House Intel Chairman announces ‘serious national security threat'

Lol…. I’ve never heard that argument before…

Why don’t you just live off grid instead of taking advantage of all the US government spending? Whoops!

Also… I don’t believe you are a millionaire or someone who would actually be affected by raising taxes on the wealthy.

 

The common thread in nearly every one of SpaceGhost's posts here are essentially:

"Oh you silly liberals are freaking out about nothing with Putin and Russia. You are the crazy ones for even thinking the Putin and Russia are doing anything bad."

It's nothing but gaslighting on behalf of the normalization of Putin's actions that are steady and increasingly provocative, bold, and highly dangerous for Americans and the free world.

If I didn't know any better, I'd think this guy works for Sputnik.

 

We're probably worried the nuke would evade early warning capabilities of norad.

Very Bond villainesque

 

lol

 

@Space Ghost is definitely smarter than these dumb Jeremy Lin fans on this thread

 

You haven't explained how you're going to tackle the deficit, let alone the debt and just hand waive "raise taxes" and "cut spending" - It's easy to just give glib responses like this.

What taxes are going to be raised and how much additional revenue are they going to bring in per annum?

What spending is going to be cut and to what degree? Whose funding are you cutting?

 

It’s insanely predictable

 

Lol and you haven’t answered my questions aside from hand waving away answers.

I’m not going to be able to solve a political issue on a basketball forum aside from making a general statement that revenue needs to be increased and spending needs to be cut.

 

You must give us your complete breakdown, otherwise don't give us your opinion at all.

 

lol

 

I’ll submit my detailed excel report….

Amusing how making the general statement of we need to increase revenue and decrease spending would ruffle the feathers of some.

 

I'm not looking for anything complicated.

I simply want to know how much revenue your proposed tax hikes are going to bring in per annum? That's not a complicated question.

You also say we need to cut spending - Ok, what spending are you cutting? Is that question too complicated as well?

We have a $1.7 trillion deficit and $34 trillion debt.

What combination of tax hikes and spending cuts gets us a surplus and on the road to repaying our debt?

 

I just want to know, generally, where you're going to find some combination of tax revenue and spending cuts equaling $1.7 trillion per annum.

Doesn't need to be detailed.

 

It's not that detailed at all, or all that long ago:

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/house-intel-chairman-announces-‘serious-national-security-threat.322391/page-3#post-15072510

 

Why do we need to get to $0 deficit? That didn’t make sense in the context of nations. This is more complicated than household finances.

 

That doesn't tell me what the projected tax revenues would be from such increases.

Maybe that only brings in an additional $500 billion per annum. Doesn't get us there.

How much would raising taxes that high actually even raise per annum? Even in your "highest taxes in U.S. history" utopia does that cover the current deficit? Does it create a surplus to start paying down the debt?

 

I'll believe the next president-elect who promises Mexico would pay for the wall over the lame duck who proposes your tax regime and financial repression needed to get our finances and entitlements back into order.

We have an entire generation who never seen a year where the budget turned a surplus and only recently seen Fed rates as high as 5%.

It's a travesty...not that generation, but the boomers who presided over it.

I'll bet in 5 years flat millennials will revolt over estate "Death Taxes" given the large amounts of wealth transfer coming towards them. Even if most of them wouldn't even trigger the current million+ thresholds.

It's "The Principle of It"... ::cough::cough::doublespeakbrainwashingforenablingselfishness::

 

Over the past 70+ years?

Nah, I'm not doing that math either.

 

Will be intersted to see whether Elon's opinions change after Putin converts all the Starlink satelites to radioactive debris.

 

No one was asking for the past 70 years. Those years are gone.

Just 2024 or 2025 would be fine.