You never go full retard. You're not going to get many nibbles for this bait. Go back to Trolling 101.
You should understand, the notion of abolishing the senate is nothing new. It was attempted in 1911 and it led to direct-election of senators. If you want reform, you have to push reform.
the primary purpose for the senate is very much still valid — putting the brakes on a fickle electorate by ensuring that no more than one third of that house can change in a single election cycle.
If that's the primary purpose (and I'm not sure it's a worthy purpose), it has failed utterly. Not only is the Senate anachronism, but it is an aristocracy enshrined, which has no place in a democratic republic.
Honestly, let's look at the 100 currently sitting senators: Who would you trust more, your fellow citizens or those jackoffs. Personally, I have a hell of a lot more faith in the voters than I do in a club of wealthy patricians who are at the beck and call of large donors. The top two current senators in terms of money taken from super pacs are from Nevada and Montana. States that have relatively small populations. What does that tell you.
Shut it down. There are better ways of diluting pure democracy than a goddamn senate.
Decade over decade, those three outlets have proven to be reliable, and when they've gotten it wrong, they've been held accountable. They print retractions, corrections. There is much to criticize with those outlets, but the answer is not to get all your news from "eaglefreedom.ru" or "breitbart.com". You know where you don't see retractions or corrections? Fake news sites.
I know we've had a few years now of the right-wing corporate media working overtime to convince everyone that no facts can be trusted, and you shouldn't believe your own eyes. Don't be fooled.
'What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening' -- Donald J. Trump, July 24, 2018
Without them, I'd never have seen the Geiko Gekko story.
My favorite commercials are those Lincoln ads with Matthew McConaughey, where he plays a man who is slowly going insane. Ever since I realized that's what was going on, I can see that's the only interpretation that makes sense.
How about free? Or perhaps they can pay people to watch ads.
You know, you're absolutely right. If network television could thrive for decades by giving people free programming paid for via commercials, so can Netflix.
So forget it. Netflix. If you add commercials, it better be gratis.
Netflix could create a lower priced tier with commercials. It could start at $5 a month for 1 concurrent stream for extremely price sensitive customers.
Tell that to the OMB... I've seen their projections. Are they lying about this?
Yes, they are lying about it. The OMB is led by Nick Mulvaney, a Trump appointee (and now his chief of staff). Are you really surprised to learn that he's a lying sack of shit? Do you believe the OMB was ever some down-the-middle non-partisan umpire who only "called 'em like they sees 'em"? They've always been a political organization.
Social Security is tracking to insolvency in about a decade, unless you expect to up the death rate
This is what I mean about the lie. The death rate is already going to go up because baby boomers are dying off - more every day. And guess what? They're not making any more baby boomers. When the largest age cohort enters their golden years, they naturally start to die off. When they're gone, that big lump in the middle of the snake goes away and then Social Security becomes solvent again. All the right-wing jackoff Social Security hand-wringing is based on the notion that there will always be baby boomers.
I suppose the "solution" is to move the retirement age to the right, alot.
Not at all. If any solution is necessary, we can just remove the cap on payroll taxes, so someone making $500,000/year pays the same percentage as someone making $55,000/year. Problem solved permanently with no increase in retirement age.
We should be looking to make the retirement age younger, and increase benefits, not cut them. It's doable, but first we have to destroy myths like "Social Security Crisis".
Not to the deficit because they are "off budget", but it will add to the national debt when it runs out of it's trust fund.
So, your assertion that entitlements currently "add to the debt" has now changed to "will someday add to the debt".;
But even that significantly different assertion you are now making is dependent on the notion that no baby boomer will ever die. The entire "entitlements are a time bomb" campaign has been predicated on falsehood.
Social Security is NOT collecting more than it spends anymore.
Yes, it is. Any money paid from the Treasury to Social Security has been interest on money that the Treasury borrowed from Social Security to begin with.
So indeed, not only does Social Security NOT make the deficit bigger, it has actually kept the deficit from being even bigger than it is.
