@Jai
Exactly. If he picked a populist like Bernie Sanders he would probably peel off a lot of the Bernie supporters and would be a very strong ticket. I actually think he might be to the left of Clinton if anything.

@teamguns

https://youtu.be/ObvdSmPbdLg

Have this argument constructed better than mine. I don't feel the need to discuss when you don't notice that your own graph admits 4/5 of energy use is still fossil, a more reliable source.

I saw that channel - it's totally ridiculous and funny. It cherry picks truths and basically sound like the official German National Socialist Party website - polite but as often as not, just untruth.

Basically, they say that sun and wind power have a shabby cost-reward ratio - maybe in the short, but definitely not in the long - and we're not going to run out of those (or, when we do, which will be loads away from other destructive energies, we'll have much bigger problems).

Edited 2/24/2016 01:13:58

@genghis

I've watched 4/5 of PragerU videos. Most of them are just stupid righwing ideas... I only like 2 or 3 of them. This one is not ammoung them lol.

We can switch to nuclear. Reliability.

Renewable energies are reliable... Fossil energies are reliable until a cartel of producers decide you won't be getting any more of them.

#1973 oil crisis
#1979 oil crisis
#NorOilNorUraniumAreUnlimited

On the contrary, it's hard to cut spending. If it was so easy, republicans would have done it during Bush. Plus, social spending is one of the few thing paying taxes is worth for after safety and justice.

What a load of horse dung. Come on you know that's not accurate. Its not hard to cut spending, the only problem is that it requires a veto-proof majority in the House of Representatives, Senate, and the President's approval (only likely when he's from the same party as the majority party of Congress). Tell me again when we had that situation last? GOP hawks don't want to cut defense spending and progressive Democrats don't want to cut anything else, so everyone ends up getting whatever pork barrel spending they want. Read this report on Pork Barrel Spending in FY 2015 (http://cagw.org/reporting/pig-book), it'll make you puke what we waste millions of dollars on.

The debt is 19 trillion. Unfunded liabilities (almost exclusively due to welfare and entitlement spending) is about 127 trillion (http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/17/you-think-the-deficit-is-bad-federal-unfunded-liabilities-exceed-127-trillion/#723df78b10d3). Let's say we cut Defense Spending by 75% from $598 billion to $149.5 billion (https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/military-spending-united-states/). The US budget deficit in 2015 was estimated to be $468 billion. What else are you going to cut to get rid of the deficit. Let's say you cut some programs other than defense (though I doubt you can name any that you would) and you get the budget to a surplus of $1 billion. At that rate it would take you 1270 years to pay back unfunded liabilities. Good luck with that economic mode.

Its time to cut the budget. Its time to cut everything that is not absolutely essential and constitutionally authorized. Its time to cut defense spending and welfare.

Exactly. If he picked a populist like Bernie Sanders he would probably peel off a lot of the Bernie supporters and would be a very strong ticket. I actually think he might be to the left of Clinton if anything.

Dude you have to listen to some CSPAN shows where they let people call in based on their party identification. I don't how many times I have heard some white person call and say: "I'm voting for Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump". Donald Trump supporters are Bernie Sanders supporters and vice versa. Donald Trump changed his party affiliation 7 times!!! 7 times. He's either mentally incoherent or an extreme political opportunist. I don't understand how millions of people can be duped by an orange carrot who's a pathological liar. Also does anyone find it curious that he "officially" switched his party affiliation to Republican only in 2010-2011, right around the time when rumors were swirling that Hillary would take a stab at the Presidential nomination in 2016? I call conspiracy on this...no doubt Trump's a mole to derail the GOP for a decade.

Edited 2/24/2016 01:47:38

We can switch to nuclear. Reliability.

Why do something that's going to also run out in 100 years? If you keep on picking the short goals over and over again, over a long time, the long goals will smash the short goals.

Nevada Caucus results in 2 hrs. Trump wins obvs. Make America Great Again!

Poor Rubio.

Edited 2/24/2016 02:06:57

@[AOE] JaiBharat909

Its not hard to cut spending, the only problem is that it requires a veto-proof majority in the House of Representatives, Senate, and the President's approval

Yea, so easy.

Donald Trump supporters are Bernie Sanders supporters and vice versa.

Simply not true. I won't spend time explaining why Sanders is better then Trump. But you're right when you say trump will kill the republican party.


About how to have a budget equilibrated. And without cutting social security, which is in fact sustainable right now and lends money to the US gvt.


US deficit was 439 billion dollars in 2015.
=> Cut military spending by half. 25% of the US military spending is wasted, so -25% won't make no harm. Cut another 25% cause you already have an overwelming army and you don't need that much military spending anyway. 598/2 = 299 billion dollars saved
=> Cut corporate subsidies. All of them. Corporate Tax Breaks ~150 billion dollars in 2015. There's other subsidies like farm and diverse energy ones that cost more then 50 billion dollars a year. 200 billion dollars saved.
=> Fix tax evasion. There's actually 2.1 trillion dollars in profit overseas to avoid paying taxes, total tax loss 620 billion dollars + hundred billion dollars in fines. Let's say a 1 trillion dollars check for the US gvt. I'd say fixing the tax evasion for corporations and individuals could give 100 billion dollars (at least) every year for the government.


