The thing is, the rich are getting richer and the have nots are left behind with less and less. They feel desperation and we're seeing it in civil unrest. I hope it doesn't become worse but we're in uncertain times and who knows how it will play out.

Smoke'em if you got'em.

 

Sorry Rixer, but no.

First, the concept that if one person gets richer, it means someone else must be poor is incorrect. There is no limit to the amount of wealth that can be created, and no barrier to anyone being as rich as they want, provided they are willing to "play the game".
Second, the standard of living is increasing faster for low incomes than for high incomes, especially for groups who are generally the last to benefit from a strong economy; women, minorities, youth.
Third, the civil unrest now has nothing whatever to do with social injustice, or police brutality, or equality.
It has to do with the elections.
And the unrest is now benefitting deplorables. Despicables have lost control of the protests and do not know how to regain control.

 

this may be true to a degree....thank your dumocrats

 

Yes Rixer Yes..The poor are getting poorer under Trump, the stats show that, and the last Tax fraud made it worse for the really poor families struggling,they are sinking lower and lower and the Trump Republicans ignore the facts.

 

the facts are the dems have stiffled any and all efforts to recover, we were doing great until the chinks unleashed the virus the H1N1 was far worse...and yet the world didnt cease to operate

 

This is incorrect. If you have something that shows "the poor are getting poorer" please present it.
Everything points to just the opposite result; Wage increases, very low unemployment, almost no inflation, increasing home ownership, decreasing poverty; all are going in a positive direction.

Excepting the damn covid; but that too will pass, and we'll get back to business.

 

Cutting taxes for the rich during a time of massive deficits is fiscally irresponsible for the same reason accumulating credit card debt is. Also, you can't pretend that COVID-19 is not Trump's fault. Bob Woodward has gotten Trump to admit that he knew that the Corona virus was more dangerous than the flu, but he lied about it. While Trump was ignoring the Corona virus, the Corona virus was not ignoring the 197,000 Americans who have died from it. There is evidence that immunity from having had the disease is temporary and that it causes permanent damage to the heart. A vaccine may be over a year away.

 

When you owe anyone a TRILLION $$ it's the same thing !! Ain't no one getting paid a fucking thing!!!!! Lol

 

Mainly due to the actions of the Democratic Party.

 

Actions like what? You wrote this in your profile:

"I am 74 years of age, disabled due to a fight with a former Marine jacked up on PCP wherein I got my left leg busted at the knee, crippling me and ending my career in Security."

If by "Security" you mean that you were a security guard, you never made much money. I am not putting you down. I was a security guard for a few years myself. I probably read more books as a guard than I did in college. Anyway, you are probably dependent on Social Security and Medicare. The leaders of the Republican Party have never liked those programs. They have always tried to phase them out.

 

Oh, distant lover, you despicable liar!!
Deplorables have never tried to phase out Social Security or Medicare.
You know that.
You damn well know you're lying and trying to use scare tactics, the same old tired despicable bullshit that we've always been subjected to.

All you do is highlight the real issue, which is, what government gives, government can take away.

 

Last time I checked, The Democrats want to spend a great deal more than Trump and Republican's. Republicans don't want any more Stim spending, Democrats want to spin us into bankruptcy!

 

The democratic party never cease to amaze me. Their ignorance and refusal to accept proof and undeniable facts is astonishing. Brainwashing at its finest.

 

The Master of Facts goes to greater lengths than any other poster on XNXX to document his factual assertions. Unfortunately, his detractors do not want to be told facts that conflict with what they want to believe. Consequently, they respond to the Master's facts with insults and name calling.

 

Oh, so the "master of facts" has gone to great lengths to document his assertion that deplorables want to phase out Social Security?

Highly doubtful.

 

I'm sorry....please tell me where I am name calling.

 

And in today's news we learn that Nancy Antoinette, a despicable, in fact, the despicable leader of the House despicables and third in line for President, you know, should anything happen to President Trump and Vice President Pence, is DEMANDING a $2.2 TRILLION relief package.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pelosi-doubles-down-demand-2-224209109.html
She wanted $3.4 TRILLION, DEMANDED that the bill be passed, but was thwarted in part by her own people, so now she'll "settle" for $2.2 TRILLION.
And what's in the relief bill for $2.2 TRILLION??
Well, details are suspiciously scarce, but includes another $1,200 windfall for every taxpayer plus $500 for each dependent, a continuation and expansion of the "fraud free"$600 bonus unemployment benefits, extension of benefits to 39 weeks, "loans" for governments, "small business" and hospitals. When one looks at the dollars estimated for each package, we're still shy of the $2.2 TRILLION bill advertised, but then Shooter supposes we'll have to pass the damn thing to find out what's in it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-stimulus-bill-unemployment-benefits-2020-3
Now, to be fair, President Trump says he can support this package, he'd like to see the total cost higher, but hasn't specified exactly where he'd like to see more spending.
The fact is, these fuckers in Washington are buying votes for the upcoming election and fuck the debt.
So much for responsibility and accountability on the part of ANY politician in Washington.

 

I agree with that, those dumb asses, they gave us $2400 bucks for nothing. We are retired our income stays the same, we are not at all financially affected by this. Yes there are people who need and deserve help, how in the hell you can find them? and do it right? I don't have a clue and neither do they.

 

Shooter doesn't think the point is to help people who "need help".
Shooter thinks it's all about politics and buying votes.
Nancy Antoinette is buying votes.
President Trump is buying votes.

The unemployment benefit system in this country has done exactly what it was designed to do since it was created in 1934; provide enough income to pay basic costs when people find themselves unemployed "through no fault of their own". It was never intended to replace one's income, nor was it intended to reward unemployment.

So along come the genius's who think giving EVERY unemployed person an additional $600 A WEEK, in ADDITION to their regular unemployment benefits, makes sense.
It does not. Not at all.
Since the average weekly unemployment check is less than $300, tacking on an ADDITIONAL $600 is bound to create abuse.
Now, the despicables say Oh no, people will have to go back to work, or they will lose their benefits all together, so no fraud here!
Bullshit.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-police-arrest-44-unemployment-033821881.html

There is always some fraud in the unemployment system. Always. tripling the value of the average unemployment check will attract more fraud.
It will attract more fraud.
guaranteed.
And anyone who thinks a semi savvy unemployed worker can't figure out quickly how easy it is to remain unemployed for an extra couple of weeks and collect their windfall should talk with Shooter about a $5,000 gift card he'll "give" them.

These "stimulus" packages are nothing but a thinly veiled vote buying scheme concocted by despicables and deplorables.
As Nancy is fond of saying;
"never waste a crisis"

 

When Barry Goldwater suffered a well deserved defeat running for president in 1964 the Republicans leaned that a direct assault of the reforms of the New Deal would fail. Beginning with the 1980 campaign of Ronald Reagan Republicans have waged guerrilla warfare on those reforms by touting the imaginary revenue building benefits of tax cuts. When those benefits do not come they point to the rise in the national debt they caused and say, "Oh my goodness, look at the national debt. We need to cut government spending."

They never are specific about what we should cut. Nevertheless, it is not possible to cut taxes, raise military spending, and balance the budget without cutting Social Security, Medicare, and other domestic spending items the Republican Donor Class - which does not need those programs - has never liked, but which Republican politicians know are popular with the voters.