It's like blaming your kids for wasting money on tuition when you've actually blown their tuition money on hookers and blow. Despite what you've read on right-wing and libertarian websites that are opposed to the very idea of Social Security, it does not add to the deficit.
Seems that he failed in doing that.. Getting us out of the recession...
Recession has a very specific meaning. By definition, yes, the recession ended at the end of 2009/beginning of 2010. The structural problems that have been in place since Reaganomics are still in effect, so it's not what you would really call "fixed", but it's not in recession, and jobs were adding and there was economic growth.
Yea, and now you don't want to spend 5.7 Billion as if it's going to kill us after 22 Trillion didn't..
No, the reason I don't want to see 5.7 billion spent is because there's absolutely no plan for what kind of wall Donald wants to build, or where, or when, and he still hasn't spend the money he was given last year for the wall.
It's a boondoggle. A flim-flam. And you don't give someone money who's up to his eyeballs in corruption and crime. If it wasn't an emergency during the two years that Republicans controlled all of congress, then it's not an emergency now. Trump could have had his 5.7 billion at any time, but he didn't seem to think it was important.
So yes, this is partisan on my part. I'm partisan to not giving criminal organizations money to build themselves monuments to racism.
Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt?
Yes, but he did have the excuse of trying to get us out of the worst recession in US history. Recessions are when you're supposed to go into deficit spending.
So far, the Democrats have refused to even consider writing a budget.
The president is the one who is supposed to submit the budget in the US system. Don't they teach US civics over there?
There's no way you can blame Trump - he's not the one refusing to make a deal.
The Democratic House has already passed several bills to reopen the government in the past couple of weeks. The Senate GOP won't even allow a vote on them.
You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".
In the middle of last century, the 45 rpm record did the exact same thing. Before that, pop songs would have long intros and the singer might not come in until the third chorus. For example, here's a Tommy Dorsey/Sinatra record from the 40's that was a big hit (it's a cool tune, so you should listen to it):
It has been said that 3 minutes should be the outer limit for a pop song. One of the greatest records of all time had an average song length of about 2 minutes, and many songs much shorter. Here is a great song from The Ramones' self-titled first record that comes in at exactly 1:30. No fat, no filler, all pumping pure pop goodness.
Did anyone NOT think Disney would muck up the Star Wars franchise? They made a huge investment and wanted to score big, fast. They got a little slapdash about the whole thing and didn't put in the care and love required.
Disney is not a good company. They are to good movies what Monstanto is to good food.
This is great news. Now if I could only get back my '82 Jetta so I could have something to play the cassettes on. I spent two weeks' pay on the sound system in that car and it fuckin' rocked. The car didn't really run all that great, and the heater didn't work, and one of the windows only went halfway down, but man I could bomb the bass in that little fucker. I loved that car. I'll bet if you could vacuum the upholstery you'd find a half-oz of some pretty decent weed I dropped there. It was green and had a 1.7 liter engine that supposedly could put out 74 horsepower, but I'm pretty sure most of those horses were pretty sick, because I really had to stand on that accelerator to merge onto the Kennedy Expressway. Good times.
Now, if you wanna bring back my '75 Honda Civic wagon (also green) with the 8-track player, you'd really have something. I went away to grad school in New York in that bitch and I remember there was a track break smack in the middle of Heroin off Lou Reed Live. It used to drive me crazy. He'd sing "when the blood begins to..." and there'd be like this thunk and 10 second pause while switching tracks before he'd sing, "...flow". It was one of like 4 tapes I had when I left Chicago.
Trump was elected to take immigration and the economy out of the trash
Did you know that the amount of illegal border crossings have increased under Donald Trump? Did you know that illegal border crossings fell to an historic low under Obama? Did you know that the trajectory of the economy has been exactly the same in Trump's first year as in Obama's last two years? Unfortunately the economic growth in this last year of Trump's presidency has slowed.
If "immigration and the economy" are your metric for Trump success, you are admitting that he is a miserable failure.
