Steve Bannon Turns On Trump

[Chance]

From BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42560520):


Former White House aide Steve Bannon "lost his mind" after he lost his job at the White House, US President Donald Trump has said.

The president disavowed Mr Bannon after he was quoted in a new book describing a meeting between Mr Trump's son and a group of Russians as "treasonous".

The Russians had offered Donald Trump Jr damaging information on Hillary Clinton at the June 2016 meeting.

Mr Bannon's quote appears in a new book by journalist Michael Wolff.

"Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind," Mr Trump said in a statement on Wednesday.

"Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party," he continued.

"Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn't as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country."

Mr Bannon, the president's former chief strategist, was considered a key player in the Trump White House and helped shape Mr Trump's "America First" campaign message before he left his post in August.

This is my surprised face.

[Chance]

And 2018 comes out swinging.

[blues]

It's like watching a bad dysfunctional family TV drama. I wonder how many episodes it will run.

[hufnagel]

about 4 years worth total?

[Peally]

...Who?

[RJ]

Steve Bannon = Judge Roy Moore.

What a schmuck. (Both of them). So yeah, like Peally said, by tomorrow Bannon will be in Trump’s taillights.

Besides, with the NE corridor bracing for Storm Grayson this weekend, they won’t be paying attention to this story after today anyway.

[Nephrology]

Ruh roh.

I am very curious to see how Trump does without Bannon/Breitbart.

[Wondering Beard]

"Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. "

Classic Trump line, made me laugh.

[Chance]

Besides, with the NE corridor bracing for Storm Grayson this weekend, they won’t be paying attention to this story after today anyway.

You really think Trump is going to let people forget about this?

[RJ]

You really think Trump is going to let people forget about this?

Pfft. He has a lot more people to piss off.

Believe me, it’s going to be GREAT. :cool:

[LOKNLOD]

Believe me, it’s going to be YUGE. :cool:

Fixed it for you.

[blues]

Fixed it for you.

Like the world has never seen before...

[Tamara]

The comments section at the relevant Breitbart article is GLORIOUS.

God Emperor nutriders and LEAVE BANNON ALONErs in a rolling, hair-pulling catfight. I don't know if I have enough popcorn.

[RoyGBiv]

The comments section at the relevant Breitbart article is GLORIOUS.

God Emperor nutriders and LEAVE BANNON ALONErs in a rolling, hair-pulling catfight. I don't know if I have enough popcorn.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/03/donald-trump-furious-steve-bannon-not-only-lost-his-job-he-lost-his-mind/

[Hambo]

A Washington Post article says some parts are literally unbelievable, yet Trump attacks Bannon and thereby lends credence to the article. WTF, people?

[Tamara]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/03/donald-trump-furious-steve-bannon-not-only-lost-his-job-he-lost-his-mind/

And now the Libruls are swarming in, smart ones trolling and dumb ones showing their asses and joining the pigpile on the floor, and there are a couple of twue bewievers running around imploring people to stop fighting because Bannon and Trump still secretly love each other and this is some kind of amazing 6D chess move.

OMG, this is just the best belated Christmas present ever.

[Chance]

A Washington Post article says some parts are literally unbelievable, yet Trump attacks Bannon and thereby lends credence to the article.

If Trump had been smart enough, he could have dismissed the whole thing as fake news, and 99% of his base would have believed him. Now there's a civil war on.

[Hambo]

OMG, this is just the best belated Christmas present ever.

You'll rot your eyes out, kid. I know it's cold up there, but you might need to get out more. ;) :cool:

[GuanoLoco]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/03/donald-trump-michael-wolff-book-highlights


Disloyalty among the president’s staff was reportedly mirrored by the president himself. Wolff says Trump called Bannon disloyal and scruffy, Priebus weak and short, Kushner a suck-up, press secretary Sean Spicer stupid and adviser Kellyanne Conway a crybaby. Jared and Ivanka, the president reportedly said, should never have come to Washington.


I love it when Trump accuses someone of being disloyal. Disloyalty implies that there is something one should be loyal to and IMHO there is nothing in Trump’s behavior that would or should inspire loyalty in any objective, reasonable person.

[blues]

And now the Libruls are swarming in, smart ones trolling and dumb ones showing their asses and joining the pigpile on the floor, and there are a couple of twue bewievers running around imploring people to stop fighting because Bannon and Trump still secretly love each other and this is some kind of amazing 6D chess move.

OMG, this is just the best belated Christmas present ever.

If you live in Russia. (Are they allowed to celebrate anything? I can't remember the current state position.)

[Tamara]

You'll rot your eyes out, kid. I know it's cold up there, but you might need to get out more. ;) :cool:

I can't help it! Internet catfights in which I have no dog and social media chimpouts by lolcows are my favorite forms of online entertainment.

[Joe in PNG]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

[blues]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

I hadda look that one up.

[Joe in PNG]

I hadda look that one up.

Some of the best books ever written... at least until "So Long and Thanks for All the Fish".

[BehindBlueI's]

How it looks in my mind when I think of their egos colliding:

https://media.giphy.com/media/6wqCLENIMAR2g/giphy.gif

[blues]

Some of the best books ever written... at least until "So Long and Thanks for All the Fish".

I have to admit that despite my lifelong love of (amateur) astronomy, I've never developed much of an appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy. I guess I need to try harder.

[Lester Polfus]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

This is the most cogent analysis of the current POTUS I have seen to date.

[Chemsoldier]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

Now you've done it. Fate and Irony are going team up and accept your challenge.

[BehindBlueI's]

I have to admit that despite my lifelong love of (amateur) astronomy, I've never developed much of an appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy. I guess I need to try harder.

Hitchhiker's Guide isn't really sci-fi any more than Titanic is a movie about a boat trip. It's just the vehicle for the story, and HG is mostly just being funny in a clever British-y sort of way.

Starship Troopers is the same way. It would be just as good if it was set on viking ships. (The movie sucks, the book is quite good).

[Zincwarrior]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

You see that too?

[blues]

Hitchhiker's Guide isn't really sci-fi any more than Titanic is a movie about a boat trip. It's just the vehicle for the story, and HG is mostly just being funny in a clever British-y sort of way.


https://youtu.be/d-OE-MdBI40

[Wondering Beard]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

That's perfect.

[Wondering Beard]

I have to admit that despite my lifelong love of (amateur) astronomy, I've never developed much of an appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy. I guess I need to try harder.

Read them.

A few quotes to entice you:

“Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.”

"Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias as it fell was Oh no, not again. Many people have speculated that if we knew exactly why the bowl of petunias had thought that we would know a lot more about the nature of the Universe than we do now."

"Not unnaturally, many elevators imbued with intelligence and precognition became terribly frustrated with the mindless business of going up and down, up and down, experimented briefly with the notion of going sideways, as a sort of existential protest, demanded participation in the decision-making process and finally took to squatting in basements sulking."

“Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.”

"It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.

[JodyH]

We coulda had Hillary...

[blues]

Read them.
Wondering Beard

Which specifically? In a particular order?

I will make the attempt as there are too many of you (respected friends) who find value for me to shrug it off without another go at the genre. (Not that I haven't read some of the classics over the years.)

[LittleLebowski]

We coulda had Hillary...

YUP.

[Shoresy]

Wondering Beard
(Not that I haven't read some of the classics over the years.)

Which ones have you read? And did you like any of them? (Don't want to throw obsolete suggestions at you)

[Hambo]

We coulda had Hillary...

That doesn't mean this administration is good, just that both choices sucked.

[JodyH]

In public I'm a Trump cheerleader.
Because we're at war.

To quote the great Eddie Murphy:

Karate man bruise on the inside, they don't show their weaknesses,

[blues]

Which ones have you read? And did you like any of them? (Don't want to throw obsolete suggestions at you)

I don't mean the Hitchhiker series if that was what was intended in WB's post above. I meant just some of the classics by Heinlein, Asimov, Vonnegut, P.K. Dick, et al over the years. My brain is not functioning at high speed right now, so an exhaustive list of my sci-fi, alternative reality, fantasy reads is not immediately forthcoming.

So, if he was referring to a particular series in his reply, then I just wanted a suggestion of where to start and an order if applicable.

