Next <
From: Tim Norfolk <>
Subject: Re: Are Americans idiots? Part 2
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id r13mr23226850qkk.26.1514498505013;
Thu, 28 Dec 2017 14:01:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id n125mr3017401vke.14.1514498503971;
Thu, 28 Dec 2017 14:01:43 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 14:01:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=;
References: <>
<> <>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Are Americans idiots? Part 2
From: Tim Norfolk <>
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:01:45 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 83
Print Article
Forward Article
On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 11:32:10 AM UTC-5, BillB wrote:
> On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 6:34:10 AM UTC-8, VegasJerry wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 28, 2017 at 5:00:26 AM UTC-8, BillB wrote:
> > > Okay, as expected, vanek wasn't able to explain to us why the old tax returns were just way
too complicated for him to report his Taco Bell earnings. Anyway, now Uncle Trump says he can do it
on a postcard, and vanek couldn't be happier! I hope he can figure that out the postcard.
> > > 
> > > The next thing that makes me think Americans are idiots is that a SIGNIFICANT number seem to
be buying into this notion of a "Trump economic boom" where none exists. It's complete fantasy, but
it's all they're talking about over on Fox News.
> > > 
> > > Last week I heard Mark Levin bragging that black unemployment under Trump is the lowest it has
been in 17 years. That is lying by omission. Is anybody really buying this nonsense?
> > > 
> > > 3% GDP growth is a boom...what?? It's been 2 quarters. Obama had consecutive quarters over 4%.
Q3 in 2014 was over 5%. Were the Republicans touting the "Obama economic boom" then? Of course was economic ARMAGEDDON under Obama.
> > > 
> > > Unemployment has continued to decline under Trump at approximately the same slope it did under
Obama for the previous EIGHT YEARS. Now it's an economic boom? Why?
> > > 
> > > Obama was said to be bankrupting the country by allowing the national debt to increase $10
trillion. Under Trump it is currently projected to increase $12 trillion over 10 years, and that's
without any more Trump populist boondoggles like the "middle class tax cut" ($1 trillion in tax
savings to the wealthy). 
> > > 
> > > There is no Trump economic boom, and I can only hope that people come down on him as hard for
causing a real crash as they've worked giving him credit for creating a fake boom.
> > 
> > You can't get a single doofus to admit their healthcare cost increase this year was the direct
result of Trump blocking government subsidy payments to insurance companies. “I’m killing
Obamacare.” – Trump. 
> > 
> > And now this tax cut bill removes the Individual Mandate for next year and the insurance
companies have said they will have to increase premiums another 10%. “Obamacare is essentially
dead now” – Trump.
> > 
> > Using their chart; I get a tax cut of $600. But an increase in insurance premiums of $800. And
the tax cut dissolves over the next 7 years. (Not for the rich or the corporations)
> > 
> > I got my notice from Social Security that after two years I finally get a COLA (cost of living
increase) of 2%, but that my Social Security payment is reduced to what it was because of insurance
> > 
> > Not a single fucking trump supporter here will admit they were wrong in voting Republican.
> Don't even get me started on the healthcare. You've got a country just to the north, with an
essentially integrated economy, that is providing health care to every single legal resident for
only 60% of the per capita cost, while obtaining better overall medical outcomes. You'd almost have
to be retarded to look at those facts without realizing that something is broken in the US health
care system. There are obviously vast inefficiencies.
> Explain this one to me, Jerry: The Republicans don't want universal health care
because...socialism. Okay, fine. But you've got a law that says if someone is seriously sick or
injured and has no insurance and no money, he has to be treated anyway. What kind of free enterprise
system says "If you need our goods and services we will charge you big bucks for them, unless you
tell us you have no insurance and no money, in which case we will give you said goods and services
for free"?
> You'd have to be a damn fool to think that would work. If you want real "free enterprise" medicine
but still want a "must treat" law, the ONLY logical solution is an "individual mandate". Because
everyone is effectively insured, everyone should have to pay at least something in premiums. That's
called personal responsibility, and it's something Republicans were *supposed* to be in favor of.
But because Obama implemented it...BAD!

Absolutely. But the GOP of the last decades only likes to break things - the environment,
healthcare, social security, science research, public education at all levels, and so on.