Ocasio-Cortez and the “socialist” left

[vantexan]

You don't like facts.

The writer assumes that the boom economy would've happened anyways plus if we still had the taxes in place we'd have a lot more revenue. What he, and you, aren't getting is the boom happened BECAUSE of the tax cuts and rescinding many regulations or reducing them. Trump made the boom happen and Americans are better off for it. And while it may be slight there has been an increase in revenue. But you guys were saying the tax cuts were going to slash revenue. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. And they'd better get that under control. Good luck with that with the Dems in control of the House.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

The writer assumes that the boom economy would've happened anyways plus if we still had the taxes in place we'd have a lot more revenue. What he, and you, aren't getting is the boom happened BECAUSE of the tax cuts and rescinding many regulations or reducing them. Trump made the boom happen and Americans are better off for it. And while it may be slight there has been an increase in revenue. But you guys were saying the tax cuts were going to slash revenue. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. And they'd better get that under control. Good luck with that with the Dems in control of the House.

Ya, you just dismissed facts and presented your unfounded opinions, most of which are drenched in kool aid.

 

[BrownFlush]

 

[Old Man Jingles]

The writer assumes that the boom economy would've happened anyways plus if we still had the taxes in place we'd have a lot more revenue. What he, and you, aren't getting is the boom happened BECAUSE of the tax cuts and rescinding many regulations or reducing them. Trump made the boom happen and Americans are better off for it. And while it may be slight there has been an increase in revenue. But you guys were saying the tax cuts were going to slash revenue. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. And they'd better get that under control. Good luck with that with the Dems in control of the House.

Well, if the Dims do not vote to build the wall, spending could turn out not being a problem.

 

[vantexan]

Well, if the Dims do not vote to build the wall, spending could turn out not being a problem.

The overall spending is certainly a problem, wall or no wall.

 

[El Correcto]

Ya, you just dismissed facts and presented your unfounded opinions, most of which are drenched in kool aid.

Tax cuts and deregulation are flaunted by libertarians for the same reason.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Tax cuts and deregulation are flaunted by libertarians for the same reason.

Libertarians are fiscally conservative and Republicans are not. Cutting taxes with no spending reduction is idiocy.

Republicans claim they want to cut spending but they never do, they just blame Democrats. Fact is they knew spending wouldn't be cut and they cut taxes anyway.

 

[El Correcto]

Libertarians are fiscally conservative and Republicans are not. Cutting taxes with no spending reduction is idiocy.

Republicans claim they want to cut spending but they never do, they just blame Democrats. Fact is they knew spending wouldn't be cut and they cut taxes anyway.

And you think libertarians differ how??

We could both speculate, but end of the day if taxes didn’t get cut they’d lose their right wing support.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

And you think libertarians differ how??

We could both speculate, but end of the day if taxes didn’t get cut they’d lose their right wing support.

You brought up libertarians as being relevant to the conversation, now you're saying they're not relevant because we can't really know what they would do... Ok then.

 

[El Correcto]

You brought up libertarians as being relevant to the conversation, now you're saying they're not relevant because we can't really know what they would do... Ok then.

His stance on tax cuts and deregulation are something you’d want to as a libertarian.

Only advantage I see libertarians having is that naive view the ones before them had of preaching isolationism before getting into office and learning the scope of what’s going on. Defense spending might not be held hostage for increased social spending, because they won’t have defense spending as a priority.

But I haven’t seen someone remain isolationist in my lifetime. Even when questioned about further in Rogan’s podcast the guy you voted for seemed to be on weak knees when it came to isolationism.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

His stance on tax cuts and deregulation are something you’d want to as a libertarian.

Only advantage I see libertarians having is that naive view the ones before them had of preaching isolationism before getting into office and learning the scope of what’s going on. Defense spending might not be held hostage for increased social spending, because they won’t have defense spending as a priority.

But I haven’t seen someone remain isolationist in my lifetime. Even when questioned about further in Rogan’s podcast the guy you voted for seemed to be on weak knees when it came to isolationism.

Libertarians are not isolationists, the opposite actually.

 

[El Correcto]

Libertarians not isolationists, the opposite actually.

non-interventionist.

I don’t see defense spending as defense spending like a world war.

I view it as a influence spending and control spending.

Libertarians seem naive in that aspect and it’s easy to preach that way until you sit in the Oval Office.

I think influence spending would move them away from being non-interventionists, I almost guarantee it would Gary Johnson or whatever his name was.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

non-interventionist.

I don’t see defense spending as defense spending like a world war.

I view it as a influence spending and control spending.

Libertarians seem naive in that aspect and it’s easy to preach that way until you sit in the Oval Office.

I think influence spending would move them away from being non-interventionists, I almost guarantee it would Gary Johnson or whatever his name was.

You might be right about Gary, a lot of libertarians thought he fell short on principles as an attempt to bring in more votes. I wasn't a huge fan.

From a conservative viewpoint it's undeniable Republicans have sold their souls to the military industrial complex. I'd say any move away from that would be a positive.

 

[BrownFlush]

 

[BrownFlush]

 

[Sportello]

Why is Rand Paul going to Canada, with their socialized healthcare, for surgery?

His government supplied health care isn’t good enough?

 

[brownmonster]

Why is Rand Paul going to Canada, with their socialized healthcare, for surgery?

His government supplied health care isn’t good enough?

It's a frickin hernia. Unless there's something he's hiding.

 

[BrownFlush]

It's a frickin hernia. Unless there's something he's hiding.

How pitiful Obummer care is?

 

[Sportello]

It's a frickin hernia. Unless there's something he's hiding.

They can't fix that in America?

 

[tonyexpress]

“This is more fake news on a story that has been terribly reported from day one,” she wrote in an email to the Courier-Journal. “This is a private, world-renowned hospital separate from any system, and people come from around the world to pay cash for their services.”

Rand Paul Heading To Canada, Land Of Universal Health Care, For Surgery

The title of the article isn't misleading at all.