Slashdot Mirror
You should understand, the notion of abolishing the senate is nothing new. It was attempted in 1911 and it led to direct-election of senators. If you want reform, you have to push reform.
https://www.senate.gov/artandh...
If that's the primary purpose (and I'm not sure it's a worthy purpose), it has failed utterly. Not only is the Senate anachronism, but it is an aristocracy enshrined, which has no place in a democratic republic.
Honestly, let's look at the 100 currently sitting senators: Who would you trust more, your fellow citizens or those jackoffs. Personally, I have a hell of a lot more faith in the voters than I do in a club of wealthy patricians who are at the beck and call of large donors. The top two current senators in terms of money taken from super pacs are from Nevada and Montana. States that have relatively small populations. What does that tell you.
Shut it down. There are better ways of diluting pure democracy than a goddamn senate.
We already don't need the Senate, and there are already proposals on the table to push a constitutional amendment dissolving the senate.
We do not need a "House of Lords" in the United States.
Decade over decade, those three outlets have proven to be reliable, and when they've gotten it wrong, they've been held accountable. They print retractions, corrections. There is much to criticize with those outlets, but the answer is not to get all your news from "eaglefreedom.ru" or "breitbart.com". You know where you don't see retractions or corrections? Fake news sites.
I know we've had a few years now of the right-wing corporate media working overtime to convince everyone that no facts can be trusted, and you shouldn't believe your own eyes. Don't be fooled.
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
My favorite commercials are those Lincoln ads with Matthew McConaughey, where he plays a man who is slowly going insane. Ever since I realized that's what was going on, I can see that's the only interpretation that makes sense.
You know, you're absolutely right. If network television could thrive for decades by giving people free programming paid for via commercials, so can Netflix.
So forget it. Netflix. If you add commercials, it better be gratis.
I'd go $2/month.
Yes, they are lying about it. The OMB is led by Nick Mulvaney, a Trump appointee (and now his chief of staff). Are you really surprised to learn that he's a lying sack of shit? Do you believe the OMB was ever some down-the-middle non-partisan umpire who only "called 'em like they sees 'em"? They've always been a political organization.
This is what I mean about the lie. The death rate is already going to go up because baby boomers are dying off - more every day. And guess what? They're not making any more baby boomers. When the largest age cohort enters their golden years, they naturally start to die off. When they're gone, that big lump in the middle of the snake goes away and then Social Security becomes solvent again. All the right-wing jackoff Social Security hand-wringing is based on the notion that there will always be baby boomers.
Not at all. If any solution is necessary, we can just remove the cap on payroll taxes, so someone making $500,000 /year pays the same percentage as someone making $55,000/year. Problem solved permanently with no increase in retirement age.
We should be looking to make the retirement age younger, and increase benefits, not cut them. It's doable, but first we have to destroy myths like "Social Security Crisis".
So, your assertion that entitlements currently "add to the debt" has now changed to "will someday add to the debt".;
But even that significantly different assertion you are now making is dependent on the notion that no baby boomer will ever die. The entire "entitlements are a time bomb" campaign has been predicated on falsehood.
Yes, it is. Any money paid from the Treasury to Social Security has been interest on money that the Treasury borrowed from Social Security to begin with.
So indeed, not only does Social Security NOT make the deficit bigger, it has actually kept the deficit from being even bigger than it is.
It's like blaming your kids for wasting money on tuition when you've actually blown their tuition money on hookers and blow. Despite what you've read on right-wing and libertarian websites that are opposed to the very idea of Social Security, it does not add to the deficit.
Recession has a very specific meaning. By definition, yes, the recession ended at the end of 2009/beginning of 2010. The structural problems that have been in place since Reaganomics are still in effect, so it's not what you would really call "fixed", but it's not in recession, and jobs were adding and there was economic growth.
No, the reason I don't want to see 5.7 billion spent is because there's absolutely no plan for what kind of wall Donald wants to build, or where, or when, and he still hasn't spend the money he was given last year for the wall.
