Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-09-2018, 01:22 AM   #121
Cleverness
GSW Fan Since the 90s
 
Cleverness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,687
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
More people are going to college because more companies require college degrees even for entry-level jobs. People aren't going to college because the government wants people to go to college. If you can get a job that pays very well in a field without having to go to college and the same job becomes available in the same field with the same pay, but requires a college degree, do you think people are going to waste 2-4 years in college and rack up debt just because the government is promoting college educations?

Yes, people are going to college and rack up debt because they've been told to since day 1 of high school. I'm not anti-college. If you want to become an engineer, then I actually recommend that you go to college. But I'm against this giant promotion of college (as described in the video with Mike Rowe) that happens in every public HS in the US. Every public HS student has been lectured on "the benefits of going to college" and the lectures are way too general and the message that gets put out is "just go and you'll earn more." Poll American HS students on what profession they want to have when they're 25... most will say they don't know, but they'll also say they are going to college. they have already been convinced that they are they're going to college, and their "why" is simply to earn more money because that's what they've been told to do. Then poll non-American students.. you'll find an Indian student for example is set on engineering or medicine.. something with an actual reason to go to college



Quote:
Um... the link underscores what I argued. The exponential increase in daycare pricing isn't a result of government involvement... it's a market reaction to more kids being in daycare. Caregiver to child ratios are an obvious requirement. Would you drop a child off at a daycare where there was only one caregiver and 20 babies or toddlers? Are you against local and city governments setting rules in place for these sorts of things too? The federal government is nowhere near this as pointed out by the "lack of consistent regulation" section.


They're noting that if there were federal gov regs in place, the licensing and registration process may be easier from state to state. Insurance and legal costs aren't affected by government either. That's a standard cost of doing business, especially when you're taking care of babies. The minimum wage has been stagnant for decades and has certainly not contributed to the sharp increase in childcare.

Thanks for posting that. It really bolsters my point. Market influences and the cost of doing high volume business have driven up the price of daycare. Not government.

You specifically said "no government involvement in sight" and the link specifically shows some government involvement...

I would look into the daycare and the caregiver to baby ratio would definitely be a factor in my decision. Another factor would be reviews of that daycare center and opinions from people I know who send/sent their child there. This is what responsible parents do. Let's not pass on so much of this freedom, responsibility, and cost, to gov't... and especially not federal gov't!

The fact that there are half-baked government licensing and registration processes is the problem of government. The solution isn't to rely on the federal gov't to provide one size fits all standards to every town across America; it's to fix the licensing and registration process at the local level


Quote:
You're not acknowledging that the college graduate had to have learned the material required by many of these high paying professions to work in those professions. Someone who doesn't go to college can be smart with a better work ethic than someone who did. In many cases, they can also make more money than someone who did. But college graduates make more money than people who don't go to college because they took the time to lean material and specialize in fields that, on average, pay more money. It's a simple, fact that, on average, jobs that require a college degree pay more than jobs that do not require a college degree. The majority of those jobs require people who are smart with a good work ethic... but the kicker is that those smart hardworking people needed to have learned the material required to work in their fields, and those fields generally require going to college.

Being smart and hardworking is a factor, but those traits alone aren't going to get you into an interview in a hospital for a position as a surgeon or an interview with Bain as a project manager.

I am not only acknowledging it, but also being very specific. You are too general when you speak of college degrees, while I keep pointing out major differences between chosen studies.

A surgeon learned a lot of material directly related to what he'll be doing everyday. Someone who majored in east-Asian studies, sociology, or Latin isn't going to be learning very much material directly related to their future job. That being said, someone who actually completes the ~4 years it takes for a degree in those studies has shown to have some level of dedication and commitment, which is why they will earn more than the average person, despite not learning much directly related to their future job.
Cleverness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 01:27 AM   #122
Cleverness
GSW Fan Since the 90s
 
Cleverness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,687
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFly
I found the study you cited. Here is a key part.



So doctors, lawyers, ect... were apparently omitted from that study.



