(12-19-2017 09:32 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  When you actually read the article that is posted. Something that this room never does you can see that Obama's terms coincides with a time period where R's controlled the purse strings.

Uhm.. No .. In fact, you apparently are just making up numbers for some reason, Mach.

Now I will admit, I don't know if your article gives the dividing line in the last years of each Congressional session, so that may skew the numbers.

2009 = Now I will give you it was George Bush's plan to start this off... BUT

110th 2007-2009 Senate: 49(D) 49® 2(I)
House: 233(D) 198® - Strike 1, No Republican control.. (You really think those two I's are Conservative/Republican votes?).
total added $3.1 T

111th 2009-2011 Senate: 57 (D) 41 ® 2 (Vacant - not sure how they classified a seat as vacant throughout)
House: 256 (D) 178 ® 1 (Vacant)
Total added: $3.1 T (Now again, you could say part of this belongs to Bush.. but the article itself again, says the 2011 numbers it used are the ESA numbers specifically.)

112th 2011-2013 : Senate 51 (D) 47 ® 2 (I)
House 193 (D) 242 ®

Total added $3.1 T

113th 2013- 2015 Senate 44 (D) 55 ® 1 (I)
House: 201 (D) 2346 ®

Total added $2.7 T.

Hey, look... first year the Republicans have both houses, and the number went down!!! So where the hell you got this 75% number is just beyond belief.

Are the 2011-13 House Republicans responsible for not cutting spending like they should? Sure... but your entire statement is not just off, but it is completely wrong.

As for zerohedge... your link is to some story about Oil Rigs being automated. yet, you conveniently missed a key paragraph later in the article:

Quote:In land drilling, activity in the U.S. oil patch is picking up, and employment has recently shown the first signs of gains after more than two years of declines

As for this:

Quote:Trump says his plan could hike taxes on the wealthy, contradicting experts and his own treasury secretary

Trump now says he wants to tax the rich

Uhm.. Trump never said he wouldn't tax wealthy individuals. In fact, he promoted that somewhat during the campaigns, pointing out that wealthy individuals would probably pay more, but that their businesses would get some relief.

In fact the CNN article kinda backs it up:

Quote:"show that a rich guy who made $25 million last year is going to pay less than he was. In a certain way, I don't like that. I'd rather take that difference and put it into the middle-income and put it into corporate."

Trump's always been of that opinion for decades.\

Now whether or not you agree with that philosophy is another thing, and a reasonable debate point... Let the money-makers put the money into the corporations, but having the govt do it? ehhh... I can see a flag there, but not along the "chicken little, sky is falling" that Mach is using.

All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

(12-19-2017 12:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

(12-19-2017 12:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

I don't need it. I long ago secured my retirement myself...and I don't have to wait till Im damn near dead to get it.

(12-19-2017 12:46 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

Yes...I thought it was funny also.

(12-19-2017 12:46 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

Let me be clear. By again, I mean it's been raided before that isn't to say only the republicans have done it. I'm well aware that the Democrats have done it.

(12-19-2017 12:47 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

That's a good way to look at it. Since the Republicans are likely to raid SS again to pay for their new tax giveaway, I'm glad I don't pay into it anymore.

I don't need it. I long ago secured my retirement myself...and I don't have to wait till Im damn near dead to get it.

Dang Fo, I hope you live in good health many years beyond 67.

(12-19-2017 11:34 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  You guys said the same thing under Reagan and W. Both times we ended up in a huge recession. Economists blast this tax cut btw. I honestly can't believe people are defending it. IT"S EXACTLY OPPOSITE OF WHAT TRUMP RAN ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He was going to raise taxes on the rich!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are you guys ok with being lied to?

Duh. 9/11 threw the economy in a recession and the Bush tax cuts turned the economy around. W. gained seats in the House and Senate in mid-terms, which is rare for a sitting president. 2008 was a whole different cycle and due to bad real estate policies by both parties.

Reagan tax cuts broke the back of Carter's stagflation, leading to a boom that didn't let up until the twin towers came down.

(12-19-2017 11:05 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Not at all. I posted a while back rig counts and jobs from the oil service industry. The two lines used to correlate. Now there is a disconnect. We are becoming automated. I do not believe this tax cut will do what you say. This was a straight up boondoggle. The Corker kickback. I was reading carve outs last week that would make all of us puke. Well maybe not you guys because you are team over country but too many Americans. The majority of Americans. The people who do not watch the propaganda arm of the GOP Fox News this is an albatross and a straight up give away to the donor class.