Back on topic:

We coulda had Hillary!!!

https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTM0NDIxODU3MDU4MjIyMDUw/home-alone-macaulay-culkinjpg.jpg

[Wondering Beard]

I don't mean the Hitchhiker series if that was what was intended in WB's post above. I meant just some of the classics by Heinlein, Asimov, Vonnegut, P.K. Dick, et al over the years. My brain is not functioning at high speed right now, so an exhaustive list of my sci-fi, alternative reality, fantasy reads is not immediately forthcoming.

So, if he was referring to a particular series in his reply, then I just wanted a suggestion of where to start and an order if applicable.


Actually I had meant the Hitchikers series.

Goes to show my brain isn't working 100% either :-)

As to other Sci Fi series, they cover too many different types of stories to be able to point you in the right direction, and I'll admit I am nowhere near knowledgeable enough (aside from the classics you mention) to be much help.

[blues]

Actually I had meant the Hitchikers series.

Goes to show my brain isn't working 100% either :-)

As to other Sci Fi series, they cover too many different types of stories to be able to point you in the right direction, and I'll admit I am nowhere near knowledgeable enough (aside from the classics you mention) to be much help.
Wondering Beard I haven't read the Hitchhiker Series so if that's what you meant, feel free to offer your suggestions and I'll pick up copies of the books (in the order you recommend). PM is fine, T since we are wandering a bit far afield I fear. That invitation is extended to you as well WeepingAngel and anyone else who wishes to chime in.

[Wondering Beard]

I haven't read the Hitchhiker Series so if that's what you meant, feel free to offer your suggestions and I'll pick up copies of the books (in the order you recommend). PM is fine, T since we are wandering a bit far afield I fear. That invitation is extended to you as well WeepingAngel and anyone else who wishes to chime in.

I do really think you should try that series out. At the very least to make people around you ask why you're laughing so hard. I first read them on a flight to Mexico many decades ago, and the stew .. err flight attendant asked me to quiet down as my laughter was disturbing other passengers.

In order they are:
-The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
-The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
-Life, the Universe and Everything
-So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
-Mostly Harmless
-And Another Thing...

The first three are the best.

[hufnagel]

Hillary would have brought war to the Republic.
I still sometimes wonder if that wouldn't have been a good thing.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'm wearing my Vote for Cthulhu tee-shirt again.

If the GOP has sense, they would run a sensible, not nuts candidate in 2020. Oh, Jeff Sessions is going to mount his marijuana crusade today. Just when we need to chill?

[JodyH]

All the sensible candidates were born losers last election.
Not one of them would have survived the Hillary machine.
I don't see a single candidate on the GOP horizon that has the will to win.

To put it in P-F terms... the GOP might have a few nice guns, but they don't have the mindset to close with and destroy their enemies.

[Chance]

Trump's lawyers are now apparently seeking to halt the book's release. From BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42570555):



Lawyers for US President Donald Trump are seeking to stop the release of a book containing damaging allegations about his administration.

Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is due for release on Tuesday.

It cites former top aide Steve Bannon as describing a meeting with a group of Russians as "treasonous".

It also questions Mr Trump's fitness for office, reports his wife was crying on election night and says Ivanka Trump has presidential ambitions.

The White House has disputed the book's accuracy. Mr Trump earlier said Mr Bannon - who was sacked in August - had "lost his mind" after losing his White House position.

....

On his Breitbart radio show on Wednesday, Mr Bannon responded to the president's criticism by saying he was a "great man" and that he supported him "day in and day out".

After the president met Republican senators in the Oval Office to discuss immigration on Thursday, a reporter asked Mr Trump if his former strategist had betrayed him. He responded: "I don't know, he called me a great man last night so he obviously changed his tune pretty quick."

So the book hit enough of a nerve that lawyers don't want it published, but Trump can't make up his mind whether he's still angry or not? Once again, if Trump had given his typical "fake news" dismissal, this probably would have disappeared immediately.

[blues]

https://jmdemma.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/insane.jpg

[Drang]

Starship Troopers is the same way. It would be just as good if it was set on viking ships. (The movie sucks, the book is quite good).

There was no movie.

[Drang]

We coulda had Hillary...

789952798515339264

[JodyH]

Ted Cruz showed his true colors near the end of the primaries when he went and got his GOP shine-box instead of standing by his supposed TEA party principles.
He solidified his position as a piece of shit when he voted to keep the Senate in session in order to prevent Trump from firing "Recuse Myself" Sessions and putting in a recess appointment.

Hillary and the Dems would have crushed Ted Cruz and his bat shit crazy wife in the election.
They had so much dirt on Cruz it would have been a bloodbath.
Smart as Cruz is he has zero killer instinct and there's no way in Hell he'd have chipped away at the Great Lakes "Blue Wall".

[RJ]

Anybody think Bannon goes to work for Mitt?

[JodyH]

Anybody think Bannon goes to work for Mitt?
Probably...
It does look like Mitt is trying to tie McCain for the "Biggest loser" title.

[BehindBlueI's]

There was no movie.

Denial won't help. Just be grateful for the shower scene and move on.

[Tamara]

We coulda had Hillary...

"We coulda been watching a different movie..."

"Shut up. We already bought the tickets and I'm laughing at this one. Go get more popcorn. I'll take extra salt." :D

[Sigfan26]

Anybody think Bannon goes to work for Mitt?

More likely you’re gonna see Bannon on Ellen before the month is done. She’ll have a doll, and Bannon is going to point to where Trump hurt him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuanoLoco]

I'm wearing my Vote for Cthulhu tee-shirt again.

If the GOP has sense, they would run a sensible, not nuts candidate in 2020. Oh, Jeff Sessions is going to mount his marijuana crusade today. Just when we need to chill?

Of all the things wrong in the world that need righting, this is pretty much at the bottom of my list - well below alcohol. And no, I have no interest in it.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Seriously, does the country need a crusade from Sessions now? If Trump had some smarts, he would shut this down. However, it is probably Sessions own bug up his ass. It is just as stupid as if we got Hillary and she launched an AWB drive. It should be as you said - the bottom of the list. How much agency time and money is wasted? We don't need damn zealots of either party pushing their screwed up agendas that constrain personal freedom.

[Zincwarrior]

We coulda had Hillary...

We could have had a lot of people. We got the Trump Family Circus.

[Zincwarrior]

Of all the things wrong in the world that need righting, this is pretty much at the bottom of my list - well below alcohol. And no, I have no interest in it.

States only have rights if I like the rights they have! said every federal employee ever.

[Zincwarrior]

Seriously, does the country need a crusade from Sessions now? If Trump had some smarts, he would shut this down. However, it is probably Sessions own bug up his ass. It is just as stupid as if we got Hillary and she launched an AWB drive. It should be as you said - the bottom of the list. How much agency time and money is wasted? We don't need damn zealots of either party pushing their screwed up agendas that constrain personal freedom.

Trump actually responded during the campaign in interviews that he would not pursue it. Winning!

[JodyH]

If Trump had some smarts, he would shut this down.
He can't.
The Senate installed Sessions as the firewall between Trump and swamp criminals.
The Senate has already told Trump there's not a damn thing he can do when it comes to Sessions.
Trump can't fire him because the Senate will not confirm a replacement and they have already voted to remain in session so Trump can't do a recess appointment.
Sessions pretty much has free reign to do whatever the fuck he wants (which is be a anti-pot crusader) and you can guarantee he doesn't want to start indicting fellow travelers in government (because there's dirt on him as well I'm sure).

[JodyH]

We could have had a lot of people. We got the Trump Family Circus.
Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about those losers?

[BillSWPA]

Seriously, does the country need a crusade from Sessions now? If Trump had some smarts, he would shut this down. However, it is probably Sessions own bug up his ass. It is just as stupid as if we got Hillary and she launched an AWB drive. It should be as you said - the bottom of the list. How much agency time and money is wasted? We don't need damn zealots of either party pushing their screwed up agendas that constrain personal freedom.

Trump and Sessions have actually done an excellent job standing up for personal freedom, with the justice department recently going to bat at the Supreme Court for religious freedom.

