Ask Me Help Desk - Biden makes a bold move

We had plenty of alternatives. It's hard to tell people to not vote for pols who promise the moon. You have to be prepared to exercise some sense to vote for responsible candidates. "Vote for me. I'll cut spending, balance the budget, and ensure a secure future for your children and grandchildren," is not a popular slogan these days. It would be like an Aussie pol saying, "Vote for me. I'll raise your taxes in order to increase defense spending so we won't have to be so dependent on the Americans." Anyone running on that slogan??? Hmmm?

As I've said before, I'd like to have the chance to vote for a pres candidate who promises to cut defense spending, retire a couple of carriers, and tell the rest of the world (including Australia) to get off their lazy arses and prepare to pay for their own national defense rather than always counting on us. We have a mere handful of true allies. The rest of our "allies" are perfectly happy to lean on us rather than leaning on themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

As I've said before, I'd like to have the chance to vote for a pres candidate who promises to cut defense spending, retire a couple of carriers, and tell the rest of the world (including Australia) to get off their lazy arses and prepare to pay for their own national defense rather than always counting on us. We have a mere handful of true allies. The rest of our "allies" are perfectly happy to lean on us rather than leaning on themselves.

For the record, us aussies are your true allies and have fought in every war at your side even though sometimes we had no direct national interest, so telling us to pay for our own defence is offensive, we have bought weapons from you and expended our capital on your behalf, but we have become a little sick of the one way flow and now seek to reestablish our own military industries to counter the threats we see. Personally I see no point in antagonising the Chinese by sailing warships in close proximity to their coast, this doesn't mean I condone the Chinese attitudes. Gunboat diplomacy should be left in the nineteenth century, so yes a few less carriers particularly since your newer ones arn't up to scratch.

You think us lazy because we spend 2% of GDP on defense, but we have no need of a standing army of one million, what would these troops do? They would not be posted to places where we have no national interest. The British are foolish to send a fleet 12,000 miles from home, showing the flag in places where they have no national interest. Do they think the Chinese will back down in Hong Kong because they have appeared on the horizon? They would be better served in the Atlantic and Mediterranean keeping tabs on the Russians

Quote:

telling us to pay for our own defence is offensive

That is a really weird idea.

Quote:

You think us lazy because we spend 2% of GDP on defense, but we have no need of a standing army of one million, what would these troops do?

That's fine with me. I don't really care what you do, but don't plan on calling on us when you need help.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That is a really weird idea.

That's fine with me. I don't really care what you do, but don't plan on calling on us when you need help.

That is a really weird idea. The ANZUS treaty is much more likely to be invoked after an attack on the US

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

U.S. debt is currently 15X greater than its national "income", speaking of annual tax revenues. By any standard that is an equation fit for disaster.

If the debt to revenue ratio was a disaster, the disaster would have happened long ago. Did you criticize Trump for reducing revenue in the face of such debt?

Quote:

On a personal level, it would be equivalent to a man with an annual income of 60K having debt of 900K.

Your man is servicing the debt. Do the math.

Quote:

We are presently surviving due to interest rates held low by the same government that is 30 tril in debt, but that will not be the case forever, and when it changes, disaster will be at the front door.

Not necessarily. Interest rates are one factor among many. Revenue is another as is budgeting. Reallocating spending into programs with a better return is still another. Increasing taxation is an obvious method, but nobody likes doing that. Selective tax increases - putting more of a tax burden on the wealthy to ensure they contribute a fair share - can help.

Quote:

Even worse, we have allowed our current crop of corrupt, dishonest pols to discover the political wonderland of being able to impress us with their charitable qualities by spending money that they didn't even have to tax us to raise.

Taxation is the chief way revenue is raised.

Quote:

It is beyond amazing to me how gullible the American electorate can be in voting for dems and repubs alike who have no integrity.

Economics is not the strong suit of the typical American. What is far more amazing to me is how 74 million Americans can vote for such an obviously incompetent con-man as Trump. And how so many continue to support him as he rants and raves about the election being stolen. Nothing ever like it in the history of this country.

The economy grew during his administration but, as any thinking person knows, he had little or nothing to do with that. Cutting taxes for the rich and not understanding such basics as tariffs slowed the growth, not accelerated it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

For the record, us aussies are your true allies and have fought in every war at your side even though sometimes we had no direct national interest, so telling us to pay for our own defence is offensive, we have bought weapons from you and expended our capital on your behalf,

On this issue, I agree 100% with you as do the great majority of Americans.

Quote:

Did you criticize Trump for reducing revenue in the face of such debt?

I did so many times and continue to do so.

Quote:

Your man is servicing the debt. Do the math.

I just did the math. We are surviving because the feds are keeping interest rates low. Just wait a little while longer.

Quote:

What is far more amazing to me is how 74 million Americans can vote for such an obviously incompetent con-man as Trump.

Even more amazing is how 80 mil could vote for a senile dimwit like Biden.

As for the Aussies, I've already said I don't much care what they do as long as their defense ideas don't include depending on us to come bail them out in case of trouble while they spend a paltry 2% of GDP on defense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Even more amazing is how 80 mil could vote for a senile dimwit like Biden.

