We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
Any money Joe lol raises is already spent and he will end up raising less by raising taxes
But still
We all understand that Daddy ran huge deficits. Still, Joe's proposal includes paying for Joe's proposal.
Pure bullshit. Joe's tax proposal don't even come close to pay off the spending that's already been passed and that he is still proposing, let alone close the current trillion dollar plus annual deficit spending we're already engaging in. Who does these lies of your work on?
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
Look at our supposedly educated college graduates. Who would date a women studies major that was a healthy normal male. What smart female accounting major would marry a male sociology major with $100k of student debt they could never repay? You look at the male and female antifa dudes and dudettes and they are simply non-functional as either citizens or spouses or parents.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
Look at our supposedly educated college graduates. Who would date a women studies major that was a healthy normal male. What smart female accounting major would marry a male sociology major with $100k of student debt they could never repay? You look at the male and female antifa dudes and dudettes and they are simply non-functional as either citizens or spouses or parents.
Exactly, we have a lot more mental illness and dysfunctional people out there.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
We're getting close. I disagree that we have a demographics problem, and I pointed out that immigration will solve some of that. Population growth is down pretty much worldwide. I don't disagree that cost is a huge factor and that our system can come up with ways to that help support families. I would point out that democrats may have some proposals that seem good in a virtue signaling, sound bite way, but the costs will be passed on to the middle class. It's not free stuff if I am paying 10% more in taxes. I see a lot of weasel words in what Biden is proposing. Small business people are the new Kulaks. I also think that China's problem is not ours. And that graph is a pretty good demonstration of it.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
Middle class people don't want a decline in their lifestyles. And we do want middle class people to reproduce.
People have been delaying getting married and having kids for some time. The oldest Echo Boomers are on the cusp of 40. It's mostly a bunch of thirty somethings. The biology doesn't allow for a whole lot more delay.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
Middle class people don't want a decline in their lifestyles. And we do want middle class people to reproduce.
People have been delaying getting married and having kids for some time. The oldest Echo Boomers are on the cusp of 40. It's mostly a bunch of thirty somethings. The biology doesn't allow for a whole lot more delay.
I didn't get married until I was 38 and didn't buy a house until 40. "Free" daycare wouldn't have changed either of those decisions.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
We're getting close. I disagree that we have a demographics problem, and I pointed out that immigration will solve some of that. Population growth is down pretty much worldwide. I don't disagree that cost is a huge factor and that our system can come up with ways to that help support families. I would point out that democrats may have some proposals that seem good in a virtue signaling, sound bite way, but the costs will be passed on to the middle class. It's not free stuff if I am paying 10% more in taxes. I see a lot of weasel words in what Biden is proposing. Small business people are the new Kulaks. I also think that China's problem is not ours. And that graph is a pretty good demonstration of it.
I agree immigration has a role to play. But while bad economic times often correlate with lower births, the recovery usually results in a rebound. Not so with the Great Recession. Providing for kids is financially back breaking for couples.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Interesting when you look at this and think if the implications
For China to be expansionary (as evidence points in that direction), there is definitely some time urgency there as losing roughly half of your population kind of throws a bit of a monkey wrench into the plan eventually.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
Or people choosing to establish their careers first and foremost
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
Or people choosing to establish their careers first and foremost
And lots of smart women of any color are choosing their career over any kids.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids?
You were just saying I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. I disagree.
Not sure where we're missing each other.
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
We're getting close. I disagree that we have a demographics problem, and I pointed out that immigration will solve some of that. Population growth is down pretty much worldwide. I don't disagree that cost is a huge factor and that our system can come up with ways to that help support families. I would point out that democrats may have some proposals that seem good in a virtue signaling, sound bite way, but the costs will be passed on to the middle class. It's not free stuff if I am paying 10% more in taxes. I see a lot of weasel words in what Biden is proposing. Small business people are the new Kulaks. I also think that China's problem is not ours. And that graph is a pretty good demonstration of it.
Immigration would solve some of that. But importing Central Americans with no education and largely coming to the US as a welfare magnet is not solving anything.
The 20th Century economic boom didn't begin in 1983, no matter what you all keep telling yourselves. Biden is proposing a return to what became mainstream economics from 1933 through about 1979, a period that saw reasonably prosperous and and large middle class arise in this country and elsewhere.
Of course, Gasbag seems to think that was Marxism.
Biden is pandering to the lowest denominator (that's you) with the usual class envy bullshit.
But here is your chance to line out what he is (isn't) proposing that will take us back to the halcyon days of Jim Crow
I was alive in 1979 and reasonably prosperous was a term you didn't hear. At all
I envy myself and that's why I support me and others like me paying "confiscatory" taxes.
I don't recall saying that we had a perfect society during or after WWII. I said the groundwork had been laid and our tax and spending policies continued to largely encourage the growth of a prosperous middle class.
And regardless of what people said and what challenges we faced in 1979 (inflation, stagflation, etc.), there is a vast body of economic data to support the proposition that the shrinking of the middle class--or at least its share of the economy--begins in the 1980s and has continued unabated.
Please stop trying to be rich on a college football board. NO ONE CARES!
Are you a child? Look at me, look at me, look at me!!!
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.
Interesting when you look at this and think if the implications
For China to be expansionary (as evidence points in that direction), there is definitely some time urgency there as losing roughly half of your population kind of throws a bit of a monkey wrench into the plan eventually.
South Korea and Japan also have dire population contractions in their future, and it's almost too late to stop.
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
And you're dumb enough to believe that giving people "free" daycare will encourage more people to have kids. You do know that the European countries have been trying this for over 25 years, It's not helping. If you really wanted people having more kids you'd be calling for the immediate end to all abortions.
Of course, if I wanted to add all the issues that arise with criminalizing abortion into the mix, I'd do that. But I don't.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People are delaying getting married, and having kids. There are all kind of reasons for this. It isn't just about money. Why do poor people tend to have more kids than middle class people? If money were the issue that wouldn't be the case.
Look at our supposedly educated college graduates. Who would date a women studies major that was a healthy normal male. What smart female accounting major would marry a male sociology major with $100k of student debt they could never repay? You look at the male and female antifa dudes and dudettes and they are simply non-functional as either citizens or spouses or parents.
A pretty high-flying generalization there, but go on.
You dream of an ugly woman studies major and you in handcuffs and a ball gag and her girlfriend putting on a strap on? It's a free country, but I have to let you know that's not normal. You are the one with the high flying way alternative lifestyle.
Comments
Twenty and thirty somethings in the US aren't having many kids. Population growth has been slowing way down. That's a problem. I suspect that has a lot to do with the costs and burdens of child rearing. I'm told people respond to incentives.
The fact we don't have as much a problem as China does is not that comforting.
I'll agree with you that free daycare isn't enough.
People have been delaying getting married and having kids for some time. The oldest Echo Boomers are on the cusp of 40. It's mostly a bunch of thirty somethings. The biology doesn't allow for a whole lot more delay.
For China to be expansionary (as evidence points in that direction), there is definitely some time urgency there as losing roughly half of your population kind of throws a bit of a monkey wrench into the plan eventually.
Are you a child? Look at me, look at me, look at me!!!