Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
fantasycurse42

Bloomberg 2020

Recommended Posts

Just now, Stealthycat said:

now to be fair ... Democrats day 1 of Trump's presidency called for impeachment right ?  that the end result is all that matters and just finding the means to get there ..... seems a bit premeditated doesn't it? Trump wasn't found to have done anything wrong with Russia nor with Ukraine nor with anything else

so if the "reasons" for those witch hunts seem valid to you, I suppose that's fine..... which is why I said start looking for impeachable offenses for Bloomberg before November, get a jump on it, right ? 

 

So, just so I have this right, your theory is that the Dems wanted to get Trump out without cause and the "means to get there" was to work with lifelong Republicans in the intelligence and diplomatic communities to draw up some false stories to get it done.  Therefore, all the testimony from these people is just part of the conspiracy, and they're all just dogs being directed by Democrats.  Does that about sum it up?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Cranks said:

You haven't been paying close attention to US politics if you still believe in this ideal.  This is not a time for 'how things should be.'  We gotta play the cards we're dealt.

This!

I think people that support Bernie truly don't get it. He is a socialist, it isn't a secret. I'm 110% confident Trump is sitting on a treasure trove waiting to destroy this guy... He's waiting until it's too late for the Dems to reverse course on Bernie and then he starts firing his bullets. He def doesn't have the same ammunition against Bloomberg.

As much as I hate Trump, and I think he is a liar that cares about billionaires only and nobody else, if my choice is the dictator where I can keep my life status quo or a socialist, I have to stay home and suck it up for another 4 years. I'd prob write Mike in as a protest vote, but sadly, those are the cards I'm dealt.

I can't and won't vote for Bernie... By the time Trump is done with Bernie, I think it will be a landslide victory for him. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fantasycurse42 said:

This!

I think people that support Bernie truly don't get it. He is a socialist, it isn't a secret. I'm 110% confident Trump is sitting on a treasure trove waiting to destroy this guy... He's waiting until it's too late for the Dems to reverse course on Bernie and then he starts firing his bullets. He def doesn't have the same ammunition against Bloomberg.

As much as I hate Trump, and I think he is a liar that cares about billionaires only and nobody else, if my choice is the dictator where I can keep my life status quo or a socialist, I have to stay home and suck it up for another 4 years. I'd prob write Mike in as a protest vote, but sadly, those are the cards I'm dealt.

I can't and won't vote for Bernie... By the time Trump is done with Bernie, I think it will be a landslide victory for him. 

:goodposting:Nailed it.  Sanders or Warren would do so much damage to our economy and I am amazed at the lack of knowledge about socialism in our youth.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sneegor said:

:goodposting:Nailed it.  Sanders or Warren would do so much damage to our economy and I am amazed at the lack of knowledge about socialism in our youth.  

Possibly but I am thinking they are going to have a hard time getting a lot of their proposals past the House and Senate

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

Possibly but I am thinking they are going to have a hard time getting a lot of their proposals past the House and Senate

There will be a lot of concern about the deficit regardless of what Dem wins the WH. Fiscal responsibility will suddenly become very important.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The General said:

There will be a lot of concern about the deficit regardless of what Dem wins the WH. Fiscal responsibility will suddenly become very important.

No it won't. None of these morons even knows what that means. By the time they realize that is important, the world reserve currency will be the Yuan and the USA will be completely ####ed.

Bloomberg is the only guy I believe would actually consider this, possibly my favorite thing about him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

No it won't. None of these morons even knows what that means. By the time they realize that is important, the world reserve currency will be the Yuan and the USA will be completely ####ed.

Bloomberg is the only guy I believe would actually consider this, possibly my favorite thing about him. 

Just like when Obama was Prez, if a Dem is in there it will become very troubling. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The General said:

Just like when Obama was Prez, if a Dem is in there it will become very troubling. 