I'm not amazed because I'm well aware of the job and career opportunities that are out there. I'm well read on the issue and I'm familiar with a fair number of endeavors aimed at getting young people into careers outside of the college/grad school route. Not too long ago I urged someone I know to take a certificate program in computer repair. My argument isn't that there aren't good opportunities available. It's that corprorations and industries, not government, are the ones primarily responsible for requiring college degrees for jobs, and thereby driving up the price of college tuition. I want to make sure that doesn't get lost in all of this. Libertarians and Republicans are so quick to blame government while Democrats are quick to give government a pass, and we fall into political debates so quickly that we miss the nuances inherent in policy.

Wow, GREAT job on your part actually looking into the study.

A lot of news reporters/writers omit a lot of key things and put their own spin on it.

But still the fact remains that only 27% of grads having a job related to their major, which imo is strong evidence for what I've been saying about college degrees.


Hmm, you make a good points, and I do agree that sometimes employers are missing out on potentially great employees by requiring a bachelors degree, but... that also means that employers who hire these great people will win in the long run and employers will change their hiring habits. In fact, I'm sure a lot of employers are already doing this. I used to hire people and the funny thing is, it only took me about 6 months of experience to realize that a college degree meant very little (in most fields). I hired AMAZING people over people who had bachelor's degrees and even PhDs. You know why? Because I believe the following attributes are WAY more important than a degree:

-Easy to work with. I don't care if you know calculus 4 or quantum mechanics.. if you are a complainer about little things, then I'm hiring someone else
-Positive energy. I like to keep things positive wherever I'm at. Hiring someone who is negative all the time is counterproductive. Yes, we can complain about the board and some of their decisions and all that... but there's ALWAYS something we CAN complain about.
-Try their best in everything they do. If someone gives it their best, I am never mad at them. I'm actually never mad at someone anyway because I'm a super chill manager. Even as a manager, I'm completely open and all ears if an employee wants to teach me something. If you are open to learning when I train you, then we'll be successful together

I can go on, but you get the picture. Bottom line is managers who end up hiring the best employees will succeed in the end.
Cleverness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2018, 10:31 PM   #123
MaxFly
Stylin' on you
 
MaxFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,019
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleverness
Uhhhh, actually I agree that education is viewed as an important social investment, but I wasn't being specific enough, so I understand your reaction.

I'm not in favor of shutting down schools or cutting funds to classrooms. I am in favor of cutting costs in boondoggle programs like to administration and regulation and putting some of those funds back into the classroom. We're the only country that has more staff outside of the classroom than in the classroom. Ask the teachers why they quit teaching and the #1 reason is regulation and administration BS that takes away from classroom funding and learning. I don't think we should limit children to one terrible school when there are alternatives that are better and cheaper, which is why I am for school choice. And as I cited earlier, only 26% disagree with me, including yourself.

You may not realize this, by when you remove funds from public schools so that kids can study in libraries or on their own, the end result is that some public schools will have to be shut down and funds to classrooms will be cut. Which administrators would you like to cut? Which school regulations are you looking to cut?

Quote:
As I stated earlier, the vast majority of my family and extended family have been living off gov't programs for decades.... not sure where you are going with that..

You noted that your friend had an alternative educational experience. The point was to make sure you are aware that your friend's family paid very little if anything in taxes and actually benefited from the tax dollars of others around the state and around the country. Broadening the tax base to include them would have likely resulted in a more difficult situation for their family.

Quote:
It's also a virtual certainty that 45% of households pay no income tax, yet his family did and still does. Most people "get more out of the tax system than they put in" ... only 20% pay 87% of income taxes lol

Given the child tax credits, the number of dependents, including his mom, and other deductions and credits they would have been eligible for, it's unlikely that they paid much, if anything, in federal income taxes.
MaxFly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2018, 11:10 PM   #124
MaxFly
Stylin' on you
 
MaxFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,019
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleverness
Hmm, I saw Thank You For Smoking years ago. And lying to people about their products should be fraud and illegal. And you are right; there should be a balance. But what I'm seeing is a lot of unnecessary regulation that causes competitive advantage and increased costs to consumers. The lawyer'd up America is way more regulated than the rest of the world.