That senile dimwit has done more in 4 months than Trump did in 4 years.

He has??? Incredibly poor job growth in April. Spending money like there's no tomorrow. Many promises and few accomplishments. Crisis on the southern border. Trump had RECORD low unemployment his third year. So no, I'm not buying that absurd statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

He has??? ....... Trump had RECORD low unemployment his third year. So no, I'm not buying that absurd statement.

Trump had nothing except a self-propelled economy that was recovering from the Republican Great Recession - a recovery that Obama set in motion even though the McConnell Republicans tried to stop him at every juncture.

McConnell, McCarthy ( a disgrace to honorable Irish names), Lindsey, Taylor-Greene with the neanderthal DNA, and the rest of the spineless Republicans.

Quote:

Trump had nothing except a self-propelled economy that was recovering from the Republican Great Recession - a recovery that Obama set in motion even though the McConnell Republicans tried to stop him at every juncture.

Yes. I'm sure that's what it was. (Note: Sarcasm meter pegged.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Yes. I'm sure that's what it was. (Note: Sarcasm meter pegged.)

The truth is not affected by sarcasm. Noted is your lack of denial.

I deny it categorically. Obama had eight years and never had vibrant growth such as Trump had.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I deny it categorically. Obama had eight years and never had vibrant growth such as Trump had.

Trump's growth was the result of Obama's efforts. Trump did nothing to foster growth, although he did claim it at every opportunity.

Your memory is short. The Republicans did everything possible to stop Obama from initiating recovery in Congress. This was led by the traitor McConnell. That is why Obama was forced to issue executive orders.

You can't rewrite history like your Republicans are presently doing re the insurrection - led by McCarthy this time.

Quote:

Trump's growth was the result of Obama's efforts. Trump did nothing to foster growth, although he did claim it at every opportunity.

You keep saying that, but you have no evidence at all. Strictly liberal dem conjecture. It is absolutely true that Trump had RECORD LOW numbers for unemployment and saw significant improvements in personal income levels. Obama cannot come close to what Trump did, and there is your evidence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You keep saying that, but you have no evidence at all. Strictly liberal dem conjecture. It is absolutely true that Trump had RECORD LOW numbers for unemployment and saw significant improvements in personal income levels. Obama cannot come close to what Trump did, and there is your evidence.

You are missing the point. Why am I not surprised?

Trump came AFTER Obama started the recovery. Get it? AFTER! You keep mentioning employment but nothing else in the recovery. Why is that? Because you do not, or will not, understand the process of the recovery. Only the fringe right maintains what you do about the recovery. Broaden your horizons.

For evidence, read whatever you can find on the recovery. Then come back and tell us what you found. Don't ask me to tell you what to read. That's your typical evasion. You're a big boy now, do your own research.

Quote:

Trump came AFTER Obama started the recovery. Get it? AFTER! You keep mentioning employment but nothing else in the recovery. Why is that? Because you do not, or will not, understand the process of the recovery. Only the fringe right maintains what you do about the recovery. Broaden your horizons.

For evidence, read whatever you can find on the recovery. Then come back and tell us what you found. Don't ask me to tell you what to read. That's your typical evasion. You're a big boy now, do your own research.

Many words and no substance.

1. Record low unemployment.
2. Significant growth in personal income.
3. Significant growth in GDP, much better than under Obama.
4. Significant growth in stock values, critical to anyone either retired or nearing retirement.

You're still experiencing TDS. I'm told it does improve with time.

You will never see the day when I will ask you what to read. I've never done so and never will. You are the LAST person I would ask.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

1. Record low unemployment.
2. Significant growth in personal income.
3. Significant growth in GDP, much better than under Obama.
4. Significant growth in stock values, critical to anyone either retired or nearing retirement.

You still don't get it. These 4 points would have happened no matter who was president. Trump did nothing to help that. Where have you been the last 4 years?

Quote:

You're still experiencing TDS. I'm told it does improve with time.

When in doubt, get nasty. You are developing a major case of ADS. I'm sure you know what that is.

Quote:

You will never see the day when I will ask you what to read. I've never done so and never will. You are the LAST person I would ask.

Then you will never learn. Watch that blood pressure - your anger is showing again.

Quote:

You still don't get it. These 4 points would have happened no matter who was president. Trump did nothing to help that. Where have you been the last 4 years?

And again, it's pure conjecture on your part. Your TDS has not improved at all. Sad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And again, it's pure conjecture on your part. Your TDS has not improved at all. Sad.

It's the considered opinion of every normal individual on the planet. What in God's name is wrong with you? Why the blind attraction to Trump?

Your ADS is getting worse by the minute.

You would vote for Satan if he lied about being anti-abortion. Deny THAT!

Quote:

It's the considered opinion of every normal individual on the planet.

A completely stupid, idiotic statement that cannot be supported in any way. And you ask what's wrong with me?

Quote:

You would vote for Satan if he lied about being anti-abortion. Deny THAT!

OK. It gets wearisome, but I'll deny another dumb statement of yours. I deny THAT!

