How are we going to pay for all this shit?

Hey guys, the answer to the OP’s question is the nuclear powered printing press.

Never runs out of fuel, runs 24 hrs a day.

I bet the China Man will even furnish us with an unlimited supply of paper.

The United States national government debt has now reached $29 trillion.

The size of the 2008 bank bailout was also $29 trillion.

https://twitter.com/GoldTelegraph_/s...71026906374144

The United States national government debt has now reached $29 trillion.

The size of the 2008 bank bailout was also $29 trillion.

https://twitter.com/GoldTelegraph_/s...71026906374144 Originally Posted by bambino

What was the debt before Trump took office when he claimed he would eliminate out debt?

I heard...and you can check this out, I heard that Trump added almost 8 trillion dollars in just 4 short years!

That’s what people are saying.

Not our boy Q, Q thinks Trump eliminated the national debt.

I heard...and you can check this out, I heard that Trump added almost 8 trillion dollars in just 4 short years! Originally Posted by WTF

I got so many phone calls with people telling this.

Not our boy Q, Q thinks Trump eliminated the national debt. Originally Posted by WTF

Wow, does "your boy" actually believe that?

He sounds almost as stupid as someone who blames today's debt on Ronnie Reagan. Or thinks we spent $29 trillion on the 2008 bank bailout.

On eccie, there's a sucker born every minute!

Wow, does "your boy" actually believe that?

He sounds almost as stupid as someone who blames today's debt on Ronnie Reagan. Or thinks we spent $29 trillion on the 2008 bank bailout.

On eccie, there's a sucker born every minute! Originally Posted by lustylad

Q is your boy.

I blame the notion that debt does not matter on Reagan. That anytime you cut taxes , the cut pays for itself. I blame your type of ignorance for Reagan to get away with it. Your lies and distortions trying to hide the facts of SnakeOil.

You are living proof of that sucker being born.

Q is your boy.

I blame the notion that debt does not matter on Reagan. That anytime you cut taxes, the cut pays for itself Originally Posted by WTF

So you must be Q! Are you offering to be my bitch again?

There's one problem...

Neither Reagan, nor any member of his administration, ever said "debt doesn't matter" or "anytime you cut taxes, the cut pays for itself".

Only a Q-Anon idiot would make up and repeatedly spread false stories like that!

Got any more straw men for us today, Q?

straw man
/ˌstrô ˈman/
noun

1. an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

There's one problem...

Neither Reagan, nor any member of his administration, ever said "debt doesn't matter"

Originally Posted by lustylad

There is only one problem....their actions.

You could be so chocked full of dicks you couldn't fart or burp and never admit to being a little gay.

It is one's actions that matter.
Not that it matters to me if you're gay or even a liar. But your actions indicate you are.

or "anytime you cut taxes, the cut pays for itself".

Originally Posted by lustylad

I've consistently said that was the take away his minions gathered.

We've had this discussion recently Grasshopper. Remember Art Laffer? My contention is that you supply side freaks have never understood the whole of when to cut taxes. Only that cutting is is good, no matter the current tax rate.

Here is your history Grasshopper...of which you seem totally oblivious. Probably because you are...

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...conomy-226704/
Reagan would go on to fully embrace supply-side theory, a shift from the party’s traditional emphasis on fiscal discipline, appointing Laffer to his Economic Policy Advisory Board...


... The group has argued that the best way to manage the economy is to make life easier for the producers of goods and services—by limiting taxes and regulations—so that producers are incentivized to supply more of these goods and services to the market, and that taming deficits is less important than spurring growth.

I've consistently said that was the take away his minions gathered.

Ok then, name a single Reagan economist or even "minion" who ever said "any time you cut taxes, the cut pays for itself". If this was really the "take away" of so many people, then surely you can find SOMEONE actually quoted as saying exactly that!

We've had this discussion recently Grasshopper. Remember Art Laffer? My contention is that you supply side freaks have never understood the whole of when to cut taxes. Originally Posted by WTF

Are you calling yourself a "freak"? You're the one who keeps bringing up Laffer as your favorite economist.

And since you claim to understand "the whole of when to cut taxes" (unlike the rest of us) - why don't you expound and enlighten us all on this subject?

Go ahead now! The floor is yours! Don't blow it!

...taming deficits is less important than spurring growth. Originally Posted by WTF

You shouldn't hide behind a Politico story, especially one that doesn't even come close to substantiating your ignorant posts.

Saying that "taming deficits is (temporarily) less important than spurring growth" is not even close to saying "deficits don't matter". The former implies they still matter, but should not be prioritized ahead of another, more urgent goal. If you disagreed with Reagan's priorities, you are entitled to say so. You are NOT entitled to completely misrepresent his views or the views of the people in his administration.

Did you find the person yet who said "any time you cut taxes, the cut pays for itself"? Like patient grasshoppers, we're still waiting. Was it Ferris Bueller? If you can't find any such quote, we can trust you to retract your claim, right?

Every President before and after Reagan, when confronted with either a recession or the exigencies of wartime, embraced the idea that taming deficits must sometimes be deemed of secondary importance. FDR's deficits pulled us out of the Great Depression and won WW2. Reagan's deficits pulled us out of the 1981 recession and won the Cold War. Moreover, as I pointed out already, Reagan's deficits enabled Clinton's surpluses - by making room for a "peace dividend" in the decade after Ronnie left office.

Now tell us, in your own words. everything we need to know about "the whole of when to cut taxes". In your post #865, you claimed to understand that subject better than the rest of us.

I know you are eager to educate everyone here. So go ahead... the floor is yours. We're waiting and hanging on every word!

Are you calling yourself a "freak"?

! Originally Posted by lustylad

No

Are you calling yourself a "freak"? You're the one who keeps bringing up Laffer as your favorite economist.

! Originally Posted by lustylad

not my favorite...he is considered the godfather of supply side though.

You do not even realize who is responsible for Reagan's economic policies.

Now if you have something rational to talk about, I will continue if you can do so in a respectful manner. If not I suggest you move along.

You do not even realize who is responsible for Reagan's economic policies. Originally Posted by WTF

I've already called Laffer a lightweight. You think he's a heavy. Reagan's economic record was so strong there are plenty of advisers eager to take credit for it.

Now if you have something rational to talk about, I will continue if you can do so in a respectful manner. If not I suggest you move along. Originally Posted by WTF

Huh? You want to "move along" when I just handed you the mic?

This is your chance to shine! Tell us everything we don't understand about "the whole of when to cut taxes"! I want to hear what I'm missing.

You're the eccie expert on fiscal policy, so please share your expertise!