This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.





--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On 1/28/18 7:54 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

Naturally, someone has a different version:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

or http://alturl.com/vuqfb

Military spending is 16% according to those figures.

Dean Hoffman wrote:

On 1/28/18 7:54 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

Naturally, someone has a different version:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

or http://alturl.com/vuqfb

Military spending is 16% according to those figures.


Yup, apparently what I posted was misleading. Apologies.




--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 11:25:42 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.

If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb


The paltry amount spent on science and education is disgraceful. Of course, I have to wonder if scientific research for the military is included in those figures? o_O

[8~{} Uncle Observant Monster

On 01/28/2018 10:25 AM, wrote:
The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/b...-101/spending/

It's not exactly bull****, it's a carefully cherry-picked chart of
discretionary spending. It doesn't mention discretionary spending is
only 29% of the budget while mandatory spending is 65% with interest on
the debt being 6%.

Like most welfare statists Pigeon Ass is skilled at turning statistics
into damned lies.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:39:55 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 11:25:42 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.

If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb


The paltry amount spent on science and education is disgraceful. Of course, I have to wonder if scientific research for the military is included in those figures? o_O


We could spend more on science but there is a lot of science hidden in
that DoD budget. If you think of all of the things we use every day
that came from a weapons program you would see that. We did not go
into space for "science" we went there because we developed ICBMs and
spy satellites. The science was just an ancillary benefit. Then there
are little things like your microwave oven, that came out of WWII
research to shoot down planes.
It is easier to appropriate money for defense than it is for science.
I don't think that is "right" but the statement is correct.
Education in the federal budget is just a red herring. Virtually all
of the education money comes from state and local taxes. I am not sure
why the feds are involved at all.
In my county the feds kick in about 0.58% of the operating budget
($4.3M of a $729.3M budget)
That includes direct payments and feed through from the state.
The biggest federal contribution is for the free food program ($45M).
That is free breakfast and lunch, not education.

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:15:08 PM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:39:55 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 11:25:42 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.

If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

The paltry amount spent on science and education is disgraceful. Of course, I have to wonder if scientific research for the military is included in those figures? o_O

We could spend more on science but there is a lot of science hidden in
that DoD budget. If you think of all of the things we use every day
that came from a weapons program you would see that. We did not go
into space for "science" we went there because we developed ICBMs and
spy satellites. The science was just an ancillary benefit. Then there
are little things like your microwave oven, that came out of WWII
research to shoot down planes.
It is easier to appropriate money for defense than it is for science.
I don't think that is "right" but the statement is correct.
Education in the federal budget is just a red herring. Virtually all
of the education money comes from state and local taxes. I am not sure
why the feds are involved at all.
In my county the feds kick in about 0.58% of the operating budget
($4.3M of a $729.3M budget)
That includes direct payments and feed through from the state.
The biggest federal contribution is for the free food program ($45M).
That is free breakfast and lunch, not education.


When NASA was formed, the military was hopping mad because the military claimed that space was its domain. Heck, I believe that the military has more control over NASA than is admitted by anyone in government. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Conspiracy Monster

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:25:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't spot that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would be $2.2 tril, it's actually a third of that.

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 11:49:04 AM UTC-5, Dove Tail wrote:
Dean Hoffman wrote:

On 1/28/18 7:54 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

Naturally, someone has a different version:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

or http://alturl.com/vuqfb

Military spending is 16% according to those figures.


Yup, apparently what I posted was misleading. Apologies.




--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

Heh, to your credit, you quickly corrected it, unlike most.

trader_4 wrote:



Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't spot
that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would be $2.2
tril, it's actually a third of that.


Yes, I made an error.




--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:35:51 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

When NASA was formed, the military was hopping mad because the military claimed that space was its domain. Heck, I believe that the military has more control over NASA than is admitted by anyone in government. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Conspiracy Monster

The Air Force is the leader. They got something:

"https://www.space.com/29448-x37b-space-plane-launches-fourth-mission.html

_US Air Force Launches X-37B Space Plane on 4th Mystery Mission_

The shaw 'nuff gots soum fancy ****s It ain't ever gots a driver

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 2:41:17 PM UTC-6, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:35:51 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

When NASA was formed, the military was hopping mad because the military claimed that space was its domain. Heck, I believe that the military has more control over NASA than is admitted by anyone in government. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Conspiracy Monster

The Air Force is the leader. They got something:

"https://www.space.com/29448-x37b-space-plane-launches-fourth-mission.html

_US Air Force Launches X-37B Space Plane on 4th Mystery Mission_

The shaw 'nuff gots soum fancy ****s It ain't ever gots a driver


Yea, that space plane can stay in orbit for a very long time doing secret poop. It wouldn't surprise me if it hasn't been used to snag a satellite from an unfriendly country and bring it back to Earth. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Space Monster

On 1/28/2018 12:21 PM, Dove Tail wrote:
trader_4 wrote:



Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't spot
that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would be $2.2
tril, it's actually a third of that.


Yes, I made an error.




Then you asked for others to correct it.

On 1/28/2018 11:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:25:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't spot that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would be $2.2 tril, it's actually a third of that.


Someone else corrected it.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 12:58:17 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 2:41:17 PM UTC-6, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:35:51 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

When NASA was formed, the military was hopping mad because the military claimed that space was its domain. Heck, I believe that the military has more control over NASA than is admitted by anyone in government. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Conspiracy Monster

The Air Force is the leader. They got something:

"https://www.space.com/29448-x37b-space-plane-launches-fourth-mission.html

_US Air Force Launches X-37B Space Plane on 4th Mystery Mission_

The shaw 'nuff gots soum fancy ****s It ain't ever gots a driver


Yea, that space plane can stay in orbit for a very long time doing secret poop. It wouldn't surprise me if it hasn't been used to snag a satellite from an unfriendly country and bring it back to Earth. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Space Monster

They won't tell us but can it hover over North Korea for months on end
and go "poof"? Then you need a Geiger counter to find the place.

Frank wrote:

On 1/28/2018 12:21 PM, Dove Tail wrote:
trader_4 wrote:



Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't
spot that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would
be $2.2 tril, it's actually a third of that.


Yes, I made an error.




Then you asked for others to correct it.


Frank, it is good to know you are still reading!

Unlike you, if you present me with evidence that something I have
posted is incorrect, I am happy to admit my errors, it's called
integrity.

What is your excuse for never admitting your frequent errors?



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 11:35:51 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:15:08 PM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:39:55 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 11:25:42 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.

If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

The paltry amount spent on science and education is disgraceful. Of course, I have to wonder if scientific research for the military is included in those figures? o_O

We could spend more on science but there is a lot of science hidden in
that DoD budget. If you think of all of the things we use every day
that came from a weapons program you would see that. We did not go
into space for "science" we went there because we developed ICBMs and
spy satellites. The science was just an ancillary benefit. Then there
are little things like your microwave oven, that came out of WWII
research to shoot down planes.
It is easier to appropriate money for defense than it is for science.
I don't think that is "right" but the statement is correct.
Education in the federal budget is just a red herring. Virtually all
of the education money comes from state and local taxes. I am not sure
why the feds are involved at all.
In my county the feds kick in about 0.58% of the operating budget
($4.3M of a $729.3M budget)
That includes direct payments and feed through from the state.
The biggest federal contribution is for the free food program ($45M).
That is free breakfast and lunch, not education.


When NASA was formed, the military was hopping mad because the military claimed that space was its domain. Heck, I believe that the military has more control over NASA than is admitted by anyone in government. o_O


Considering that most of their launches are for military satellites,
that would not shock me.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 12:58:17 -0800 (PST), Uncle Monster
wrote:

Yea, that space plane can stay in orbit for a very long time doing secret poop. It wouldn't surprise me if it hasn't been used to snag a satellite from an unfriendly country and bring it back to Earth. o_O

That was one of the "military" missions envisioned for the shuttle
although I am not sure if we ever did it. There were plenty of "black"
shuttle ops tho.
The only real value of the shuttle was that we could bring big things
home. Other than that it was a huge black hole that sucked up most of
Nasa's budget. Expendable rockets would have been much cheaper for
most things it did.

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 4:12:41 PM UTC-5, Frank wrote:
On 1/28/2018 11:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:25:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending.
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

This is the chart they come up with.
https://tinyurl.com/nlgg4eb

Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't spot that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would be $2.2 tril, it's actually a third of that.


Someone else corrected it.

But Dove is right, he immediately admitted to his mistake. I've never seen you or the typical trumpets here or Trump do it. Trump tells lie after lie, yells fake news, doubles down on the lies and you cheer him on.

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 3:19:14 PM UTC-6, Dove Tail wrote:
Frank wrote:

On 1/28/2018 12:21 PM, Dove Tail wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

Yes, that was an example of fake bs news. Surprised Dove didn't
spot that. The budget is $4 tril, if defense was 57%, that would
be $2.2 tril, it's actually a third of that.

Yes, I made an error.


Then you asked for others to correct it.

Frank, it is good to know you are still reading!

Unlike you, if you present me with evidence that something I have
posted is incorrect, I am happy to admit my errors, it's called
integrity.

What is your excuse for never admitting your frequent errors?
--


Dove Anus, your error is posting to Usenet to start with. Well, you are a North Korean troll so you are compelled to post by your illustrious leader Kim Pug WTF. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Observant Monster

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 4:53:08 PM UTC-6, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 4:12:41 PM UTC-5, Frank wrote:
On 1/28/2018 11:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 12:25:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:19:29 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 13:54:57 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

This brings the issue into perspective.

https://imgur.com/a/cj2dT

That is a misleading (lie?) representation of the federal spending..
Where is the slice for SS/MC/Federal pensions and the one for
interest on the debt?
I agree military spending is more than we should be spending but it is
a jobs program with contracts in just about every congressional
district in the US.


If it is a "misleading lie" as you claim, I urge you to provide an
accurate chart.

I know facts really get in the way of your rants but how about
Politifact?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

The real number for DoD is more like 16% Food and agriculture is 4% of
that budget. The chart floating around on facebook is simply bull****.

trader_4 wrote:

But Dove is right, he immediately admitted to his mistake. I've never
seen you or the typical trumpets here or Trump do it. Trump tells lie
after lie, yells fake news, doubles down on the lies and you cheer
him on.


Actually, I feel complimented. I make one error, whether I admitted it
and apologized or not, the goon squad is prepared to jump all over it.

This proves I have their attention and am most likely running my
fingernails over a few of their slate boards.

It is a little like the New York Times and CNN, the Trumpets call them
"fake news" and try to dismiss them, but, as soon as they make an
actual error, there is a cacophony of criticism from the alt-right,
proving just how widespread their audience actually is.

I am not comparing myself to a professional news organization in any
way other than from the perspective of a hidden audience.

I am positive they treat you in a similar fashion.



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:29:42 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

But Dove is right, he immediately admitted to his mistake. I've never
seen you or the typical trumpets here or Trump do it. Trump tells lie
after lie, yells fake news, doubles down on the lies and you cheer
him on.


Actually, I feel complimented. I make one error, whether I admitted it
and apologized or not, the goon squad is prepared to jump all over it.

This proves I have their attention and am most likely running my
fingernails over a few of their slate boards.

It is a little like the New York Times and CNN, the Trumpets call them
"fake news" and try to dismiss them, but, as soon as they make an
actual error, there is a cacophony of criticism from the alt-right,
proving just how widespread their audience actually is.

I am not comparing myself to a professional news organization in any
way other than from the perspective of a hidden audience.

I am positive they treat you in a similar fashion.

Hey I acknowledged that you admitted your mistake. I have done the
same thing when I was wrong but it does beg the question, how did you
fall for any chart of "government spending" that did not have SS/MC on
it? You do understand that SS/MC and interest on the debt eats every
penny of federal revenue, before they even get to that discretionary
spending chart you posted. It would have been accurate if you said it
was "what we borrow money for". That is plenty scary enough for anyone
who thinks they may still be alive when the whole thing comes crashing
down. We just saw that interest on the debt is 6% of revenue at around
1.5-1.8% APR. What happens when the fed has to take their thumb off
the scale and that doubles or triples? That is still nowhere near what
could happen. Carter handed Reagan interest rates of over 14%.
That would be 50-60% of current revenue if we did not borrow another
dime.
Yes I think any tax cut was a dumb idea but our economy is in so much
trouble in real terms that we need to perpetuate the lie as long as
possible.
I may start smoking sky diving and riding motorcycles again, I don't
want to be around for that crash. ;-)

wrote:

how did you
fall for any chart of "government spending" that did not have SS/MC on
it?

How? I haven't slept in two days. But I make no excuses, a mistake is
a mistake.



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Sunday, January 28, 2018 at 7:52:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:29:42 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

But Dove is right, he immediately admitted to his mistake. I've never
seen you or the typical trumpets here or Trump do it. Trump tells lie
after lie, yells fake news, doubles down on the lies and you cheer
him on.


Actually, I feel complimented. I make one error, whether I admitted it
and apologized or not, the goon squad is prepared to jump all over it.

This proves I have their attention and am most likely running my
fingernails over a few of their slate boards.

It is a little like the New York Times and CNN, the Trumpets call them
"fake news" and try to dismiss them, but, as soon as they make an
actual error, there is a cacophony of criticism from the alt-right,
proving just how widespread their audience actually is.

I am not comparing myself to a professional news organization in any
way other than from the perspective of a hidden audience.

I am positive they treat you in a similar fashion.

Hey I acknowledged that you admitted your mistake. I have done the
same thing when I was wrong but it does beg the question, how did you
fall for any chart of "government spending" that did not have SS/MC on
it? You do understand that SS/MC and interest on the debt eats every
penny of federal revenue, before they even get to that discretionary
spending chart you posted.


That is incorrect. Mandatory spending that includes ss, Medicare, and more is $2.4t. Interest on the debt is another $225 bil. That's $2.6t, the deficit is $600 bil, the total budget is $4t. It doesn't add up. There is about $800bil more coming in than total mandatory spending.



It would have been accurate if you said it
was "what we borrow money for". That is plenty scary enough for anyone
who thinks they may still be alive when the whole thing comes crashing
down. We just saw that interest on the debt is 6% of revenue at around
1.5-1.8% APR. What happens when the fed has to take their thumb off
the scale and that doubles or triples? That is still nowhere near what
could happen.

That's a very real concern, I agree.


Carter handed Reagan interest rates of over 14%.
That would be 50-60% of current revenue if we did not borrow another
dime.
Yes I think any tax cut was a dumb idea but our economy is in so much
trouble in real terms that we need to perpetuate the lie as long as
possible.

I didn't see the dire economy that you claim. It's not shown in any graphs I've seen. I asked uncle to provide some graphs that show it. I do think the business tax cuts were a good idea. But giving the rich, including Trump a tax cut, given the deficit and debt that you agree with, was irresponsible. And there were morally repugnant aspects too, eg eliminating the charitable deduction.



I may start smoking sky diving and riding motorcycles again, I don't
want to be around for that crash. ;-)

trader_4 wrote:

You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they posted
this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:10:07 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they posted
this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.

wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:10:07 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they
posted this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.


Satire.




--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:42:33 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:10:07 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they
posted this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.


Satire.

Yeah sort of like Rachel Maddow, Not accurate but humorous to the
faithful.

On 1/29/2018 11:58 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:42:33 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:10:07 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

trader_4 wrote:

You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they
posted this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.


Satire.

Yeah sort of like Rachel Maddow, Not accurate but humorous to the
faithful.

Highly unusual for libs to have a sense of humor.

wrote:


You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they
posted this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.


Satire.

Yeah sort of like Rachel Maddow, Not accurate but humorous to the
faithful.


Actually, in this case, Trader's satire more closely resembled that of
Mark Twain and, he hit the nail squarely on the head with his satirical
hammer.

Your comments appear to be precipitated by the sting of a good
satirical spanking.

I do not watch Rachel Maddow, but, based upon your frequent references
to her, maybe I should catch a couple of her shows. Reads as if she
really gets under your skin, which means she must knowledgeable and
entertaining.



--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

Frank wrote:

Highly unusual for libs to have a sense of humor.


Skank, we make jokes about you and the rest of the fascist cabal on a
regular basis. Your lack of a sense of humor prevents you from seeing
the humor in the comments.

Last night there was a skit broadcast on the Grammy awards show which
involved fictional auditions for the person who would read the
audio-book version of Fire and Fury.

Here you go Skank:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMLPBn506LY

If you don't laugh at this, it is definitely you who is humor impaired.


--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:12:23 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:


You need to secure your PC. Somebody else is using it and they
posted this from your account yesterday, defending Trump:


Christ, that was funny!

Not accurate but funny anyway.


Satire.

Yeah sort of like Rachel Maddow, Not accurate but humorous to the
faithful.


Actually, in this case, Trader's satire more closely resembled that of
Mark Twain and, he hit the nail squarely on the head with his satirical
hammer.

Your comments appear to be precipitated by the sting of a good
satirical spanking.

I do not watch Rachel Maddow, but, based upon your frequent references
to her, maybe I should catch a couple of her shows. Reads as if she
really gets under your skin, which means she must knowledgeable and
entertaining.

It is just your garden variety left wing ranting but she has been
caught lying several times and the hype over non-events is comical.
Trump's tax return was a classic. We heard about it for 3 days and
when she finally made the big reveal, it was just the 2 page 1040 with
none of the details. It just showed that he paid a lot of tax that
year.

wrote:

Actually, in this case, Trader's satire more closely resembled that
of Mark Twain and, he hit the nail squarely on the head with his
satirical hammer.


It is just your garden variety left wing ranting but she has been
caught lying several times and the hype over non-events is comical.
Trump's tax return was a classic. We heard about it for 3 days and
when she finally made the big reveal, it was just the 2 page 1040 with
none of the details. It just showed that he paid a lot of tax that
year.

Not sure why you are going off on tangents about a TV personality when
the topic was Trader's Twain-like satire about your hypocrisy.

Maybe you are stretching for a diversion. :-)


--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:08:51 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

Actually, in this case, Trader's satire more closely resembled that
of Mark Twain and, he hit the nail squarely on the head with his
satirical hammer.


It is just your garden variety left wing ranting but she has been
caught lying several times and the hype over non-events is comical.
Trump's tax return was a classic. We heard about it for 3 days and
when she finally made the big reveal, it was just the 2 page 1040 with
none of the details. It just showed that he paid a lot of tax that
year.

Not sure why you are going off on tangents about a TV personality when
the topic was Trader's Twain-like satire about your hypocrisy.

Maybe you are stretching for a diversion. :-)

You mean diverting from the diverted diversion?
Trader does not want to admit the middle class has been stuck in the
mud for 40 years. Perhaps the best indication is 40sumpin% (probably
50% with the tax cut) don't make enough money to pay any income tax at
all.
They like to point at "household" income going up but they do not want
to admit there are more 2 wage households than there were 40 years ago
and they do not want to factor in the cost of that second income. By
the time you figure in child care, commuting expenses, business
clothes and other things you need for a decent job, the 2d income is
really watered down.

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 12:09:49 -0500, Frank "frank wrote:

Highly unusual for libs to have a sense of humor.

Dang it. You figured it out. I've known it for multiple decades.

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 12:29:04 PM UTC-5, Dove Tail wrote:
Frank wrote:

Highly unusual for libs to have a sense of humor.


Skank, we make jokes about you and the rest of the fascist cabal on a
regular basis. Your lack of a sense of humor prevents you from seeing
the humor in the comments.

Last night there was a skit broadcast on the Grammy awards show which
involved fictional auditions for the person who would read the
audio-book version of Fire and Fury.

Here you go Skank:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMLPBn506LY

If you don't laugh at this, it is definitely you who is humor impaired.


--
Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth

Seems to me the brain impaired in that case is the music industry elites
who are so full of themselves that they think this kind of stunt is appropriate
at the Grammys. About 40% of Americans approve of Trump, yet they want to
**** off that customer base. The results show in the ratings, weren't
they down 20%?