Oil industry jobs are declining because companies are still laying off geologists and accountants. Now automated rigs may have an impact in the future, but its not why rig counts are going up while employment in the industry is flat.

(12-19-2017 11:38 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 11:31 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-03...ustry-jobs

This is what I am talking about and that article should scare the hell out of 80% of Americans.

which is why infrastructure is going to be the next wave of job creation for those workers....

I just had a good friend lose his son two weeks ago on a rig.....

here's a caveat from your linky.....

Quote:The inevitable advance of technology and automation has upended industries such as car manufacturing and food processing. Now robotics is making its way into the oil fields by helping drilling activities and putting together heavy pipes.

For companies, more automation would mean higher efficiency, safer operations, and ultimately, lower drilling and production costs. For oil rig workers, it would mean that part of the jobs lost during the oil price downturn would never return. Also, part of the new job openings would require a different type of skill set: for example, information technology and advanced computer skills.

in no way do I see anything in this article as a negative....

which is why infrastructure is going to be the next wave of job creation for those workers....


Hey, wait a minute. If I remember right, a Demoncrap proposed using this same game plan after the Stock Market crash. I hope not too many of todays Demons don't impede this next Trump move...just because it's Trump.

(12-19-2017 01:54 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 11:38 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 11:31 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-03...ustry-jobs

This is what I am talking about and that article should scare the hell out of 80% of Americans.

which is why infrastructure is going to be the next wave of job creation for those workers....

I just had a good friend lose his son two weeks ago on a rig.....

here's a caveat from your linky.....

Quote:The inevitable advance of technology and automation has upended industries such as car manufacturing and food processing. Now robotics is making its way into the oil fields by helping drilling activities and putting together heavy pipes.

For companies, more automation would mean higher efficiency, safer operations, and ultimately, lower drilling and production costs. For oil rig workers, it would mean that part of the jobs lost during the oil price downturn would never return. Also, part of the new job openings would require a different type of skill set: for example, information technology and advanced computer skills.

in no way do I see anything in this article as a negative....

which is why infrastructure is going to be the next wave of job creation for those workers....


Hey, wait a minute. If I remember right, a Demoncrap proposed using this same game plan after the Stock Market crash. I hope not too many of todays Demons don't impede this next Trump move...just because it's Trump.

XACLY! Ryan is now fully on board.......finally.........he's giving one helluva speech at this moment...

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

Hey, isn't Fo a Democrat? If he's okay with the Tax Plan why aren't the rest of you Liberals?

Fo has principles. Fo is an optimist. Fo is what is right in this world and I'm proud to have gotten to know his acquaintance.


but sadly, no Democrat. Fo is libertarian leans republican.

(12-19-2017 01:59 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

Hey, isn't Fo a Democrat? If he's okay with the Tax Plan why aren't the rest of you Liberals?

Take note to not trust anything you say that you preface with, "if memory serves me correctly."

(12-19-2017 11:41 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 07:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 07:14 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  And our deficit is going to go up 1.5 trillion due to this boondoggle. People can’t be this stupid? Who could possibly support this? It’s going to be the most disliked piece of legislation in 30 years.

Shush. If this was Obama you'd be singing the praises.

So what you are saying is that because it's Trump's, you'll take it?

Nope. I wasn't for Obamcare. But I didn't bash it. I waited for lower rates. Still waiting.

BTW when Obama was racking up $9 trillion in debt for 8 years, where was your concern? Now we're saying maybe a 10th in 10 years and it's an issue. GTFO

(12-19-2017 02:01 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 01:59 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

Hey, isn't Fo a Democrat? If he's okay with the Tax Plan why aren't the rest of you Liberals?

Take note to not trust anything you say that you preface with, "if memory serves me correctly."

In his defense...I am a classical Liberal. (socially liberal/fiscally conservative). There are issues that I see eye to eye with Democrats on and he may have seen me post something to that effect.

(12-19-2017 02:01 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Fo has principles. Fo is an optimist. Fo is what is right in this world and I'm proud to have gotten to know his acquaintance.


but sadly, no Democrat. Fo is libertarian leans republican.

Sadly?...

(12-19-2017 05:37 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 02:01 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 01:59 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 12:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  All I know is that for at least 10 years Ill have less stolen from me. Ill take it.

Hey, isn't Fo a Democrat? If he's okay with the Tax Plan why aren't the rest of you Liberals?

Take note to not trust anything you say that you preface with, "if memory serves me correctly."

In his defense...I am a classical Liberal. (socially liberal/fiscally conservative). There are issues that I see eye to eye with Democrats on and he may have seen me post something to that effect.

You are now a republican