Page 4 of 5
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:29 pm
by HouseDivided
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:34 pm
by ousdahl
I was gonna say we should PSYCHoanalyze this poster, but illy makes sense too.
I mean not even his avatar can agree with itself!
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:39 pm
by jhawks99
Can I get a "cankles"
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:40 pm
by Deleted User 62
HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:29 pm
jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:25 pm
Florida (every part)
New York
New Jersey
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Virginia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Texas
Missouri
Minnesota
Lousiana
Are you going to dismiss all of these separate states on your idiotic terms?
Same old Plano: still rolling out your resume and bank accounts to compensate for . . . whatever.
Don’t care.
I dont have any idea where any of what I posted could be viewed as "bragging".
I simply stated that the company that I currently work for (in big ticket retail sales) has enjoyed several years of sales and profit growth.
You made a comment that basically made the idiotic suggestion that somehow Texas could not have been doing so...because the voted GOP.
They ALWAYS vote GOP. The 2 can exist at the same time.
You claim you are a really smart guy (brag?) ...so please tell me how a company with sales growth in all of these different states were able to achieve this under completely different political circumstances.
You cant have it both ways.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:51 pm
by Geezer
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:02 pm
Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:56 pm
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:11 pm
Yes.
so...you're thanking Bush?
Cuz...uh...
Just wondering why you mentioned TARP.
BTW CNBC has some great stuff interviewing the principals involved in the meltdown.
Because TARP is the only reason that Obama's first three budgets were "smaller." Deficits are considered larger or smaller based only on the year previous. TARP (FY'09) was an outsized deficit. The next three were NOT TARP related, but were also resulted in outsized deficits. Obama gets credit for "shrinking" the deficit only because he's compared to an anomaly.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/12/watch-b ... later.html
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:02 pm
by DCHawk1
Paulson is a word that I can't type here on a family web site.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:44 pm
by Deleted User 104
I wish you guys would have kept your original usernames. I cannot tell who the hell is who anymore.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:21 am
by Deleted User 89
seems i’ve encountered my first foe
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:31 am
by Deleted User 89
too lazy to google, but how much of Obama’s deficits were related to Bush’s war/s?
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:35 am
by Deleted User 62
Are you insinuating that borrowing billions from the Chinese every year to fight 2 never ending wars is fiscally irresponsible?
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:19 am
by Deleted User 89
what ever could you mean?
i was just asking an innocent question...
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:24 am
by DCHawk1
The wars -- while costly -- weren't likely a part of the deficits.
Part of them was funded/is funded "off-budget" through emergency supplementals, and part was/is funded through the regular DoJ budget.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:52 am
by Deleted User 57
jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:25 pm
Florida (every part)
New York
New Jersey
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Virginia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Texas
Missouri
Minnesota
Lousiana
Are you going to dismiss all of these separate states on your idiotic terms?
"Cunt" here.
All of the states you listed are "separate"? I ask that because you listed Florida twice.
Anyways, a simple Google search of your company's website, it's investor relations link (and it's SEC filings?), might help provide me and others with more insight about the company you work for (and it's financial success that you claim) than your posts do - being that you have provided zero actual information that backs your claim/s. Not saying it's not true, just looking for some actual information to back your claim/s.
Bloomberg can actually be a resourceful tool too - if anyone cared to take the time to do the research.
As far as your claim regarding Texas and saying, "They ALWAYS vote GOP". Really? "ALWAYS"?
Sorry, I should back off and not be a "cunt" and just let you and the other posters be "cunts" to one another.
.com, then .net, now a new .com.
The more things change, the more they stay the same - as it ever was.
Carry on!
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:58 am
by ousdahl
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:24 am
The wars -- while costly -- weren't likely a part of the deficits.
Part of them was funded/is funded "off-budget" through emergency supplementals, and part was/is funded through the regular DoJ budget.
so what was part of the deficits?
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:28 am
by HouseDivided
Gutter's Mother wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:52 am
jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:25 pm
Florida (every part)
New York
New Jersey
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Virginia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Texas
Missouri
Minnesota
Lousiana
Are you going to dismiss all of these separate states on your idiotic terms?
"Cunt" here.
All of the states you listed are "separate"? I ask that because you listed Florida twice.
Anyways, a simple Google search of your company's website, it's investor relations link (and it's SEC filings?), might help provide me and others with more insight about the company you work for (and it's financial success that you claim) than your posts do - being that you have provided zero actual information that backs your claim/s. Not saying it's not true, just looking for some actual information to back your claim/s.
Bloomberg can actually be a resourceful tool too - if anyone cared to take the time to do the research.
As far as your claim regarding Texas and saying, "They ALWAYS vote GOP". Really? "ALWAYS"?
Sorry, I should back off and not be a "cunt" and just let you and the other posters be "cunts" to one another.
.com, then .net, now a new .com.
The more things change, the more they stay the same - as it ever was.
Carry on!
You're assuming that Plano has an IQ above double digits. Lower your expectations to that for a fourth grader, and things start to make much more sense. Well, a potty-mouthed fourth grader with a king-sized inferiority complex, anyway.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:30 am
by DCHawk1
ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:58 am
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:24 am
The wars -- while costly -- weren't likely a part of the deficits.
Part of them was funded/is funded "off-budget" through emergency supplementals, and part was/is funded through the regular DoJ budget.
so what was part of the deficits?
All other spending?
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:34 am
by jhawks99
DC is going to say entitlements at some point.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:38 am
by DCHawk1
jhawks99 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:34 am
DC is going to say entitlements at some point.
Also off budget.
ETA: Sorry. This is misleading. Corrected below.
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:48 am
by jhawks99
So is it all military?
Re: Good speech by Rand Paul
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:54 am
by DCHawk1
Sorry. Should have said that entitlements are not part of the discretionary budget. They are the mandatory part of the budget, however.
As for the discretionary budget, yes 53% of it is military spending.