[jlisenbe]

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.

[paraclete]

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

[jlisenbe]

telling us to pay for our own defence is offensive

That is a really weird idea.

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.

[paraclete]

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

[Athos]

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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

I did so many times and continue to do so.

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.

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.

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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.

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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.)

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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.

[Athos]

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.

[jlisenbe]

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.

[Athos]

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?

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.

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.

[jlisenbe]

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.

[Athos]

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!