I am having a really hard time understanding the hate for Trump. During the election, I was for anyone but Trump, only becoming a Trump supporter when the only alternative became the Hildabeast. Since he has been elected, we have a surging economy. We have significant tax cuts. We have, for the first time in decades, started cutting off foreign aid to countries that pretend to be allies but support terrorists. We are cutting funding to the U.N. Federal regulations have been slashed. Our enemies find him to be truly unpredictable, which is a really good thing. The Obamacare individual mandate is gone, although much more must be done. Regulations have been slashed. Concealed carry reciprocity has a realistic chance. Trump has done more for conservative priorities - including gun rights - than any of the career politicians ever would have done.

Responding to another post, putting Roy Moore and Steve Bannon in the same group is difficult to understand. Bannon was a self-serving piece of trash who pretended to be conservative because it served his purpose. Roy Moore is a good man who stands by what he knows is right despite the consequences to himself, and who repeatedly won elections, but who got derailed by allegations of 40 year old misconduct based in part on forged evidence. There is no comparison.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stephanie B]

We coulda had Hillary...

Which was the outcome desired by both candidates.

[JodyH]

Trump and Sessions have actually done an excellent job standing up for personal freedom, with the justice department recently going to bat at the Supreme Court for religious freedom.

I am having a really hard time understanding the hate for Trump. During the election, I was for anyone but Trump, only becoming a Trump supporter when the only alternative became the Hildabeast. Since he has been elected, we have a surging economy. We have significant tax cuts. We have, for the first time in decades, started cutting off foreign aid to countries that pretend to be allies but support terrorists. We are cutting funding to the U.N. Federal regulations have been slashed. Our enemies find him to be truly unpredictable, which is a really good thing. The Obamacare individual mandate is gone, although much more must be done. Regulations have been slashed. Concealed carry reciprocity has a realistic chance. Trump has done more for conservative priorities - including gun rights - than any of the career politicians ever would have done.

Responding to another post, putting Roy Moore and Steve Bannon in the same group is difficult to understand. Bannon was a self-serving piece of trash who pretended to be conservative because it served his purpose. Roy Moore is a good man who stands by what he knows is right despite the consequences to himself, and who repeatedly won elections, but who got derailed by allegations of 40 year old misconduct based in part on forged evidence. There is no comparison.

But... but... the crazy Tweets!
Results be damned... the man is a lunatic on Twitter!

[JodyH]

Which was the outcome desired by both candidates.
By both parties...

I knew Trump was in it to win it when he burned the bridges at that NY white tie dinner party early in the election.

[Stephanie B]

Anybody think Bannon goes to work for Mitt?

Based on what, exactly? The stunning work he's done in getting Republicans elected to the Senate in Alabama and the governorship in Virginia? Or Bannon's comments about Romney recently, which probably won't play well among Mormons?

Bannon is now dead to a hell of a lot of Trump supporters. He already was dead to everyone else. He'll end up writing a tell-all book and then retire to a job as an equipment operator at the Donald J. Trump Waste Processing Facility,

IMO.

[Zincwarrior]

Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about those losers?

That Idiocracy was a documentary?

[JodyH]

That Idiocracy was a documentary?
Welcome to the new reality for the foreseeable future.
Either embrace it or join the Whig party.
Those were your choices in 2016, those will be your choices in 2020.

As the old saying goes... "Wish in one hand, shit in the other. See which one fills up first."

[JodyH]

Based on what, exactly? The stunning work he's done in getting Republicans elected to the Senate in Alabama and the governorship in Virginia? Or Bannon's comments about Romney recently, which probably won't play well among Mormons?

Bannon is now dead to a hell of a lot of Trump supporters. He already was dead to everyone else. He'll end up writing a tell-all book and then retire to a job as an equipment operator at the Donald J. Trump Waste Processing Facility,

IMO.
Carl Rove has made a career out of giving shitty advice to politicians and he's still in demand. Why would Bannon be any different?

[blues]

States only have rights if I like the rights they have! said every federal employee ever.

I call complete b.s. And I should know. And you should know better.

[BillSWPA]

It appears that the author of the book has a questionable record on truthfulness.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/4/michael-wolffs-spotty-record-raises-questions-abou/

Edited to add: even of Bannon's quote was completely misreported, he had no business even talking to his author after having signed a nondisclosure agreement.

[Wondering Beard]

The response to Sessions by the Colorado Senate Dems is Hilarious: "We'll give Jeff Sessions our legal pot when he pries it from our warm, extremely interesting to look at hands."

https://twitter.com/COSenDem/status/948948921694302209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsarahd-313035%2F2018%2F01%2F05%2Fyou-win-colorado-dems-really-have-the-best-reaction-to-jeff-sessions-pot-crackdown%2F

[BillSWPA]

The response to Sessions by the Colorado Senate Dems is Hilarious: "We'll give Jeff Sessions our legal pot when he pries it from our warm, extremely interesting to look at hands."

https://twitter.com/COSenDem/status/948948921694302209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsarahd-313035%2F2018%2F01%2F05%2Fyou-win-colorado-dems-really-have-the-best-reaction-to-jeff-sessions-pot-crackdown%2F

I agree that it is hilarious.

However, if they continue poisoning their bodies with their pot, they might find cold, dead hands to be self-inflicted.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Yeah, they should stick with booze and opioids. Much better for.

[Zincwarrior]

Welcome to the new reality for the foreseeable future.
Either embrace it or join the Whig party.
Those were your choices in 2016, those will be your choices in 2020.

As the old saying goes... "Wish in one hand, shit in the other. See which one fills up first."

I am a Libertarian. I am used to not winning...

[Zincwarrior]

I call complete b.s. And I should know. And you should know better.

Then we disagree.

[Tamara]

It appears that the author of the book has a questionable record on truthfulness.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/4/michael-wolffs-spotty-record-raises-questions-abou/

"Has a questionable record on truthfulness..."

<cites Washington Times>

MY. SIDES. :D

[Tamara]

if they continue poisoning their bodies with their pot, they might find cold, dead hands to be self-inflicted.

This is some sort of elaborate troll, right?

This thread is awesome. :D :D :D

[BillSWPA]

This is some sort of elaborate troll, right?

This thread is awesome. :D :D :D

Actually, I was dead serious (if driving while stoned doesn't get them, the many known carcinogens in a joint will), but I am glad you are enjoying it.

[GuanoLoco]

This is some sort of elaborate troll, right?

This thread is awesome. :D :D :D

I think he is for realz, just...misinformed.

What’s the LD50 for pot again? Googling...here is something: https://weedpress.wordpress.com/science/studies/ld50-of-cannabis/


A smoker would theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of marijuana within about fifteen minutes to induce a lethal response.

And what about Roy “Fuit Salad” Moore?

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-roy-moores-law-school-professor-nicknamed-him-fruit-salad

Check the reports on Gadsden locals (about an hour from me) who were interviewed when all this was hot - his ‘creeping’ behavior was not exactly a secret.

Roy was all about Roy - damn the law and damn the facts. I’m not happy a Democrat won, but I am quite pleased that he lost.

[Chance]

Trump recently tweeted:



....Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.

The guy is a caricature of himself.

[ranger]

Trump recently tweeted:



The guy is a caricature of himself.

Maybe he has a great sense of humor and enjoys driving the elite media crazy.

[GuanoLoco]

Or maybe he has the maturity and impulse control of a 12 year old trapped in a 71 year old body.

[JodyH]

I do a simple cost to benefit analysis.
I gain absolutely nothing and empower the people who want to strip me of everything by being a vocal anti-Trumper.
By being silent I gain or lose nothing.
By supporting the President when he's lowering my taxes and supporting my gun rights I stand to regain a whole lot of freedoms (and money) I've been fucked out of over the past 28 years of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama.

When I'm in the ring fighting, my corner men don't start yelling out my weaknesses for everyone to hear. They wait until we're between rounds and whisper it to me.
"You're leaving that jab floating, if he counters with a right over the top of it you're gonna get knocked the fuck out. Snap that jab back faster." is better said between rounds than shouted out during the round.
While I'm in there trading punches with my opponent my corner yells out what I'm doing right and where to attack next.
"You hurt him with that inside kick! Switch to southpaw! Use your reach!"

