A Failed Presidency -- The American Problem
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Good Luck
New member
Yea, that's the only riot to occur in the past several months. (Talk about willful ignorance....the lengths you liberals will go to to support your obviously failed economic policies is beyond comprehension.)
Just go to Google News and enter "austerity riots" You'll only get a few million hits. And they will NOT all - nor even a significant minority - be from Fox.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
yeah....right. now it is a question, before you were making a statement. when confronted with the dichotomy, pull this crap. you can't have it both ways. you have repeatedly used european economies/policies to "prove" how such policies would not work here. that is why you keep asking the question, because you want the answer to be:
it did not work for X euro country, therefore it will not work here
cut the bullshit dung
Good Luck
New member
Well, it would be going better if there weren't a bunch of selfish whiny liberals rioting. Too bad there are so many entitlist whiny children like you over there, firmly convinced the government owes them a middle-income standard of living just because they happen to exist.
Right. Those economies are just humming along. Pay no attention to the implosion underway and the shrinking, stalled and stalling economies. It would all be swell if not for those whiny leftists.
apple0154
MEOW
When people start to go hungry, lose a roof over their head when there is food and housing available then, yes, they will riot.
There is a difference between a food shortage, as in crop failure, and a shortage because one does not have sufficient funds to purchase it. There is a difference between a housing crisis, as in no structures available, and houses left empty to rot because one lacks sufficient funds. I suggest Conservatives learn and understand the difference before things get worse.
I wasn't making any comparison. I was responding to the comparison made by GL. He points to the Europeans as an example of what we should do. Well, how are the Europeans doing? Not terribly well.
Good Luck
New member
Well, you MIGHT have a point if it were not for the fact that the riots are taking place at the ANNOUNCEMENT of social services cutbacks. They've lost nothing real yet, their bellies are full, but they riot at the mere IDEA that they might have to make do with less. You're painting your emo argument with a brush of lies.
The facts are that European countries are faced with the reality that socialism DOES NOT FUCKING WORK. They have run their economies into the ground due to SPENDING, not cutbacks on spending. WHY would they be cutting back on spending if cuts were causing the problems? Your diatribe is completely illogical. The way this basic fact eludes you just proves how delusional you are in continued support for your failed ideology. All the countries you have expoused the past several years as showing how socialist programs work are GOING BROKE, just as the U.S. is GOING BROKE.
HOW many times did we hear from you "not one country with universal health care is going back to the old way?" Well, NOW they are going to austerity health care because they can no longer afford those programs you laud so loudly - an end result we have been warning your kind about for over a decade now. We stated "those programs are not sustainable!" and you laughed at us. Yet, despite the fact that these ever-so civilized hero-countries of yours have tax rates vastly higher than ours, despite the fact that they tax their rich in the way you want the U.S. to tax our rich, they are STILL going broke, because as we have said all along, those programs are simply NOT sustainable in the forms you demand over the long haul.
One major difference between the U.S. and Europe in expenditures is these self same countries have been depending on U.S. military for their security since WWII (even while demanding we keep it at home - a demand we should have complied with 40 years ago). We could temporarily ease our deficit spending by cutting way back on military spending. We'd still have to cut entitlement spending to get a balanced budget, but it is possible FOR THE SHORT TERM. But the additional facts are that social programs INVARIABLY grow faster than ANY economy could possibly keep up with - as Europe is now in the process of proving. And as such any balance achieved by gutting our military would be overwhelmed within a decade by expanded entitlement spending, in which case we'd be right back where we are today, except no large military to cut back.
Bottom line: you are wrong. Europe IS cutting back on their entitlement spending, WAY back, and the riots are a by product from people who have grown so dependent on them they cannot see a way to survive without them. (Sad that any human should be so dependent on their government's benevolence they cannot envision ways to provide for themselves.) And the fact the the other four AAA rated countries are cutting back while the U.S. is not is one of the major reason S&P has given for downgrading the U.S.
Last edited:
Good Luck
New member
And, as usual, your pathetically poor reading comprehension skills lead you WAY down the wrong track.
First, I was not the one who made the comparison - S&P did. I just pointed out that was what S&P was using as rationale for their credit downgrade: European AAA countries are cutting back spending enough to make an actual difference, while the U.S. is not. It is support for the argument that the move is in response to our making no significant spending cuts, as opposed to the liberal lie that it's all the republicans' fault for not raising taxes.
Second, (and again, your comprehension skills are showing their lack - or you are being willfully ignorant, or willfully lying) the severe cutbacks being made in said European countries entitlement spending budgets are in RESPONSE to their tanking economies, and NOT the cause of the tanking economies. The cutbacks are NOT the SOURCE of problems - except for the rioting by bunches of entitlist silver-spooners upset at the idea they might have to work a little harder - which again is not the direct fault of the spending cuts, but rather the over-reaction by those spoiled children who believe they are actually OWED other people's money.
Whatever you need to do to convince yourself. No one cares about the S&P downgrade of the US. You can try to convince people that revenues had nothing to do with it if you want, but it's a stupid argument.
Actually, the austerity measures were supposed to improve their economies. They didn't. Instead, many European economies are backsliding, stalling or stalled.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
good lord....yeah....no one cares, that is why the US market and other markets tanked on this news
Good Luck
New member
How about this: go in and count the number of times spending is mentioned, and compare that to the number of times revenues are mentioned. Clue: the word revenues occurs a total of two times in the entire document. Call it stupid, because you are too stupid to recognize reality, even when it slaps you in the face.
Once again, wrong - but that is your normal performance level. Bat 000 and call the other guys stupid.
Austerity measures were emplaced to prevent total economic melt down. I suppose, comparing the current situation to total melt down could be said to "improve the economies", but I'm not going to claim that, because I did not make the claim that austerity moves (by themselves) would mean improved economies. Not to mention, that it will take more than a few months for the spending changes to have any distinguishable effect, especially considering how much of and how long their economies were dependent on massive entitlement spending. It takes time to wean the addict off their dependencies.
But that, too, is the way it is with your type, isn't it. When the "bad guys" foment a plan, the positive effects are supposed to be instantaneous, or its proof of failure. Yet, when your heroes implement their policies, it's all about excuses why no significant good is occurring over two years later.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
You seem to have failed to include the initial report of him shooting at the Police, first.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
When people start to fear losing their belongs and life to the those same rioters, then rioters will start to die and pile up in the street.
But that's as justifiable as your presentation.
wanderingbear
Radical liberal
The only reason that Obama is haveing problems is because the republicans refuse to work with him on anything.
Annie
Not So Junior Member
You mean they refused to give him a 'clean ceiling' so he could continue spending without restraint? Where do you think the rating would be then?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
We've already established that you don't want the responsibility to run your own life, that you want the government to do that for you. You voted for The Obama to head the government. "The buck stops here." Now you refuse to have The Obama accept responsibility.
Are there any grown-ups in your world?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i guess you "forgot" about the dems chanting "dead on arrival" of the house bill sponsored by boehner....
Alias
Banned
poet
Banned
It was BS, and Boehner even knew it.