It's a boondoggle. A flim-flam. And you don't give someone money who's up to his eyeballs in corruption and crime. If it wasn't an emergency during the two years that Republicans controlled all of congress, then it's not an emergency now. Trump could have had his 5.7 billion at any time, but he didn't seem to think it was important.
So yes, this is partisan on my part. I'm partisan to not giving criminal organizations money to build themselves monuments to racism.
Entitlements were never ON budget. Social Security and Medicare are entirely separate programs paid for through payroll deductions.
Did you know what Social Security is still taking in more than it's paying out? That there is still a surplus?
Entitlements don't impact the budget.
Yes, but he did have the excuse of trying to get us out of the worst recession in US history. Recessions are when you're supposed to go into deficit spending.
He does get something. There's over a billion dollars for border security, on top of the money he got last year and still hasn't spent.
You mean last year when Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress?
Oops, not billion...$4.407 trillion. It's easy to make mistakes with such large numbers.
The president is the one who is supposed to submit the budget in the US system. Don't they teach US civics over there?
The Democratic House has already passed several bills to reopen the government in the past couple of weeks. The Senate GOP won't even allow a vote on them.
You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".
Who's zooming whom?
In the middle of last century, the 45 rpm record did the exact same thing. Before that, pop songs would have long intros and the singer might not come in until the third chorus. For example, here's a Tommy Dorsey/Sinatra record from the 40's that was a big hit (it's a cool tune, so you should listen to it):
https://youtu.be/M_EPgmVaLWA
I wish some Tommy Dorsey/Sinatra tunes could have made it into the Fallout games. The song still comes in at 3:19, but the structure is pure 78 rpm.
Once the 45 rpm came out, it was one measure and the singer comes in. Verse/chorus/verse/chorus. Not even a bridge sometimes.
https://youtu.be/-eHJ12Vhpyc
It has been said that 3 minutes should be the outer limit for a pop song. One of the greatest records of all time had an average song length of about 2 minutes, and many songs much shorter. Here is a great song from The Ramones' self-titled first record that comes in at exactly 1:30. No fat, no filler, all pumping pure pop goodness.
https://youtu.be/K6GAGdBiJF0
In the US, we call them, "Trump voters". But in their defense, a large number of them appear to be addicted to opioids, bless their hearts.
https://jamanetwork.com/journa...
That's how we do it in the Soviet USSA.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and...
Did anyone NOT think Disney would muck up the Star Wars franchise? They made a huge investment and wanted to score big, fast. They got a little slapdash about the whole thing and didn't put in the care and love required.
Disney is not a good company. They are to good movies what Monstanto is to good food.
The data would suggest otherwise.
This is great news. Now if I could only get back my '82 Jetta so I could have something to play the cassettes on. I spent two weeks' pay on the sound system in that car and it fuckin' rocked. The car didn't really run all that great, and the heater didn't work, and one of the windows only went halfway down, but man I could bomb the bass in that little fucker. I loved that car. I'll bet if you could vacuum the upholstery you'd find a half-oz of some pretty decent weed I dropped there. It was green and had a 1.7 liter engine that supposedly could put out 74 horsepower, but I'm pretty sure most of those horses were pretty sick, because I really had to stand on that accelerator to merge onto the Kennedy Expressway. Good times.
Now, if you wanna bring back my '75 Honda Civic wagon (also green) with the 8-track player, you'd really have something. I went away to grad school in New York in that bitch and I remember there was a track break smack in the middle of Heroin off Lou Reed Live. It used to drive me crazy. He'd sing "when the blood begins to..." and there'd be like this thunk and 10 second pause while switching tracks before he'd sing, "...flow". It was one of like 4 tapes I had when I left Chicago.
Did you know that the amount of illegal border crossings have increased under Donald Trump? Did you know that illegal border crossings fell to an historic low under Obama? Did you know that the trajectory of the economy has been exactly the same in Trump's first year as in Obama's last two years? Unfortunately the economic growth in this last year of Trump's presidency has slowed.
If "immigration and the economy" are your metric for Trump success, you are admitting that he is a miserable failure.