America is certainly not more regulated than Europe, and when you look at the business practices of Chinese companies and all of the scandals around baby formula and plastic rice, you start to realize that, again, we have to strike a balance between competitive advantage and consumer protection. Yes, we have unnecessary regulations and regulations that are old and inefficient, but we also have companies in the US that are refusing to clean up their Superfund sites and others in the financial industry that go out of their way to take advantage of consumers until they are caught.

Quote:
Drug companies lobby against having to list all side effects in commercials? I actually think they like listing all their side effects. IMO they list so many that the public has become 'numb' tothem... almost like a 12-page terms of service to install a phone app or video game. Regulations have forced these companies to have super long terms of agreement that are so crazy you'd need a lawyer to even know what you're signing. Btw, we have healthcare providers like physicians and pharmacists to tell us about the medication before we take it.

If you recall, there was a time companies were not allowed to advertise drugs on television. The compromise was that they could market their drugs, but they had to note the side effects. A company being forced to list all of the side effects of a drug protects the consumer. Yes, it looks like a long list that people will easily ignore, but the onus is now on people to pay attention to the side effects that they were told about and the list of side effects balances the marketing of the drug. Relying on your healthcare provider to tell you about the side effects of a drug sounds fine until you realize how many drugs some people are on and the fact that some healthcare providers don't carry out medication reconciliation. Listing side effects is an extra safeguard for the patient and consumer.

Quote:
Google works hand and hand with gov't, but they can be hacked too. How is regulation and oversight going to help Facebook/Google from being hacked? The main problem isn't regulation; it's the fact they're servers are centralized. Decentralization of data via blockchain will help fix this in the future; let's hope gov't doesn't slow down that innovation too much.

Regulation, or at least accountability, places more stringent expectations on how these companies manage people's data. It's one thing to tell people that their data was hacked, but it's another matter entirely to have to sit before Congress and explain it in front of the American people. If you recall, Facebook used to share people's data with third parties without their awareness or consent. They've cut back on those practices as they have found themselves facing more scrutiny from government. Google is facing all sorts of regulatory issues in Europe... most of them about anti-competitive behavior.
MaxFly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2018, 10:29 PM   #125
Cleverness
GSW Fan Since the 90s
 
Cleverness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,687
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFly
You may not realize this, by when you remove funds from public schools so that kids can study in libraries or on their own, the end result is that some public schools will have to be shut down and funds to classrooms will be cut. Which administrators would you like to cut? Which school regulations are you looking to cut?



You noted that your friend had an alternative educational experience. The point was to make sure you are aware that your friend's family paid very little if anything in taxes and actually benefited from the tax dollars of others around the state and around the country. Broadening the tax base to include them would have likely resulted in a more difficult situation for their family.



Given the child tax credits, the number of dependents, including his mom, and other deductions and credits they would have been eligible for, it's unlikely that they paid much, if anything, in federal income taxes.


Go talk to great teachers who are leaving the profession. The #1 reason why they are leaving is not pay; it's the unnecessary administration and regulation.

The first article when you google "why are teachers leaving the profession" is https://www.weareteachers.com/why-te...he-profession/ and it's worth a read


I can get into the details of what specific administration I would change, cut budget from, cut regulation from, etc, but the best and most realistic answer to fixing our school system is school choice. This will take care of a lot of unnecessary spending. It was also lead to improving academic outcomes. Check out this article: https://fee.org/articles/3-reasons-t...school-choice/ I copied and pasted it below

1. School choice improves academic outcomes and saves taxpayers money.
Despite some opponents’ claims, school choice does not seek to privatize public schools; rather, it seeks to open them up to competition from private schools by giving families the financial ability to attend such schools. Solid evidence suggests that attending private schools improves academic performance.