 

I stated this way before any of the laughable CBO projections came out years ago that we'd be running trillion dollar deficits until we collapse. They're all dolts, Trump leading the charge with his trillion dollar deficits with the greatest economy we've ever seen. I truly believe he thinks we can just file bankruptcy and it won't be a big deal, not even shtick when I say that, sadly. 

Edited by fantasycurse42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

I stated this way before any of the laughable CBO projections came out years ago that we'd be running trillion dollar surpluses until we collapse. They're all dolts, Trump leading the charge with his trillion dollar deficits with the greatest economy we've ever seen. I truly believe he thinks we can just file bankruptcy it won't be a big deal, not even shtick when I say that, sadly. 

You guys are talking past each other.  The General isn't saying that Republicans have a sincere desire to shrink the deficit.  He's saying the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

You guys are talking past each other.  The General isn't saying that Republicans have a sincere desire to shrink the deficit.  He's saying the opposite.

Yes, I fully understand what he is saying. I agree with him. I think they're all irresponsible reckless idiots. Now we have a new breed of progressive dolts leading an even more reckless charge.

They all suck and none of them understand economics... It simply doesn't matter to any of them bc they can just kick the can to the next guy/girl. Finally have a Fed Chairman saying the same thing, but nobody cares (and neither does he, even if he speaks to it). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/378-13/mayor-bloomberg-budget-fiscal-year-2015-which-begins-july-1-2014-already/#/0

:blush:

Quote

This is the first time in documented City history that an incoming Administration will inherit a budget that is already balanced for the fiscal year that begins six months after inauguration. 

Quote

Since the current year’s budget was adopted in late June, the Administration announced a series of cost savings initiatives, which helped reduce a $2 billion budget gap for FY 2015 down to zero. 

We need Bloomberg!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The General said:

There will be a lot of concern about the deficit regardless of what Dem wins the WH. Fiscal responsibility will suddenly become very important.

time to dust off those tricorn hats and teabags

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

I stated this way before any of the laughable CBO projections came out years ago that we'd be running trillion dollar deficits until we collapse. They're all dolts, Trump leading the charge with his trillion dollar deficits with the greatest economy we've ever seen. I truly believe he thinks we can just file bankruptcy and it won't be a big deal, not even shtick when I say that, sadly. 

I agree with most of this.

I won’t pretend to understand long term deficits but it’s pretty scary stuff to the novice.

Klobacher I believe is the only candidate that mentions this on their website listed issues/goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

Bloomberg prostrated himself before Bush in support of the $5.6 trillion dollar war on terror 

Military spending is out of control and he would do nothing about it

I really can’t believe people are acting like there is some huge material difference between Trump and Bloomberg 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

One of the ways Bloomberg was able to balance the budget was by cutting programs and then using his personal wealth to keep those programs operational.  I'm not sure how sustainable that model would be as President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

I really can’t believe people are acting like there is some huge material difference between Trump and Bloomberg 

If you really feel this way, you have zero credibility. 

One is big proponent of fighting global warming, the other doesn't believe it is real. 

One believes heavily in gun control, one is best friends with the NRA.

One supports immigration, the other does not. 

I could go on, but my gut says it falls on deaf ears. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Bloomberg prostrated himself before Bush in support of the $5.6 trillion dollar war on terror 

Military spending is out of control and he would do nothing about it

I really can’t believe people are acting like there is some huge material difference between Trump and Bloomberg 

Believes in climate change, gun control, gives away billions to charities. Not a complete dotard.

Sign me up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

Yes, I fully understand what he is saying. I agree with him. I think they're all irresponsible reckless idiots. Now we have a new breed of progressive dolts leading an even more reckless charge.

They all suck and none of them understand economics... It simply doesn't matter to any of them bc they can just kick the can to the next guy/girl. Finally have a Fed Chairman saying the same thing, but nobody cares (and neither does he, even if he speaks to it). 