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

As for the Aussies, I've already said I don't much care what they do as long as their defense ideas don't include depending on us to come bail them out in case of trouble while they spend a paltry 2% of GDP on defense.

Just because we are not dimwitted enough to cause an arms race doesn't mean we have to match your spending

I don't care what you do so long as you take care of yourself and don't look to us to do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

A completely stupid, idiotic statement that cannot be supported in any way. And you ask what's wrong with me?

You have the prize for stupid and idiotic. Second place is nowhere in sight. You're a Trump supporter. 'Nuff said.

Try to control that ADS. It's getting the better of you.

Quote:

I deny THAT!

Then explain why you support Trump. I used Satan in place of Trump because I know you Bible thumpers believe in that myth. A useful fiction to cast your personal blame elsewhere. Trump personifies the myth. Deny THAT!

Can you explain why Trump's core base is filled with white evangelicals? No, I didn't think so.

Quote:

Then explain why you support Trump. I used Satan in place of Trump because I know you Bible thumpers believe in that myth. A useful fiction to cast your personal blame elsewhere. Trump personifies the myth. Deny THAT!

Wow. You took your drama pills today, didn't you? Well, of course I deny it.

I make statements I can support. You don't. I'm OK with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Well, of course I deny it.

Regarding #1:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/un...ent-low-trump/

As is usual, your own site supported my contention in #1. "According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the country's unemployment rate dropped to 3.5% in fall 2019 — the lowest rate in about 50 years, since December 1969." They went on to say that it was not due to Trump. They, of course, have no way of knowing that. All that can be said is that it happened under his admin. You can be sure that if it had happened under the Obama admin, they would have fallen all over themselves giving him credit.

You should know by now that I don't make statements I don't feel pretty sure I can support.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You should know by now that I don't make statements I don't feel pretty sure I can support.

No, you cherrypick and then lie.

Oh stop whining. Show me where I've done it and we can discuss it, but your lie about Gen. 3 is disgusting. You should be completely ashamed of yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I make statements I can support.

Then support this:

Can you explain why Trump's core base is filled with white evangelicals? No, I didn't think so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, ........ They (Snopes fact check site) went on to say that it (low unemployment) was not due to Trump.

Let me repeat that -- They went on to say that it (low unemployment) was not due to Trump.

NOT-DUE-TO-TRUMP!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't care what you do so long as you take care of yourself and don't look to us to do it.

We don't rely on you, your recent performances have been dismal, and have emboldened our mutual would be enemies

Quote:

JL said: They, of course, have no way of knowing that. All that can be said is that it happened under his admin. You can be sure that if it had happened under the Obama admin, they would have fallen all over themselves giving him credit.

Wasn't that (the bolded sentence) the point? Then you added your own interpretation to it to confirm your own "truth".

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

We don't rely on you, your recent performances have been dismal, and have emboldened our mutual would be enemies

You are right about our recent performances. That was entirely due to the moron some of us morons elected to the White House. We will get over it and are doing so with the old man in the WH now running things.

However, the rest of the world will long remember that America once elected a proto-fascist as the most powerful man in the world. God knows what he would have done had he been elected for a second term.

We now know his administration colluded with the Russians. Thank God he is no longer immune from prosecution (if he ever was - no thanks to the criminal AG Barr).

Yeh, Yeh, you had a bad trip getting on the Trump bus, but any failures are your own and have nothing to do with any supposed outside influence. I doubt you will do any better with a geriatric running things, he can't put two words together

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

he can't put two words together

Actually, he does quite well! Hope I'm that coherent when I hit that age.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Actually, he does quite well! Hope I'm that coherent when I hit that age.

I'm more than that age and I am quite coherent, if my speech stumbled like his I would be very concerned

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

I'm more than that age and I am quite coherent,

That's one of the funniest things you've ever said here. For lack of coherence, you win the prize. You can barely put two words together and make sense.

You have a marked inability to coherently reply to a question or comment. Not blaming you for that, old age affects some people more than others.

Biden btw has had a speech impediment since childhood and has fought mightily to overcome it. It still arises from time to time and does not reflect his mental abilities. If you were really concerned about him, you would know that and not criticize him for something he should be congratulated for.

(Later edit: Correction: you do not win the prize for lack of coherence, someone else here is in first place.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You should know by now that I don't make statements I don't feel pretty sure I can support.

Here's your chance: Can you explain why Trump's core base is filled with white evangelicals who, btw, were prominent at the Trump Insurrection?

Quote:

Here's your chance: Can you explain why Trump's core base is filled with white evangelicals who, btw, were prominent at the Trump Insurrection?

That's not my statement; it's your statement. It's up to you to support your own statements. I said I can support mine, not yours.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

You have a marked inability to coherently reply to a question or comment. Not blaming you for that, old age affects some people more than others.

I'm going to disagree with you, Athos. I've known 'Clete since the late '90s (??) when we answered questions on one of the first Q&A sites -- and when that one died, moved to others. He always has a unique perspective, being on the other side of the world and living in the Southern Hemisphere. I may even still have the reports I did (in 4th grade) on emus and platypuses! We learned what an interesting and varied continent Australia and its inhabitants are.