A review of the evidence on the differing educational outcomes between public and private schools finds that “the private sector outperforms the public sector in the overwhelming majority of cases.” In line with the findings of this research, a meta-analysis of 90 studies on the performance of private religious schools in comparison to public schools found that “attending private religious schools is associated with the highest level of academic achievement among the three school types, [public school, public charter school, and private religious school] even when sophisticated controls are used to adjust for socioeconomic status.” (emphasis added)

Allowing students to use vouchers to attend private schools would increase educational performance and attainment. Greg Forster, a senior fellow with the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, summarized the findings of studies on existing school choice programs in a review of the empirical evidence:

Twelve empirical studies have examined academic outcomes for school choice participants using random assignment, the “gold standard” of social science. Of these, 11 find that choice improves student outcomes — six that all students benefit and five that some benefit and some are not affected. One study finds no visible impact. No empirical study has found a negative impact.

Six empirical studies have examined school choice’s fiscal impact on taxpayers. All six find that school choice saves money for taxpayers. No empirical study has found a negative fiscal impact.

2. School choice reduces racial segregation and benefits the poor.
School choice has been shown to benefit minorities and the poor substantially.
One Harvard study examined how a school choice program in New York affected college enrollment. According to the authors, “Using a voucher to attend private school increased the overall college enrollment rate among African Americans by 24 percent.” Additionally, the National Bureau of Economic Research found that among poor children, school choice increased secondary school completion rates by 15–20 percent.

Eight empirical studies have examined how school choice relates to racial segregation in schools. According to Forster, “Of these, seven find that school choice moves students from more segregated schools into less segregated schools. One finds no net effect on segregation from school choice. No empirical study has found that [school] choice increases racial segregation.”


3. School choice increases the quality of public schools.
Some opponents of school choice fear that it could lead to the financial starvation of public schools, thereby worsening their performance. However, of the 23 studies that examine how school choice affects academic outcomes in public schools, 22 find that choice improves outcomes. The empirical evidence confirms the theory: competition leads to superior results.


Conclusion
The evidence clearly demonstrates that school choice programs are desirable and ought to be pursued on a larger scale. While opponents may try to portray school choice programs as “pro-corporate education reform,” the reality is that these programs enable students, including the poorest kids, to achieve more than they could have in conventional public schools — and at a lower cost to taxpayers. It’s hard to understand how anyone could oppose a marketplace in education.

^ I honestly don't understand why you're still opposed to it. Others who oppose are the unions and the bureaucrats in charge of the money, so it makes sense for them to oppose it.

Once again, the money is taken from taxpayers, given to politicians and special interest who take a cut for themselves, then passed to a bureaucracy that takes care of itself first, then finally that bureaucracy decides what is best for your children. And they want to keep this monopoly around because they want to keep power. It is so wasteful and inefficient. We should give some of the power back to the parents and students and put them in more control of their life.



As for my friend's family vs other people and total taxes paid vs benefit, you know that's an unfair comparison and an entirely different discussion. It'd be a waste of time to compare raw tax dollars of how much an individual pays/takes when a) 1% of the country pays half the income tax and b) it's difficult to determine how much one is paying in taxes when so many taxes are paid indirectly. For example, who pays the payroll tax? The employee or the employer?

If you want to compare families, then a better comparison would be to compare his family to other families the same size. You'll find that his family actually benefited less than most because they saved taxpayers $600,000+ simply by not attending public schools. Plus, they weren't on Medicaid, food stamps, Section 8, or other gov't programs such as paid school breakfast/lunch. And lastly, his parents provided an amazing education to their children - a great gift to society. Like I said earlier, my friend finished Calculus 4... at 16 years old. He wouldn't have done that in the public schools. He's now making $200,000-$250,000/yr, paying more than his fair share in taxes. It's a wonderful contribution to society and I wish we stopped disincentivizing good behavior such as theirs.
Cleverness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2018, 10:56 PM   #126
Cleverness
GSW Fan Since the 90s
 
Cleverness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,687
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFly
America is certainly not more regulated than Europe, and when you look at the business practices of Chinese companies and all of the scandals around baby formula and plastic rice, you start to realize that, again, we have to strike a balance between competitive advantage and consumer protection. Yes, we have unnecessary regulations and regulations that are old and inefficient, but we also have companies in the US that are refusing to clean up their Superfund sites and others in the financial industry that go out of their way to take advantage of consumers until they are caught.