So, my plan covers the US deficit, and gives a surplus of 160 billion dollars a year. The US debt will also shrink by 1 trillion dollars if the US go after corporate tax evasion. Then just use the GDP growth and your debt in covered a few decades as the debt interest spending also lowers and so do the interest rates. And I've just scratched the surface, there's plenty of other stuff you can cut without touching in welfare.

And after the US debt is paid, you can use that surplus to spend in real welfare (not the one the US gives, it's a joke calling that welfare or socialism) or go for a republican plan and cut taxes.

Donald Trump supporters are Bernie Sanders supporters and vice versa.

Simply not true. I won't spend time explaining why Sanders is better then Trump. But you're right when you say trump will kill the republican party

Subjectivity-rife. They are both good listeners (some folk call this populism), but to different speakers, and they are both extremists who want and get attention.

Bernie's plans are extremists in the US, in Europe they're called common sense. And yea, both are populist, they say what people want to ear.

But they're different, one says the US problem is muslims and mexicans. The other says it's the fact that college and healthcare in the US are the highest on the world and that your fucking gvt wastes money on social programs for corporations.

Edited 2/24/2016 02:45:52

Bernie's plans are extremists in the US

Bernie's not running for Soviet Europe, where such a politician would be welcomed - he's extremist in American relativity (which is what matters).

And yes, they're obviously different in politic direction. One says f--- "them Muslims" and "them 'mmigrants", while the other says "them corporatist pigs" and "100% taxes on top 1%, 1% on bottom 99%, trololol".

Edited 2/24/2016 02:58:21

one says the US problem is muslims and mexicans.

He says much more, but whatever. And it's Islamic terrorists and illegal immigrants, not Muslims and Mexicans. Get your crap together.

Edited 2/24/2016 02:51:08

About how to have a budget equilibrated. And without cutting social security, which is in fact sustainable right now and lends money to the US gvt.

lel wut? Social Security is not sustainable. The baby boomers retirement + lower work force participation + stagnant wages + no means testing = $84 trillion in unfunded liabilities (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/23/does-the-united-states-have-128-trillion-in-unfunded-liabilities/). Using the debt number of $19 trillion is disingenuous because it fails to take into account ongoing expenses the Government is obligated to pay for. Social Security is not solvent for the future - its going to be insolvent in 19 years and will only be able to cover 79% of welfare benefits (that means the government essentially stole the 21% of the the benefits they were supposed to pay out).

US deficit was 439 billion dollars in 2015.
=> Cut military spending by half. 25% of the US military spending is wasted, so -25% won't make no harm. Cut another 25% cause you already have an overwelming army and you don't need that much military spending anyway. 598/2 = 299 billion dollars saved
=> Cut corporate subsidies. All of them. Corporate Tax Breaks ~150 billion dollars in 2015. There's other subsidies like farm and diverse energy ones that cost more then 50 billion dollars a year. 200 billion dollars saved.
=> Fix tax evasion. There's actually 2.1 trillion dollars in profit overseas to avoid paying taxes, total tax loss 620 billion dollars + hundred billion dollars in fines. Let's say a 1 trillion dollars check for the US gvt. I'd say fixing the tax evasion for corporations and individuals could give 100 billion dollars (at least) every year for the government.

1) I'm all for slashing the military budget as a fiscal conservative...but it has to be responsible. Instead of doing arbitrary budget cuts like "cut the defense budget by 50%", I would much rather peg the defense spending to GDP. I think 2% of GDP (around $300 billion) is a fair number because it keeps the military as a viable superpower for the long-term while also maintaining our NATO pledge. Plus I think a lot of the defense contracting waste is due to R&D. Most of the high tech weaponry doesn't even work for asymmetrical combat like in the Middle East and Vietnam. We don't need lasers or super armor.

2) I'm all for slashing corporate subsidies and welfare as a fiscal conservative. Just know that you would be removing subsidies for ethanol (given to the Environmental and Renewable Energy Sector), agricultural products, solar power, SpaceX, and Tesla as well.

3) Okay so tax evasion is a bit tricky. Yes they are acting under a loophole, but even if you close the loophole you won't get the entirety of the $2 trillion back (probably not even half that).

So you managed to come up with a way to get a 160 billion surplus. If you take the unfunded liabilities of 128 trillion dollars...you would pay off all that America owes in 800 years. That's just not a sustainable model to cutting the debt and unfunded liabilities. We need to cut domestic spending. It has to be fair and balanced. Its compromise. You can't just ask one side to make all the cuts.

Edited 2/24/2016 02:53:12

EDIT: I'm a knob.

Edited 2/24/2016 02:56:57

He says much more, but whatever.

The core of his program is the US problem with muslims and mexicans... There's other stuff no one care about, just watch people sleeping during his speeches when he's not talking about muslims and mexicans, and see they sudentely wake up when he goes back to the core.

That's a hell of a program, never thought becoming the republican nominee would be so easy. And you're gonna vote for him because frankly, you're a moron. There's other republican candidates with real programs you can support.

It is fair and balanced, the way you spend originally isn't. South Korea spends less on military, and they live in constant danger (per capita too).