[blues]

Whatever he has, if it in anyway has anything to do with how the stock market has performed since the election, I like it. :)

To be fair, despite my not being a yuge fan of the Obama administration, the market was pretty darn good for a number of years then as well.

(As it was under Bubba, despite how disturbing that particular image may be.)

This market has been amazing. Of course the wailing and gnashing of teeth will eventually come round again as it always do.

[JodyH]

Whatever he has, if it in anyway has anything to do with how the stock market has performed since the election, I like it. :)
It's easy to see who should get the credit... what else changed in DC?
Hint... nothing.
Congress and the FedGov bureaucracy are all pretty much the same names and faces as the past 16 years.

[JodyH]

To be fair, despite my not being a yuge fan of the Obama administration, the market was pretty darn good for a number of years then as well.

(As it was under Bubba, despite how disturbing that particular image may be.)

This market has been amazing. Of course the wailing and gnashing of teeth will eventually come round again as it always do.
Under Clinton and Obama the markets did do fairly well.
But under Clinton is was primarily very volatile tech stocks and we saw how that turned out when the bubble popped.
Under Obama it was again primarily volatile tech stocks driving the market, we'll see if Tesla, Apple, Facebook and Google can carry the water for another 50-75 years like they have for the past 8-12.
Under Trump it's still sorting itself out but it'll be interesting to see what the market drivers are in 4 years or so and if it's a bubble economy or a not.

[GuanoLoco]

Trump’s weaknesses are no secret and I’ve never seen a person less interested in feedback from his cornermen.

I equate the so-called “tax cut” to taking out a long term loan (owed by all of us - the deficit/debt) so I can pay myself a smidge more each week.

I like the state of the market but have concerns that a bear market is overdue. The “tax cut” may delay this a bit.

I’m happy Hillary is not president.

This does not equate to giving the President a pass on every insecure, stupidly unnecessary and counter-productive thing he says and does.

What if I told you: Trump could lead WITHOUT the constant, embarrassing shenanigans.

[blues]

Under Clinton and Obama the markets did do fairly well.
But under Clinton is was primarily very volatile tech stocks and we saw how that turned out when the bubble popped.
Under Obama it was again primarily volatile tech stocks driving the market, we'll see if Tesla, Apple, Facebook and Google can carry the water for another 50-75 years like they have for the past 8-12.
Under Trump it's still sorting itself out but it'll be interesting to see what the market drivers are in 4 years or so and if it's a bubble economy or a not.

In the 90's healthcare and banking did quite well, (as did other industries), beyond just tech. Regardless of the industry that led the way at any given point, the markets surged. No need to put too fine a point on it, I think the matter speaks for itself by and large.

(FWIW, though I don't consider myself expert, I do have quite a bit of experience in the market since about 1985 so I've been through many up and down markets and have experienced both the elation and the pain.)

I'd never have thought, when I retired some years back, that my net worth would be greater in retirement than it was the day I walked out the door.
To say it has exceeded all expectation would be to put it lightly.

[Wondering Beard]

From Drudge, so take with a grain of salt, but it's mostly solid in this case.

https://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Screen-Shot-2018-01-06-at-9.12.50-AM.png

Bubbles and bears aren't here yet, the weakness is here ("https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/05/global-debt-level-hits-233-trillion-record-high-in-q3-2017iif.html) (specifically the last paragraph of the piece) and those are the results of low interests rates that went on for too long (helping the markets do well during the Bush and Obama years but keeping the producing part of the economy mostly stagnant).

[JodyH]

The deficit/debt is in no way tied to tax revenue.
You could tax everyone 100% and we would still never pay of the "deficit/debt", because taxation is control not revenue.
The sooner people realize that taxation is just a way for the government to pick winners and losers the better off we'll be.

[Wondering Beard]

The deficit/debt is in no way tied to tax revenue.
You could tax everyone 100% and we would still never pay of the "deficit/debt", because taxation is control not revenue.
The sooner people realize that taxation is just a way for the government to pick winners and losers the better off we'll be.

If this is in response to my post (it's siesta time here and I could easily be wrong), I not only do not dispute that, but quite agree and the US debt, gigantic though it is, is not worrying me right now. National and corporate debt in countries that are more centralized (most of the developed world) as far as their economies go are a lot more vulnerable than we are since their capacity for creative destruction and adaptability is much less than ours; their chickens could come home to roost much faster than ours and that will affect the markets.

[BillSWPA]

History reminder: Ronald Reagan cut taxes, thereby increasing government revenue by improving the economy. The deficit only went up due to the need to repair the military after a previous Democrat administration left it in shambles.

Clinton flatlined a recovering economy with a massive tax increase. The economy took off after the Republicans took over Congress.

Trump has not only cut taxes and improved the economy, but cut expenses by cutting foreign aid to hostile entities.

He has done a better job than any past President since Reagan, but apparently some prefer to ignore all of this and criticize his tweets. Hope you are happy when you help make Joe Biden our next president.

For those of you who think recreational marijuana is safe, please do not drive your cars near my family.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hufnagel]

Maybe he has a great sense of humor and enjoys driving the elite media crazy.

Or maybe he has the maturity and impulse control of a 12 year old trapped in a 71 year old body.

I personally think some of the shit he tweets is precisely crafted to make certain people lose their fucking minds, for the laughs.
In a way, it keeps them busy and directs a portion of their energies away from doing things to stop him from doing actual good work.
Granted this is all an assumption (caveat understood) and theory on my part, but I mean if *I* had the chance to freak out a shitload of people who hate me with 40 characters, you damn well know I would as often as I could! Yes, I'm 12 years old inside as well. :D

[Glenn E. Meyer]

For those of you who think recreational marijuana is safe, please do not drive your cars near my family.

Since I have been in space of four major accidents with serious physical consequences due to lack of attention and cell phone usage by the people who hit me, I must report that I've never been clobbered by someone who was stoned.

So are you in favor of bringing back Prohibition? Don't be hypocritical in such blanket statements? We know how Prohibition helped in developing organized crime and the resultant horror shows we still have. Studies show that much of the gun crime is related to drug dealing. Removing one factor in illegal trafficking might reduce the crime related to that. Since 70% of the country is for some form of legalization, that is telling. 64% of the country are not in favor of an AWB.

So what's the difference between gun banning Hillary and pot banning Jeff when it comes to will of the people? Both want to constrain personal freedom. It is sad that some of the right are just as tyrannical for stupid reasons as some on the left are tyrannical for stupid reasons.

I don't buy that Trump is a PR genius using his tweet to stir the pot. It is his basic personality and gets in the way of accomplishments. Time to grow up. Also, pass proactive gun laws or the GOP is pretty worthless on the offense for gun rights. Saying you are not Hillary is not enough.

I am a very stable genius!

[blues]

I think we should get the Russkies to wire all of our homes with "yea / nay" buttons so that we can vote in real time on upcoming referendums.
(I mean since they're so good with computers and viruses and all.)

A third button should provide the opportunity to send a strong electric jolt to any representative who doesn't vote in accordance thereafter with the will of the people. (Or we can maybe just do away with them altogether.)

Then we can push the button on any given topic covered on something like C-Span and if the motion is carried and not put into effect, ZAP!!! (Each one becoming incrementally stronger until...well...they were warned.)

I think I could fit this manner of political engagement in while still keeping up with P-F.

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3b894b_d538b4c330044c2780608c3b478513ec~mv2_d_4496 _3000_s_4_2.jpg/v1/fill/w_300,h_300/3b894b_d538b4c330044c2780608c3b478513ec~mv2_d_4496 _3000_s_4_2.jpg

[JodyH]

I don't really care if marijuana or alcohol or guns are safe.
Freedom > safety.

[blues]

I don't really care if marijuana or alcohol or guns are safe.
Freedom > safety.

We should get Kris Kristofferson in on this discussion...



Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose
And nothin' ain't worth nothin' but it's free...

[MistWolf]

What if I told you: Trump could lead WITHOUT the constant, embarrassing shenanigans.
I wish he would


We know how Prohibition helped in developing organized crime and the resultant horror shows we still have.
Prohibition didn't do it. It was the corruption of our government and justice system that did it.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Quibbling. The Constitutional process put Prohibition in place. It established the market that attracted organized crime to that market and thus the expansion of organized crime. They did work hand in hand with corrupt government. Our current drug laws corrupt government also.

[Totem Polar]

Welcome to the new reality for the foreseeable future.
Either embrace it or join the Whig party.
Those were your choices in 2016, those will be your choices in 2020.

As the old saying goes... "Wish in one hand, shit in the other. See which one fills up first."

[Hambo]

Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about those losers?

The flip side is...Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about registered Republicans who ignored 16 better candidates and voted for Trump?

[Nephrology]

The flip side is...Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about registered Republicans who ignored 16 better candidates and voted for Trump?

...This is the interior of Ben Carson's house (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gallery/2015/nov/07/ben-carson-house-homage-to-himself-in-pictures). Remember, he was the chair of neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins for years.

https://i.imgur.com/fhgr5q7.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/0eTBbcu.jpg


.....Eyuuuup.

[JodyH]

The flip side is...Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about registered Republicans who ignored 16 better candidates and voted for Trump?
If you're not smart enough to appeal to dumb people...

[Hambo]

If you're not smart enough to appeal to dumb people...

Ah, the possibilities. I've said it before, but we're at most eight years from idiocracy and Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

To wit, https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/19/the-rock-reveals-why-hes-considering-running-for-president.html

[JodyH]

Ah, the possibilities. I've said it before, but we're at most eight years from idiocracy and Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.
I don't see the demographics changing or the collective IQ rising much in the next 8 years so I plan on doing everything I can to make sure that it's my flavor of Mountain Dew that comes out on top.
You can either play the hand that's dealt or fold, those are your options.

[Zincwarrior]

Or maybe he has the maturity and impulse control of a 12 year old trapped in a 71 year old body.

Bingo!

[LOKNLOD]

You can either play the hand that's dealt or fold, those are your options.

This this this.

We don’t get to take our ball and go home because we don’t like how the team-choosin’ turned out. I’ve got to live with the outcome whether I participate or not, so why not do the most I can to keep the bad guys from winning. Maybe both sides are bad guys... so what. One side’s still worse. Fuck those worse guys.

[Jaywalker]

The deficit/debt is in no way tied to tax revenue.
You could tax everyone 100% and we would still never pay of the "deficit/debt", because taxation is control not revenue.
The sooner people realize that taxation is just a way for the government to pick winners and losers the better off we'll be.
JodyH,

I pay careful attention to what you say about guns and such, but I think you've been listening to the wrong TV channel on national debt.

Leave aside for a moment whether debt is good or bad (I'm in the "not good" category, but there are other arguments.) Here's an interesting web site on debt and income: http://www.usdebtclock.org/. As I write this on 6 January 2018 the National Debt is $20.6 Trillion. Most of that we owe to US taxable entities, who can be taxed on the interest they receive (one of the reason some economists are in the "debt is good" column.) As of now debt owed to foreign entities is $6.4 Trillion. (Same citation)

In 2000 the national debt was $5 Trillion; by the time Bush II left office it had doubled to $10 Trillion. https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

For that debt the US must pay interest. As of December 2016 the average interest rate was 2.1% (or 2.3%, but who's quibbling). It's nearly simple: 2.1% of $20.6 Trillion is approximately $400 Billion. Those are checks the government must write to pay interest on the debt each year, some of which goes out of country and can't be taxed. So, $400 Billion of our taxes goes to pay the interest on our outstanding debt.

Interestingly, our national deficit (which adds to the national debt annually) was about $585 Billion in 2016.

Compare the $585 Billion deficit to the $400 Billion in interest paid on national debt and it appears (from these numbers) that approximately $185 Billion in additional taxes would stop the national debt from rising. More would begin to pay it down.

So, I really do dispute your statement that "The deficit/debt is in no way tied to tax revenue." It is extremely closely tied.

[JodyH]

As long as the feds can print money and deficit spend, tax revenue doesn't mean jack-shit.

[scjbash]

Compare the $585 Billion deficit to the $400 Billion in interest paid on national debt and it appears (from these numbers) that approximately $185 Billion in additional taxes would stop the national debt from rising.



Increase tax revenue by $185 Billion and they'll simply increase spending by $200 Billion. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

[Jaywalker]

Increase tax revenue by $185 Billion and they'll simply increase spending by $200 Billion. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
So the "fed" is one guy who decides to run up the deficit?

[Jaywalker]

Increase tax revenue by $185 Billion and they'll simply increase spending by $200 Billion. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
"They'll" means who? Congress?

[Jaywalker]

Okay, I get you disagree, but the problem we have in the US now is that we absolutely refuse to agree on a common set of facts. I'm talking about fiscal matters and you want to talk about human nature. As I used to say in briefings about insoluble matters, "All we need is a small change in human nature." They aren't going to happen, but I damn sure know that we owe $20.6 T; we need to pay it back so that we don't have to pay interest on it.

[Tamara]

The flip side is...Trump had 16 Republican opponents in the primaries.
If he's the dumbest most incompetent man to ever run and achieve the Presidency... what's that say about registered Republicans who ignored 16 better candidates and voted for Trump?

They don't appear to think very highly of weed.

[GuanoLoco]

Just take the $20 TRILLION debt, and consider the $62,000 owed by every man, woman and child - many of which who do not pay in to the system, an increasing # of whom are being subsidized by the system.

We will be adding about $700 Billion to the debt in 2017.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the “Tax Cut” will increade the deficit (not the debt) $1.4 TRILLION over 10 years. I have not seen a single credible report, even from “conservative sources” that claims this so-called “Tax Cut” can pay for itself.

How about these one-time $1000 bonuses being doled out to employees by AT&T, etc.? I did the math - AT&T will pay this one-time deductable expense off (say $200 million) in a fraction of a year and take profits every year until the benefit expires. I hope you are all deep stockholders, because that is who it will benefit - at the expense of everyday american people.

Do your homework, do the math. We are being routinely lied to, and far to many seem willing accept these lies at face value.

[Joe in PNG]

They don't appear to think very highly of weed.

It's not the weed as much as the people who really, really, REALLY like weed.
You know, the really obnoxious types with the bad whiteboy dreds and worse smell who just. Won't. Shut. Up! about weed and how great it is, and that sort of thing.

[blues]

It's not the weed as much as the people who really, really, REALLY like weed.
You know, the really obnoxious types with the bad whiteboy dreds and worse smell who just. Won't. Shut. Up! about weed and how great it is, and that sort of thing.

http://runt-of-the-web.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/college-kid-with-dreads.jpg

"Dude, I tolja we were gonna be famous! No more of that 'what the heck is that, a tarantula on your head?' Let's burn one!"

[GuanoLoco]

I’m more of a civil libertarian. It’s about freedom.

Someone explain to me how weed is meaningfully different than the recreational and/or “medicinal” use of alcohol.

As far as I can tell, alcohol is a vastly more dangerous drug, yet somehow we manage its benefits against it’s risks and dangers. People are routinely injured and die from alcohol - directly or indirectly. Weed? It’s not even close to being in the same league. Compare that to the real expense and harm caused by the realities of the intersection of weed and the war on dugs.

[blues]

I’m more of a civil libertarian. It’s about freedom.

Someone explain to me how weed is meaningfully different than the recreational and/or “medicinal” use of alcohol.

As far as I can tell, alcohol is a vastly more dangerous drug, yet somehow we manage its benefits against it’s risks and dangers. People are routinely injured and die from alcohol - directly or indirectly. Weed? It’s not even close to being in the same league. Compare that to the real expense and harm caused by the realities of the intersection of weed and the war on dugs.


https://youtu.be/sbjHOBJzhb0


/sarcasm (or is it?) ;)

[Zincwarrior]

As long as the feds can print money and deficit spend, tax revenue doesn't mean jack-shit.

Tell that to Argentina and Venezuela.

[Sensei]

I’m more of a civil libertarian. It’s about freedom.

I might be more convinced if you were calling for (or at the very least mentioning) spending cuts over the next 10 years instead of decrying tax cuts. The $1.7 trillion increase in the deficit caused by tax cuts, if the CBO’s assumptions are correct, represent about a 15% increase in the total debt over the same period. That is an insignificant drop in a $28T bucket in 2027. Do you really think there is a meaningful difference in $26T vs 28T? Moreover, the federal government’s revenue as a percentage of GDP will remain relatively flat over the same period of time at 17-18% despite the tax cuts. In fact, it will probably go up a little. When you really do the math, it becomes quite obvious that our problem is with spending on things like Medicare and Social Security, not a lack of revenue.

So, if you really love freedom, if you thirst for liberty, if you crave self-determination like a pothead craves Cheetos, then demand government cut spending.

As for this book and Steve Bannon, Trump’s self-immolation on Twitter in response to the perceived slight is far more revealing about the man’s character than anything written in those pages.

[GuanoLoco]

I might be more convinced if you were calling for (or at the very least mentioning) spending cuts over the next 10 years instead of decrying tax cuts. The $1.7 trillion increase in the deficit caused by tax cuts, if the CBO’s assumptions are correct, represent about a 15% increase in the total debt over the same period. That is an insignificant drop in a $28T bucket in 2027. Do you really think there is a meaningful difference in $26T vs 28T? Moreover, the federal government’s revenue as a percentage of GDP will remain relatively flat over the same period of time at 17-18% despite the tax cuts. In fact, it will probably go up a little. When you really do the math, it becomes quite obvious that our problem is with spending on things like Medicare and Social Security, not a lack of revenue.

So, if you really love freedom, if you thirst for liberty, if you crave self-determination like a pothead craves Cheetos, then demand government cut spending.

As for this book and Steve Bannon, Trump’s self-immolation on Twitter in response to the perceived slight is far more revealing about the man’s character than anything written in those pages.

I’ll say it: The federal government needs to stop spending like a drunken sailor in a whorehouse, with little more to show for it.

I’m a civil libertarian (ALL liberties, I don’t cherry pick) AND am fiscally conservative - traits shared by NEITHER party in our two-party system.

[blues]

So, if you really love freedom, if you thirst for liberty, if you crave self-determination like a pothead craves Cheetos, then demand government cut spending.

I'd like to see the cuts begin with programs and policies that are not directly benefiting the American people. While I lament that there are people all over the globe in need, there is still a great deal of need at home in terms of poverty, health care, food, shelter, education, infrastructure etc. I'd like to see a commitment to taking care of our needs first and foremost... and worry about everyone else second. (Military necessity and requirements are a separate issue from what I'm referring to in terms of our payouts (and proposed cutbacks) overseas.)

[Sensei]

I'd like to see the cuts begin with programs and policies that are not directly benefiting the American people. While I lament that there are people all over the globe in need, there is still a great deal of need at home in terms of poverty, health care, food, shelter, education, infrastructure etc. I'd like to see a commitment to taking care of our needs first and foremost... and worry about everyone else second. (Military necessity and requirements are a separate issue from what I'm referring to in terms of our payouts (and proposed cutbacks) overseas.)

Agreed. Foreign aid represents about 1% of of the federal budget and 8% of the deficit. That’s a start. Israel is now on its own, Africa can work through the next Ebola crisis, and Haitians can practice their back stroke in preparation for the next hurricane. I fine with all of that.

Where else should we cut to make up the remaining 92% of our deficit? Here is a graph to illustrate the possibilities:

22853

[GuanoLoco]

How about we stop “spending” on corporate subsidies, either direct or indirect through tax loopholes.

All such items should automatically expire after 5 years and require being re-signed into law.

Also, lets minimize the undue influence of special interests on the election and lobbying processes and increase the influence of voting and contributing individuals. Whee do you think all this corporate / special interest favoritism comes from in the first place?

[blues]

I don't know what portion of the U.N., its programs and upkeep were included in your graph and stats, but I'd cut most of that and move the HQ to Jerusalem. (Sarcasm...okay.)

I'd also recommend and enforce (as Trump has recommended doing) that NATO and any other strategic alliances must be supported by other member nations paying their fair share and not relying on us to carry their water.

I don't know the answer to the healthcare and social security questions as I'm not averse to paying a higher percentage in taxes for key social programs, even ones I don't necessarily benefit directly from.

I do have some issues with programs and entitlements being cut that were backed by the full faith of the U.S. government (much as "bonds" are supposed to be). Those who have paid in, and / or spent a career with the understanding that they would receive a pension or benefit at the end of their commitment shouldn't be kicked to the curb with an "oh, sorry about that, mate". (I'll admit to having a dog in that fight as a federal annuitant based upon a career in federal LE.) That doesn't mean that it isn't subject to review and a certain amount of adjustment / revision to keep it viable. But they shouldn't be singled out for belt tightening as Congress tends to threaten yearly.

Our vets should only receive the best of everything in my view. You don't send men and women into harm's way without the willingness to provide for their well being upon their return. Otherwise, let's opt for isolationism over internationalism and "walk softly but carry a big stick".

Anyway...better minds than my own will hopefully weigh in with their view towards a solution.

[ranger]

Agreed. Foreign aid represents about 1% of of the federal budget and 8% of the deficit. That’s a start. Israel is now on its own, Africa can work through the next Ebola crisis, and Haitians can practice their back stroke in preparation for the next hurricane. I fine with all of that.

Where else should we cut to make up the remaining 92% of our deficit? Here is a graph to illustrate the possibilities:

22853

This illustrates the problem with government spending. No politician has the courage to address the Social Security and Health buckets and those plus Defense are the areas that consume the budget. That said, I am ok with reducing or stopping the low percentages of Labor, Energy, Education, Housing, Science, Food and Agriculture, International Affairs, etc. - that would cut budget by 10% or more.

[Sensei]

This illustrates the problem with government spending. No politician has the courage to address the Social Security and Health buckets and those plus Defense are the areas that consume the budget. That said, I am ok with reducing or stopping the low percentages of Labor, Energy, Education, Housing, Science, Food and Agriculture, International Affairs, etc. - that would cut budget by 10% or more.

If you completely cut all of those programs, you would cut the deficit in half. I can’t speak to the other departments, but completely eliminating NIH funding would collapse US healthcare as medical research would grind to a halt...at least until the private market could come up with some alternative. Is everyone cool with NASA going the way of the dinosaur? Also, I believe the international affairs budget includes operating our embassies, so they would all need to be closed. I have no idea what eliminating Labor, Housing, and Education would entail, but I do not suggest hanging out at Jordan Downs or Cabrini Green when the locals realize that their keys don’t work and the schools will not be taking care of their kids. Again, I’m completely fine with what you propose, but I want to describe the consequences so that everyone is on the same page.

Finally, keep in mind that you still have another $250-300 billion or so to take from defense, healthcare, or social security to close the deficit if we completely eliminate all of those programs.


How about we stop “spending” on corporate subsidies, either direct or indirect through tax loopholes.

All such items should automatically expire after 5 years and require being re-signed into law.

Also, lets minimize the undue influence of special interests on the election and lobbying processes and increase the influence of voting and contributing individuals. Whee do you think all this corporate / special interest favoritism comes from int he first place?

When it comes to pork, corporate welfare, and crony capitalism, I’m all with you. Shit like Solyndra, Tesla, and bank bailouts should never happen. My suggestion to prevent future debacles is to only vote for candidates with Liberty Scores at least 80 on Conservative Review.

As for eliminating corporate tax loopholes - we just did. That tax cut that you were complaining about eliminated the lion’s share of loopholes in exchange for lowering the rate to 21%.

How do you propose that we curtail the influence of special interests and lobbyists? Perhaps you are in favor of some federal laws restricting their ability to contact lawmakers or contribute to PACs?

Here is my point. Our fiscal crisis is one of spending on 3 areas that comprise 66% of our budget - healthcare, defense, and social security. Interest on our debt is another 6% that I do not suggest touching.

So, the math is very simple - you can only balance our budget by cutting one or more of these 3 programs: healthcare, social security, and defense. Now, only one of those programs comes from an enumerated federal power in our Constitution. That should help you decide which programs to cut if you truely are a conservative with libertarian leanings.

People who mention cuts to foreign aid, eliminating corporate welfare, etc. as solutions to our predicament either do not understand the simple math starring them in the face or want to distract from confronting the problem.

[blues]

People who mention cuts to foreign aid, eliminating corporate welfare, etc. as solutions to our predicament either do not understand the simple math starring them in the face or want to distract from confronting the problem.

I also don't necessarily think that cutting taxes was the way to address the problem.

Don't get me wrong, I like to hold on to my money as much as the next guy but that doesn't necessarily equate to fiscal responsibility...

...And not everyone whining about taxes is or was facing hardship at current or even somewhat higher rates. Somewhere along the line we have to decide what being a citizen of a nation requires in terms of financial commitment.

What are we willing to pay for as citizens? Or do we all just go our own way and adopt "screw you, I got mine"? Where's the balancing point?

[Sensei]

I don't know what portion of the U.N., its programs and upkeep were included in your graph and stats, but I'd cut most of that and move the HQ to Jerusalem. (Sarcasm...okay.)

It is mostly part of the 1% foreign affairs costs which includes operating embassies across the globe. I am sure there are local costs for security, but our fiscal crisis has little to do with money that we give to the U.N. Having said that, I agree with cutting their budget and expelling their assembly from NYC based on nothing more than principle.



I'd also recommend and enforce (as Trump has recommended doing) that NATO and any other strategic alliances must be supported by other member nations paying their fair share and not relying on us to carry their water.


Making up the shortfall from NATO contributions is a small fraction of our defense budget.



I don't know the answer to the healthcare and social security questions as I'm not averse to paying a higher percentage in taxes for key social programs, even ones I don't necessarily benefit directly from.

I do have some issues with programs and entitlements being cut that were backed by the full faith of the U.S. government (much as "bonds" are supposed to be). Those who have paid in, and / or spent a career with the understanding that they would receive a pension or benefit at the end of their commitment shouldn't be kicked to the curb with an "oh, sorry about that, mate". (I'll admit to having a dog in that fight as a federal annuitant based upon a career in federal LE.) That doesn't mean that it isn't subject to review and a certain amount of adjustment / revision to keep it viable. But they shouldn't be singled out for belt tightening as Congress tends to threaten yearly.

Our vets should only receive the best of everything in my view. You don't send men and women into harm's way without the willingness to provide for their well being upon their return. Otherwise, let's opt for isolationism over internationalism and "walk softly but carry a big stick".

Anyway...better minds than my own will hopefully weigh in with their view towards a solution.

There is no way to solve healthcare and make everyone feel good and treated fairly. If fairness and equality are the goal, do not bother coming to the table to discuss solutions because those ideas do not exist in the real world. The best way to solve the problem which largely centers around delivering expensive care to the elderly is a gradual phaseout of Federal contributions coupled with immediate means testing. That means all of the people currently in the system who need the services will see very little change, but those currently with money and future generations can expect to get less. Eventually, our goal should be to have the federal government completely out of providing healthcare in 50 years or so, and state governments providing basic levels of care in limited circumstances.

Finally, our vets are currently not receiving only the best of everything and never will. The most that they can hope for is to improve their lot to something that approaches what a middle class Americans enjoy. Right now, they get something that is in between Medicaid and Medicare which is a far cry from what your probably get. I have outlined the best way to make that happen in previous posts and it does not involve more money going to the VA.

[Sensei]

I also don't necessarily think that cutting taxes was the way to address the problem.

Don't get me wrong, I like to hold on to my money as much as the next guy but that doesn't necessarily equate to fiscal responsibility...

...And not everyone whining about taxes is or was facing hardship at current or even somewhat higher rates. Somewhere along the line we have to decide what being a citizen of a nation requires in terms of financial commitment.

What are we willing to pay for as citizens? Or do we all just go our own way and adopt "screw you, I got mine"? Where's the balancing point?

Again, the tax cut will have negligible impact on our debt in 10 years or the percentage of revenue from GDP that the government collects from our pockets.

Tax cuts make a lot of sense when coupled with spending cuts as it means that the size of government is shrinking. That is a good thing. Those who disagree with that premise should take a long, hard look at Elizabeth Warren for POTUS in 2020. ;)

[blues]

Those who disagree with that premise should take a long, hard look at Elizabeth Warren for POTUS in 2020. ;)

Uh...No-to-hontas.

[Sensei]

Forgive the naive question from a someone who was had relatively little exposure to healthcare (mostly physicals and flu shots -- that sort of thing), but what is exactly is government spending all the healthcare money on? Serious question, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass or anything.

The majority of federal healthcare spending comes in the form of Medicare at $675B per year. This is a federal program that provides healthcare to the elderly. The Feds spend another $350B per year on Medicaid which is for low income individuals; this is matched by another $200B in state spending. Obamacare subsidies are another $100B. Add it all up and it’s about 28-30% of the budget.

[Totem Polar]

Forgive the naive question from a someone who was had relatively little exposure to healthcare (mostly physicals and flu shots -- that sort of thing), but what is exactly is government spending all the healthcare money on? Serious question, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass or anything.

Administration. Including things like liability, etc.

When you have been on the roll-your-own self-employed plan for as long as i have, you see some pretty incredible mark up on services. The best was an ER bill that included a $122 ice pack... which was a roughly 4x6" plastic cold wrap in the shape of a teddy bear. Everyone here can google $30 asprin tablets and find plenty of info to make them angry if they wish.

As to alcohol v maryjane: I have yet to see anyone dead of chronic toking up. I’ve seen plenty of people in deep shit over long-term drinking, to include immediate family dead of liver/everything failure as recently as a couple of weeks ago.

I don’t have a dog in the hunt, because, form 4473, but I’m definitely in the "fuck it; legalize it camp" and nothing I’ve seen out of Washington State has led me to beleive that it’s a bad idea. MJ revenue is a pretty decent vice tax, in all. Sure, there are people getting baked each weekend who should probably be reading "think and grow rich" instead, but stupid will always stupid, and dope is more societally benign than a lot of things, to include booze and possibly facebook. JMO: everyone has one, and that’s mine.

[Sensei]

Administration. Including things like liability, etc.

Administrative expenditures for Medicare are about 2% of its budget. That is because it is able to piggyback much of its overhead off Social Security and other federal programs. Regardless, the vast, vast majority of expenditures are actually delivering care.

[blues]

Administrative expenditures for Medicare are about 2% of its budget. That is because it is able to piggyback much of its overhead off Social Security and other federal programs. Regardless, the vast, vast majority of expenditures are actually delivering care.
Sensei

I'll follow Tom's lead and ask a question based upon my own ignorance. As a physician yourself, what percentage of the cost of delivering care is provided at reasonable / justifiable cost? I ask this without animus. My only interaction with the health system (other than routine dentist visits) in recent years has been an ER visit to have both hands sutured up following a fall while running on gravel. (For which the hospital billed $1500, covered fully by insurance since I was treated immediately following the accident.)

I'm wondering if most personal physician and hospital related costs (to your mind) are fair and reasonable or is it like the military and the $3000 toilet seats of internet lore?

[Totem Polar]

Regardless, the vast, vast majority of expenditures are actually delivering care.

I think we may be splitting around semantics here. How much of the cost of delivering care is covering things besides actually treating patients? Why are US delivery costs so much higher than any other country with advanced healthcare? That's the main question to tackle, if we are gunning for any sort of meaningful improvement.

I'm going to keep asking you, because you are clearly an enthusiast practitioner, by personality. In my experience, asking most docs about this is like asking most police detailed questions about firearms: some know an astounding amount, and most have absolutely no idea how things work outside their daily activities.

[UNK]

From BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42560520):



This is my surprised face.

Fake News http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/07/steve-bannon-issues-statement-my-support-is-unwavering-for-trump-and-his-agenda/

[blues]

Fake News http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/07/steve-bannon-issues-statement-my-support-is-unwavering-for-trump-and-his-agenda/

If I were inclined to believe anything this or any other self-serving buffoon had to say, either pro or anti, especially after the fact...it would be a lot more believable had it not been said for publication in the first place.

"Trump is a patriot". Lip service don't make it so. Show me. (I'm pulling for him to do so.)