If you recall, there was a time companies were not allowed to advertise drugs on television. The compromise was that they could market their drugs, but they had to note the side effects. A company being forced to list all of the side effects of a drug protects the consumer. Yes, it looks like a long list that people will easily ignore, but the onus is now on people to pay attention to the side effects that they were told about and the list of side effects balances the marketing of the drug. Relying on your healthcare provider to tell you about the side effects of a drug sounds fine until you realize how many drugs some people are on and the fact that some healthcare providers don't carry out medication reconciliation. Listing side effects is an extra safeguard for the patient and consumer.


Regulation, or at least accountability, places more stringent expectations on how these companies manage people's data. It's one thing to tell people that their data was hacked, but it's another matter entirely to have to sit before Congress and explain it in front of the American people. If you recall, Facebook used to share people's data with third parties without their awareness or consent. They've cut back on those practices as they have found themselves facing more scrutiny from government. Google is facing all sorts of regulatory issues in Europe... most of them about anti-competitive behavior.


Some places in Europe have more regulation than us in certain sectors, but not all. It's not worth debating though, since I think you were just pointing out that the US isn't the most regulated place in the world. I'll say it again; I agree that there should continue to be a balance.



@ bold.. Hmm, I would not say "rely" on healthcare provider. Instead, I wish people relied on themselves a bit more to talk to a healthcare provider about it. Is it that hard to take a tiny bit of responsibility for your own healthcare and what medications you are taking? I'm sure in the northeast you guys have easily accessible pharmacists 7 days a week. Plus, the pharmacy gives you sheets and will consult you on your prescription 100% of the time you ask for a consultation.

I agree they need to list side effects. All I was saying is that listing every single side effect on a TV ad drowns out the few main side effects of the drug and now every drug on TV seems to have the same side effects. A better way would be to list to top 3 most common and one severe adverse reaction.

Google and big tech are definitely a problem. One could argue they are worse than Russia when it comes to interfering with our elections. Did you know Google had a big company meeting right after the presidential election, it was secretly taped/leaked, and almost everyone was crying because "they" lost? Did you know they are working with China to help create a censored search engine over there? Scary stuff, but I digress...

I agree with "accountability places more stringent expectations on how these companies manage people's data." It is funny that you cite the senate hearing with Facebook. Mike Zuckerberg kept saying, "Senator, I don't know, but I'll have my team get back to you." Why didn't any senator ask, "well, can't you just call them on your cell phone?" And I bet he's hardly gotten back to any senator and none of the senators even care or remember anyway.
Cleverness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 12:59 PM   #127
SomeBlackDude
Good college starter
 
SomeBlackDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,463
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

almost there, boyos. we're at $981 bills. one more month should do the trick.

october deficit rose to $100.5 billion. up 60% over oct '17.

Quote:
Steven Dennis
‏@StevenTDennis

On Jan. 24, 2017, 4 days into Trump's term, CBO projected a $601 billion deficit for fiscal 2019.

CBO now projects a $981 billion deficit for FY19.
What happened?

CBO's FY19 revenue projections dropped $243B mostly because of the tax bill. And spending projections are up $136B.

Quote:
The October report showed that among the biggest increases in spending from a year ago was in interest payments on the public debt, which totaled $32 billion, 30 percent more than a year ago.

Quote:
US debt payments will soon exceed military spending

As reported by The Wall Street Journal citing data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the U.S. will spend more on interest than it spends on Medicaid in 2020, in 2023 interest spending will exceed national defense spending, and by 2025 it will spend more on interest than on all nondefense discretionary programs combined.
SomeBlackDude is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 01:10 PM   #128
MaxFly
Stylin' on you
 
MaxFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,019
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeBlackDude
almost there, boyos. we're at $981 bills. one more month should do the trick.

october deficit rose to $100.5 billion. up 60% over oct '17.

I doubt we'll reach a trillion; the new budget has plans to cut forest management funds and fire fighting... so that should help.
MaxFly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 01:14 PM   #129
SomeBlackDude
Good college starter
 
SomeBlackDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,463
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFly
I doubt we'll reach a trillion; the new budget has plans to cut forest management funds and fire fighting... so that should help.

every little bit counts.
SomeBlackDude is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 01:47 PM   #130
Real Men Wear Green
Please clap.
 
Real Men Wear Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 23,627
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

I am disappointed in the lack of a thread discussing the Queen ordering the beheading of that aide no one ever uses the name of that works for the national security advisers that Trump doesn't listen to.

Bonus points if you can work in a Michael Bolton joke.
Real Men Wear Green is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 03:53 PM   #131
r15mohd
College superstar
 
r15mohd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,731
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Men Wear Green
I am disappointed in the lack of a thread discussing the Queen ordering the beheading of that aide no one ever uses the name of that works for the national security advisers that Trump doesn't listen to.

Bonus points if you can work in a Michael Bolton joke.


saw this one a while back, and with Melania becoming upset of airplane seating (IIRC)...it seems to fit the role. tho I dont see why she would complain if seated next to her husband, Trump, as he'd reach for the carry-on anyways


Quote:
An airplane was about to crash. There were 4 passengers on board, but only 3 parachutes.

The 1st passenger said, 'I am Steph Curry, the best NBA basketball player. The Warriors and my millions of fans need me, and I can't afford to die.' So he took the 1st pack and left the plane.

The 2nd passenger, Donald Trump, said, 'I am the newly-elected US President, and I am the smartest President in American history, so my people don't want me to die.' He took the 2nd pack and jumped out of the plane.

The 3rd passenger, the Pope, said to the 4th passenger, a 10-year-old schoolboy, 'My son, I am old and don't have many years left, you have more years ahead so I will sacrifice my life and let you have the last parachute.'

The little boy said, 'That's okay, Your Holiness, there's a parachute left for you. America 's smartest President took my schoolbag...
r15mohd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 02:55 AM   #132
Cleverness
GSW Fan Since the 90s
 
Cleverness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,687
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeBlackDude
almost there, boyos. we're at $981 bills. one more month should do the trick.

october deficit rose to $100.5 billion. up 60% over oct '17.

Damn. Trump channeling his inner-Obama now.

Obama still holding onto the lead tho

Will Trump pass his $1.3 trillion deficit in 2011?


Thanks to Obama's $20 T debt plan, we now spend $350+ B /yr in interest alone

No worries SomeBlackDude, I'm sure someone else will explain how none of that counts. :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFly
I doubt we'll reach a trillion; the new budget has plans to cut forest management funds and fire fighting... so that should help.

Obama cut federal wildfire management appropriations most of his years; didn't seem to help

Jerry Brown (D), CA, cut forest and fire protection in last year; didn't seem to help
Cleverness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2018, 03:09 AM   #133
MaxFly
Stylin' on you
 
MaxFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,019
Default Re: The Road to Trillion Dollar Federal Deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleverness
Thanks to Obama's $20 T debt plan, we now spend $350+ B /yr in interest alone

I know, right? Can you believe Obama started 2 wars and a recession... and had no plan to pay for them? The nerve.

Quote:
Obama cut federal wildfire management appropriations most of his years; didn't seem to help

Jerry Brown (D), CA, cut forest and fire protection in last year; didn't seem to help

We should cut some more stuff. Let's start by cutting more taxes.
MaxFly is online now   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:


Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 PM.






NBA BASKETBALL FORUM KEY LINKS:

NBA Basketball

NBA Rumors

Basketball Blog

NBA Videos

Search Site

FOLLOW US
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram
YouTube
















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy