Trump signs $1.3 trillion spending bill despite earlier threat to veto

[Jacque67 7,328]

Ann Coulter joined drunken Jeanine on her Fox show "Justice" (a favourite nighttime show of Don's) and said she was "deeply depressed" regards the bill.

[JimandChristy 1,689]

The tea party protests/crowds are strangely absent. Wonder why that is? They showed up after Obama was Inaugurated.

[Póg mo 1,749]

1 minute ago, JimandChristy said:

The tea party protests/crowds are strangely absent. Wonder why that is? They showed up after Obama was Inaugurated.

They'll be back, Donnie will soon enough be cast out, and the tea party will be back in force to save America from deficits. The spectre of tax and spend Democrats will once again be reserected. Rinse and repeat. 

[Dashinka 24,767]

3 hours ago, JimandChristy said:

The tea party protests/crowds are strangely absent. Wonder why that is? They showed up after Obama was Inaugurated.

I think Obama neutered them with his IRS.

3 hours ago, Póg mo said:

They'll be back, Donnie will soon enough be cast out, and the tea party will be back in force to save America from deficits. The spectre of tax and spend Democrats will once again be reserected. Rinse and repeat. 

Interesting how that works on all sides in politics.

[TBoneTX 46,060]

Trump signed his own back-stabbing.  This bill was the legislative equivalent of the Mueller commission.  In signing it, he got almost nothing that his supporters wanted, and there's apparently a little note in the bill that budget issues will not be revisited before the midterm elections.  The Swamp Establishment -- of both parties -- emerged victorious in their goal of neutralizing this president with an eye toward forcing him out.

Edited March 25, 2018 by TBoneTX

[bcking 3,157]

8 hours ago, Póg mo said:

They'll be back, Donnie will soon enough be cast out, and the tea party will be back in force to save America from deficits. The spectre of tax and spend Democrats will once again be reserected. Rinse and repeat. 

What's better?

 

Tax and Spend

 or

Spend and Spend

 

[jg121783 3,921]

23 minutes ago, bcking said:

What's better?

 

Tax and Spend

 or

Spend and Spend

 

None of the above. While there are essential functions of the government that need to be funded beyond that most people know how to spend their own money better than the government does.

[Póg mo 1,749]

26 minutes ago, bcking said:

What's better?

 

Tax and Spend

 or

Spend and Spend

 

I have nothing against taxing and spending. I do have a big problem with those who think you can control big goverment by limiting a governments ability to raise revenue, by preventing taxes from being raised. Otherwise all we will end up with is huge public debt and failing government services. Republican conomies over the past thirty years seems to have been built around the idea of supposedly cutting enough wasteful spending, while having enough money left over for tax cuts, all the while increasingly military spending. This approch has been a unmitigated failure.

[Póg mo 1,749]

15 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

None of the above. While there are essential functions of the government that need to be funded beyond that most people know how to spend their own money better than the government does.

Sounds great in theory, but in reality not so much. I get it. Nobody likes paying taxes, and probably can manage their own finances better than the government. However, I feel that so long as Joe public is not directly on the hook for government spending, they probably won't be too concerned about government borrowing. Also, important things such as infrastructure require large scale investment, which is typically beyond the ability of individuals to cover. The private sector only cares about profits, and isn't going to be willing to fund important things that important for society as a whole to have.

 

[Póg mo 1,749]

Limiting any governments ability to raise taxation, invariably means that during downturns in the economy, the government will be either forced to cut essential government services, or increase revenue through other means. Increased borrowing or all kinds of new statutory fees. 

[JimandChristy 1,689]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I think Obama neutered them with his IRS.

Interesting how that works on all sides in politics.

Obama must've been a magician! He stopped hundreds of people from marching on Washington. Obviously Donnie isn't as effective because he's had several marches on him and he's been in President for less than two years. Seriously though we know why Tea Party showed up after Obama was Inaugurated. Let's just say if McCain got elected we would've never seen the Tea Party at all.

Edited March 25, 2018 by JimandChristy

[JimandChristy 1,689]

21 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

Limiting any governments ability to raise taxation, invariably means that during downturns in the economy, the government will be either forced to cut essential government services, or increase revenue through other means. Increased borrowing or all kinds of new statutory fees. 

It's a no brainier, you can't have a first world country without taxation, it's a necessity. The problem with some politicians is they can always find money (Borrow) to kill people but not to help people.

[Dashinka 24,767]

1 hour ago, Póg mo said:

I have nothing against taxing and spending. I do have a big problem with those who think you can control big goverment by limiting a governments ability to raise revenue, by preventing taxes from being raised. Otherwise all we will end up with is huge public debt and failing government services. Republican conomies over the past thirty years seems to have been built around the idea of supposedly cutting enough wasteful spending, while having enough money left over for tax cuts, all the while increasingly military spending. This approch has been a unmitigated failure.

So how does one limit big government?

[Dashinka 24,767]

7 minutes ago, JimandChristy said:

It's a no brainier, you can't have a first world country without taxation, it's a necessity. The problem with some politicians is they can always find money (Borrow) to kill people but not to help people.

What is this obsession with this mythical first world.  Since you seem to believe the US is not a first world country with a first world economy, why live here?  

[JimandChristy 1,689]

6 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

What is this obsession with this mythical first world.  Since you seem to believe the US is not a first world country with a first world economy, why live here?  

No the USA is a first world country but it seems to be determined to be the odd ball of the group.