[UNK]

If I were inclined to believe anything this or any other self-serving buffoon had to say, either pro or anti, especially after the fact...it would be a lot more believable had it not been said for publication in the first place.

"Trump is a patriot". Lip service don't make it so. Show me. (I'm pulling for him to do so.)

I started a thread about the Alabama election. I thought based on his education, military service and prior experience, plus watching everything I could find about him, that he was the real deal. Now how hard did the Republicans fight to make him fail? I would guess the swamp threw everything they had and could without getting caught. I mean seriously who are you going to believe. Bannon or a person whose absolute goal is to destroy 45?

[blues]

I started a thread about the Alabama election. I thought based on his education, military service and prior experience, plus watching everything I could find about him, that he was the real deal. Now how hard did the Republicans fight to make him fail? I would guess the swamp threw everything they had and could without getting caught. I mean seriously who are you going to believe. Bannon or a person whose absolute goal is to destroy 45?

Probably neither until the preponderance of available information and evidence has had time to be digested.

[Sensei]

Sensei

I'll follow Tom's lead and ask a question based upon my own ignorance. As a physician yourself, what percentage of the cost of delivering care is provided at reasonable / justifiable cost? I ask this without animus. My only interaction with the health system (other than routine dentist visits) in recent years has been an ER visit to have both hands sutured up following a fall while running on gravel. (For which the hospital billed $1500, covered fully by insurance since I was treated immediately following the accident.)

I'm wondering if most personal physician and hospital related costs (to your mind) are fair and reasonable or is it like the military and the $3000 toilet seats of internet lore?

The Center for Medicare Services sets the rate that physicians and hospitals will be reimbursed by Medicare for a given visit, procedure, or test. Private insurers and Medicaid use these CMS price benchmarks when deciding how much they will reimburse for care delivered to their covered patients. The rates for private insurance and Medicaid are highly variable for different services, states, etc., but a general rule of thumb is that Medicaid is roughly 60-70% of Medicare and pivate insurance is 120-130%. For many aspects of healthcare care delivery, the CMS reimbursement rate for Medicare does not fully cover the cost of delivering care and Medicaid is a joke. Thus, healthcare providers must recover those losses from care billed to private insurance. There is a careful balance of payer mix so that accepting too many Medicaid or Medicare patients can put a practice in the red. For example, my hospital is pretty high performing and has a 4% profit margin; a small cut in Medicare funding or increase in uninsured patients and we are in the red which means cutting services.

So, Medicare basically serves as a complex system of price controls to shelter the elderly from the full burden of their care. Medicaid is another form of price controls for the poor. Large healthcare plans and HMOs are another less stringent form of price controls for their covered patients. Thus, patients without any insurance are exposed to the full burden of inflated healthcare costs when everyone else is sheltered. That is how you get uninsured patients getting billed $1500 for some stitches while someone with BC/BC sees that amount knocked down to their plan rate of $500 that is paid for by their insurance (minus deductible).

[Sensei]

I think we may be splitting around semantics here. How much of the cost of delivering care is covering things besides actually treating patients? Why are US delivery costs so much higher than any other country with advanced healthcare? That's the main question to tackle, if we are gunning for any sort of meaningful improvement.

I'm going to keep asking you, because you are clearly an enthusiast practitioner, by personality. In my experience, asking most docs about this is like asking most police detailed questions about firearms: some know an astounding amount, and most have absolutely no idea how things work outside their daily activities.

Healthcare delivery in America is much more expensive than other developed countries because:
1) We consume a tremendous amount of high tech resources. We use more MRIs, CT scans, stress tests, etc. per capita than other developed nations. Simply put, Americans will not tolerate the level of diagnostic uncertainty that is common abroad.
2) Americans want their care right now. Our CT scanners run 24/7.
3) Americans want a pill for everything. We are 5% of the world’s population and consume 80 of its prescription drugs.
4) We have created an elaborate system of price controls (see my post above) that creates tons of market distortions.
5) We practice under tremendous regulations and must pay an army of bean counters to insure compliance and get paid.
6) Our system of medical education does not emphasize cost effectiveness.
7) Our tort system increase utilization via defensive medicine (actually a minor source of cost).

[Totem Polar]

Thanks for that.

[Mjolnir]

We coulda had Hillary...

Uh, negative, Ghostrider...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[blues]

Sensei Thank you for explaining that process. Very interesting and helps put things in perspective.

[Josh Runkle]

Whatever he has, if it in anyway has anything to do with how the stock market has performed since the election, I like it. :)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/01/05/heres-how-trumps-first-year-on-stocks-jobs-compares-to-past-presidents.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Josh Runkle]

They don't appear to think very highly of weed.

Who’s “they”? The Russians? ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNK]

He can't.
The Senate installed Sessions as the firewall between Trump and swamp criminals.
The Senate has already told Trump there's not a damn thing he can do when it comes to Sessions.
Trump can't fire him because the Senate will not confirm a replacement and they have already voted to remain in session so Trump can't do a recess appointment.
Sessions pretty much has free reign to do whatever the fuck he wants (which is be a anti-pot crusader) and you can guarantee he doesn't want to start indicting fellow travelers in government (because there's dirt on him as well I'm sure).

Like times 100. Theres some folks who need to get woke.

[Sensei]

Thanks for that.


Sensei Thank you for explaining that process. Very interesting and helps put things in perspective.

Your both very welcome. I wish that more people were as engaged as you and asking good questions.

[blues]

Like him or not, but President Trump is pretty much the closet thing to Zaphod Beeblebrox we will ever have in the Oval Office.

Joe in PNG I'm about halfway through the first book and I can't believe just how right you are. It's as if Adams had him in mind for the role. Uncanny.

[Sensei]

Bannon has been fired at Breitbart. I suppose that settles who can piss further and higher...

[David S.]

Nevermind I;m staying out of this.

[DocGKR]

So much truth here:


Healthcare delivery in America is much more expensive than other developed countries because:
1) We consume a tremendous amount of high tech resources. We use more MRIs, CT scans, stress tests, etc. per capita than other developed nations. Simply put, Americans will not tolerate the level of diagnostic uncertainty that is common abroad.
2) Americans want their care right now. Our CT scanners run 24/7.
3) Americans want a pill for everything. We are 5% of the world’s population and consume 80 of its prescription drugs.
4) We have created an elaborate system of price controls (see my post above) that creates tons of market distortions.
5) We practice under tremendous regulations and must pay an army of bean counters to insure compliance and get paid.
6) Our system of medical education does not emphasize cost effectiveness.
7) Our tort system increase utilization via defensive medicine (actually a minor source of cost).

[OlongJohnson]

In my experience, the bean counters are terrifyingly incompetent much of the time. Thank god they don't touch patients.

[Nephrology]

6) Our system of medical education does not emphasize cost effectiveness.

Not to mention that our system of medical education is itself enormously expensive, which heavily influences specialty selection and career choice. It's hard to convince someone graduating with $400k in loans (estimated total 4 yr cost for attending my MD program as an out of state student) to go into Peds or Psych when they got a 260 on Step 1 and Rad Onc seems mighty appealing...

The sad part being, of course, that that's after heavy subsidy of their education...

[TheNewbie]

My girlfriend went to a top private medical school in Mexico. Cost her 12k.

[45dotACP]

Healthcare delivery in America is much more expensive than other developed countries because:
1) We consume a tremendous amount of high tech resources. We use more MRIs, CT scans, stress tests, etc. per capita than other developed nations. Simply put, Americans will not tolerate the level of diagnostic uncertainty that is common abroad.
2) Americans want their care right now. Our CT scanners run 24/7.
3) Americans want a pill for everything. We are 5% of the world’s population and consume 80 of its prescription drugs.
4) We have created an elaborate system of price controls (see my post above) that creates tons of market distortions.
5) We practice under tremendous regulations and must pay an army of bean counters to insure compliance and get paid.
6) Our system of medical education does not emphasize cost effectiveness.
7) Our tort system increase utilization via defensive medicine (actually a minor source of cost).Get this man a pulpit because I'm over here saying Amen....

Damn good post here Sensei. Even having worked in healthcare myself for a few years, I still find myself largely baffled by shit like this.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk