
So, how much of it is American?

1/4, maybe a 1/3.

The ragheads got all the dollars.
 

All nonsense, it's @Ronjul that makes the wealth trickle down, I'm not sure how and why but it helps if you're not a child groomer and tranny supporter...


 

 
 

Trumprules » 27 Mar 2023, 3:33 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:33 pm

They had something like 10 trillion dollars in off shore accounts.

Just curious, what do you think those banks do with the money they take in through deposits?
 

DeezerShoove » 27 Mar 2023, 10:36 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 10:36 pm

That's not what I see. Check that again.

Says I joined on March 28, 2022.  Ok, so I was off 1 day. 
 

Poor Professor Broekback- aka @Xavier_Onassis  .

NOW he is pulling his BEST Josef Stalin!! KILL THE RICH BASTARDS and then what happens?? Seize their money and "distribute" it to whom?? The ELITISTS who killed the "evil rich"??

Because in the REAL WORLD, no "poor person": will see ONE RED CENT of anything those "evil rich" people had taken from them

You, PROFESSOR BROKEBACK, need to be BANNED for calling for the MURDER OF INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO JUST HAPPENED TO WORK HARDER THAN YOU EVER WILL TO EARN A TON MORE THAN YOU ARE CAPABLE OF EARNING!!
 
 

Skans » 28 Mar 2023, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 7:39 am

Says I joined on March 28, 2022.  Ok, so I was off 1 day.

I mean, you status is not new user.
"Registered user" like everyone else.

DeezerShoove » 28 Mar 2023, 8:29 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 8:29 am

I mean, you status is not new user.
"Registered user" like everyone else.

Ok.  I tried to do a best post nomination, but it wouldn't let me.
 

Skans » 28 Mar 2023, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 8:33 am

Ok.  I tried to do a best post nomination, but it wouldn't let me.

What was the message?

Might be that CP or GW will have to address the problem if it's coming back "new user" or something.
That is a field with no options I can get at for you.
An actual new user has options I can change. Yours is clean.

DeezerShoove » 28 Mar 2023, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 8:41 am

What was the message?

Might be that CP or GW will have to address the problem if it's coming back "new user" or something.
That is a field with no options I can get at for you.
An actual new user has options I can change. Yours is clean.

When I click the red star it just says "Newly registered users cannot nominate posts".  It's a cool feature.  Every now and again, someone posts something startlingly good.
 

Xavier_Onassis » 27 Mar 2023, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:11 pm

Here is an interesting and at least
 partially correct observation

Trickle-down economics was a macroeconomic policy that started under the Reagan administration. The theory was that the private sector does a better job of aiding prosperity than the government and regulation schemes that can actually be counterproductive. For example, do you tax the rich and pay a citizen in welfare or do you offer a job to that person? According to the supply side theory the latter is more beneficial. 
The problem of course is the fact that this scheme causes more and more wealth to be held at the top which is still a problem today. The poor and middle class don't necessarily get poorer although that is a possibility, but the rich due get richer hence the contemporary inequality argument.

Skans » 28 Mar 2023, 8:47 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 8:47 am

When I click the red star it just says "Newly registered users cannot nominate posts".  It's a cool feature.  Every now and again, someone posts something startlingly good.

Unless it's intentionally set that way because you are an annoying prick,
sounds like an admin issue.
CP or GW will have to check on it.

Have you been bad? You know how tough the mods are here.   

Taipan » 27 Mar 2023, 5:16 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 5:16 pm

When Trump took office, he 'repatriated' trillions back to the U.S. from corps. offshore accounts.
Those corps. invested that money & the Am. econ. took off like a jet.     Everyone had a job &
the stock market went up 11,000-pts.

That is a lie.
The market was headed upward for the last two years of Obama's presidency, and the DJIA did NOT go up 11,000 points.
Trump added more to the deficit than any other recent president.

DeezerShoove » 28 Mar 2023, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 9:03 am

Unless it's intentionally set that way because you are an annoying prick,
sounds like an admin issue.
CP or GW will have to check on it.

Have you been bad? You know how tough the mods are here. 

I'm not bad, I don't spam and I don't tag CP, or his Krishna-pet Ronjul, just to be a PITA.  And, I'm only a dick to some people here.  Well, maybe I'm a dick to most people here some of the time, but only when they deserve it.  
 

Xavier_Onassis » 27 Mar 2023, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2023, 3:11 pm

Here is an interesting and at least
 partially correct observation

When is partially correct observation become complete truth? Added reasonable doubt getting everyone living at the eternal point of balancing life between incoming replacements and outgoing achievements believing it cannot be self contained to current situation mutually shared by a relative food chain native to one atmosphere universally present as everything else is, one at a time combined kinetically never same total sum again.

those that know won't tell the secrets to their intellectual advantage over the rest of the species.

Like a magician never reveals their secret that is always self evident.

Trickle down is those outside understanding themselves pay those understanding ways and means to keep everyone confused until extinction arrives.

the temptation, promises of better days each rotation of the planet for those willing to sacrifice their biological time to become citizens of dream state of mind societies.

the price, giving away one's own sense of sharing eternity living cradle to grave.

the cost, everyone learns to doubt everyone else leaving mayhem, madness, misery all 5 generation gaps still alive.

I would tell you to GFY or GTH, but you achieved both already. So I leave you with an opportunity I had to discover on my own because I cannot be faithful to reasonable doubt like you are loyal to it.

Genetics actually eternally separates lifetimes adapting to the moment here as displaced evolving one at a time physiclaly here in a perpeptually balancing universe of multiple cycles sharing the moment. Inorganically and ancestrally using the same chemical periodic table as inanimate objects and animated lifetimes deveoped after erosion created organic compounding DNA streaming ancestors present..

Xavier_Onassis » 28 Mar 2023, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑

28 Mar 2023, 9:13 am

That is a lie.
The market was headed upward for the last two years of Obama's presidency, and the DJIA did NOT go up 11,000 points.
Trump added more to the deficit than any other recent president.

Sorry DYKEboy,. but your boy bye-DONE has had the LARGEST DEFICITS SINCE ANYONE TOOK OFFICE....

In Nov. 2022, the CBO reported that the budget deficit for FY 2022 was nearly $1.4 trillion, down from nearly $2.8 trillion in 2021.
  "The marked decline in the deficit from the previous year reflected waning spending in response to the coronavirus pandemic and increased revenues driven by higher inflation and the continued recovery of economic activity," the CBO reported.

So your boy has had DEFICITS of $2.8 TRILLION in 2021 and ANOTHER $1.4 TRILLION in 2022.

So tell us PROFESSOR BROKEBACK, how high was TRUMP'S largest deficit?? WAS IT MORE THAN bye-DONES??

Let me help you our, Dr. Brokeback.....

 Under Trump, the deficit reached $984 billion in 2019 and hit more than $1 trillion in 2020

 
Now, give us your BEST REBUTTAL of the FACTS. More of your usual LWNJ CRAP no doubt!!