Are you saying that anyone who isn’t concerned about deficits/debt right now doesn’t understand economics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Bloomberg prostrated himself before Bush in support of the $5.6 trillion dollar war on terror 

Military spending is out of control and he would do nothing about it

I really can’t believe people are acting like there is some huge material difference between Trump and Bloomberg 

Other than Healthcare, climate change, raising minimum wages, stricter gun controls, increase taxes on wealthy, immigration and other policies you might be right

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Captain Cranks said:

So, just so I have this right, your theory is that the Dems wanted to get Trump out without cause and the "means to get there" was to work with lifelong Republicans in the intelligence and diplomatic communities to draw up some false stories to get it done.  Therefore, all the testimony from these people is just part of the conspiracy, and they're all just dogs being directed by Democrats.  Does that about sum it up?   

Day One of the Trump presidency yes, Democrats started talking impeachment. This is true

They knew the end goal 

Day One of the next Democrat President, GOP needs to start talking impeachment or every months before. Do you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stealthycat said:

Day One of the Trump presidency yes, Democrats started talking impeachment. This is true

They knew the end goal 

Day One of the next Democrat President, GOP needs to start talking impeachment or every months before. Do you agree?

This is the wrong thread for the discussion and you're conveniently avoiding the points I'm making, so it's best that we move on.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, caustic said:

Are you saying that anyone who isn’t concerned about deficits/debt right now doesn’t understand economics?

I'm sure some of them do, but I would equate those that do understand to smokers. They know there is the potential for severe damage, but since the real damage is hypothetically coming many years down the road, they ignore the consequences. It's reckless at best, and the longer they kick the can, the worse it will be. Within 20-30 years tops, the first real shoe in government insolvency is going to drop on Japan, that will give us a taste of what our future beholds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Godsbrother said:
1 hour ago, Sneegor said:

:goodposting:Nailed it.  Sanders or Warren would do so much damage to our economy and I am amazed at the lack of knowledge about socialism in our youth.  

Possibly but I am thinking they are going to have a hard time getting a lot of their proposals past the House and Senate

Thank you! I said this time and time again around here, the amount of “damage” that will be done will be very limited. There’s too many safeguards in place, it’s not like the Republican Party dies the second Bernie is elected. Worst case scenario IF he were able to get a few programs through, which would no doubt be highly compromised like Obamacare, We’re stuck with a few expensive programs that don’t work. A road we’ve been down many many times before btw.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

I'm sure some of them do, but I would equate those that do understand to smokers. They know there is the potential for severe damage, but since the real damage is hypothetically coming many years down the road, they ignore the consequences. It's reckless at best, and the longer they kick the can, the worse it will be.

I think this may be true to some extent (the most recent tax bill seems like a good example), but I’m leery of deficit hawking as well, especially as many economists have softened their stances on deficits/debt. Deficit spending is something we should do more judiciously, not something we should eliminate. https://www.piie.com/system/files/documents/pb19-2.pdf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

Day One of the Trump presidency yes, Democrats started talking impeachment. This is true

They knew the end goal 

Day One of the next Democrat President, GOP needs to start talking impeachment or every months before. Do you agree?

Talk is cheap.  If the GOP finds the next Democrat president to be as corrupt as Trump then I'll join them in their pursuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

One of the ways Bloomberg was able to balance the budget was by cutting programs and then using his personal wealth to keep those programs operational.  I'm not sure how sustainable that model would be as President.

Not more than 8 years I'd imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had mail arrive at house from Bloomberg today.

Gotta appreciate the effort.  Was a quality print.

Edited by BigSteelThrill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sneegor said:

:goodposting:Nailed it.  Sanders or Warren would do so much damage to our economy and I am amazed at the lack of knowledge about socialism in our youth.  

Really?  Amazed?  I suspect that they are getting their info from their parents and based on what I read here and elsewhere it is NO surprise that they don't understand socialism.  Their parents and grandparents don't either.  It just makes me shake my head coming into threads here and elsewhere and people labeling the extension of public school by four years as "socialism" 

It's disappointing to see that sort of misinformation coming from "the sides" but I can't say I am surprised at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Commish said:

Really?  Amazed?  I suspect that they are getting their info from their parents and based on what I read here and elsewhere it is NO surprise that they don't understand socialism.  Their parents and grandparents don't either.  It just makes me shake my head coming into threads here and elsewhere and people labeling the extension of public school by four years as "socialism" 

It's disappointing to see that sort of misinformation coming from "the sides" but I can't say I am surprised at all.

I think you need you read up on what Sanders goals are.  Hint- it is more than just free college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sneegor said:

I think you need you read up on what Sanders goals are.  Hint- it is more than just free college.

I'm fully aware of what he's after.  But just as an exercise, can you articulate which of his proposals are "socialist" in your view?

  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

now to be fair ... Democrats day 1 of Trump's presidency called for impeachment right ?  that the end result is all that matters and just finding the means to get there ..... seems a bit premeditated doesn't it? Trump wasn't found to have done anything wrong with Russia nor with Ukraine nor with anything else

so if the "reasons" for those witch hunts seem valid to you, I suppose that's fine..... which is why I said start looking for impeachable offenses for Bloomberg before November, get a jump on it, right ? 

actually any of them ... Buttigieg or Bernie or Amy ... get dirt on them all right now so if one gets elected, start moving towards impeaching in Jan 2021

isn't that what DNC did ? 

 

Wasn't Sessions a Republican? I thought he was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He needs to tidy up his response to Stop and Frisk and his comments defending it.  

"That was five years ago," isn't going to cut it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Captain Cranks said:

He needs to tidy up his response to Stop and Frisk and his comments defending it.  

"That was five years ago," isn't going to cut it.  

Imo, all he has to do is have an African American vp and he can kill most of that talk.  Even better if it's a female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I'm fully aware of what he's after.  But just as an exercise, can you articulate which of his proposals are "socialist" in your view?

Medicare for All

Free college

College Debt wiped away

Heavy taxes on billionaires - notice he doesn't say millionaires anymore since he is one.

Green New Deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Imo, all he has to do is have an African American vp and he can kill most of that talk.  Even better if it's a female.

I agree.  Oprah or Michelle Obama would fit real nicely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Captain Cranks said:

I agree.  Oprah or Michelle Obama would fit real nicely.  

They’re both too wealthy to be bought. No self-respecting minority would share the stage with this guy, and I don’t think even another billion dollars can keeps his history buried.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sneegor said:

Medicare for All

Free college

College Debt wiped away

Heavy taxes on billionaires - notice he doesn't say millionaires anymore since he is one.

Green New Deal

Can you show me a single one of those plans where any of them proposes that the "community" take over the creation, distribution, and regulation of them?  The closest you can point to is the college debt.  Am I to assume you think the current bailouts for farmers are "socialist" too and a bad thing?  Or the auto bailout?  Or SNAP?  Or TARP?  

Do you have a problem with public schools today?  Do you have a problem with fire/police stations?  These things he wants are absolutely populist...no question about it.  It's wrong to call them socialist.

ETA:  I am really curious (if you're ok with public school system) why you think 13 years of school is ok, but 17 years of school is "socialist".

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Can you show me a single one of those plans where any of them proposes that the "community" take over the creation, distribution, and regulation of them?  The closest you can point to is the college debt.  Am I to assume you think the current bailouts for farmers are "socialist" too and a bad thing?  Or the auto bailout?  Or SNAP?  Or TARP?  

Do you have a problem with public schools today?  Do you have a problem with fire/police stations?  These things he wants are absolutely populist...no question about it.  It's wrong to call them socialist.

ETA:  I am really curious (if you're ok with public school system) why you think 13 years of school is ok, but 17 years of school is "socialist".

Hey, you definitely aren’t convincing him when you have Tim and others running around talking about the scary socialist Bernie.

Heres the thing - Trump is a socialist.  Pass it along:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, The General said:

There will be a lot of concern about the deficit regardless of what Dem wins the WH. Fiscal responsibility will suddenly become very important.

"For thee, but not for me" should be the official Republican motto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Hey, you definitely aren’t convincing him when you have Tim and others running around talking about the scary socialist Bernie.

Heres the thing - Trump is a socialist.  Pass it along:

:lol:

You're probably right.  I do admit, the most bizarre thing to me in this whole "socialist" debate is that the lack of understanding is rampant.  It comes from all directions/sides.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CletiusMaximus said:

They’re both too wealthy to be bought. No self-respecting minority would share the stage with this guy, and I don’t think even another billion dollars can keeps his history buried.  
 

Are black voters quietly turning to Mike Bloomberg?

This could be the Dems' version of Evangelicals coalescing behind Trump.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Commish said:

Can you show me a single one of those plans where any of them proposes that the "community" take over the creation, distribution, and regulation of them?  The closest you can point to is the college debt.  Am I to assume you think the current bailouts for farmers are "socialist" too and a bad thing?  Or the auto bailout?  Or SNAP?  Or TARP?  

Do you have a problem with public schools today?  Do you have a problem with fire/police stations?  These things he wants are absolutely populist...no question about it.  It's wrong to call them socialist.

ETA:  I am really curious (if you're ok with public school system) why you think 13 years of school is ok, but 17 years of school is "socialist".

I really don't care what term you call it but I am against the huge spending proposals of Sanders and huge tax increases to pay for it.  Giving away free stuff to people and having rich folks pay is redistribution of wealth, socialism.  

I am against starting any new entitlements because quite frankly we can't afford it and they are too hard to take away.  His pie in the sky proposals are simply not feasable.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sneegor said:

I really don't care what term you call it but I am against the huge spending proposals of Sanders and huge tax increases to pay for it.  Giving away free stuff to people and having rich folks pay is redistribution of wealth, socialism.  

I am against starting any new entitlements because quite frankly we can't afford it and they are too hard to take away.  His pie in the sky proposals are simply not feasable.

Do you see any problems with capitalism and if so, how would you go about fixing them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sneegor said:
3 hours ago, The Commish said:

Can you show me a single one of those plans where any of them proposes that the "community" take over the creation, distribution, and regulation of them?  The closest you can point to is the college debt.  Am I to assume you think the current bailouts for farmers are "socialist" too and a bad thing?  Or the auto bailout?  Or SNAP?  Or TARP?  

Do you have a problem with public schools today?  Do you have a problem with fire/police stations?  These things he wants are absolutely populist...no question about it.  It's wrong to call them socialist.

ETA:  I am really curious (if you're ok with public school system) why you think 13 years of school is ok, but 17 years of school is "socialist".

I really don't care what term you call it but I am against the huge spending proposals of Sanders and huge tax increases to pay for it.  Giving away free stuff to people and having rich folks pay is redistribution of wealth, socialism.  

I am against starting any new entitlements because quite frankly we can't afford it and they are too hard to take away.  His pie in the sky proposals are simply not feasable.

I noticed you didn't answer my questions.  And it seems odd that you continue to call it something it's not even though you don't care what it's called.  I assume you are latched onto the term because you believe the term carries a negative connotation.  That's a popular approach and you certainly aren't alone.  What you articulate here is also a popular view however inconsistent it may be.  Because I hear it so frequently, I figured it might be wise to try and understand it even if I think it's a gross mischaracterization of what's going on.

Two questions that frequently come to mind are:

1.  With respect to "huge spending proposals....and huge tax increases to pay for it" I assume you are referring to healthcare.  If that's true, I'm not sure I understand the issue of one's taxes going up by a % of some measure if it means a net gain of money in your pocket every month because that increase in tax is negated by the freedom provided from not having to pay premiums and deductibles and large hospital bills anymore.  It would be a net gain to one's bottom line but its "bad" because the tax goes up?

2.  With respect to education no one has yet been able to explain to me why the arbitrary line of 13 years is ok, but over that is "socialism".  Paying the education bill for those extra four years could easily be paid by a slight reduction in our military spending.  We could actually have a TON of extra money in reserve from military spending if our politicians understood the next world war is not likely to be fought on a battlefield and all those ships, tanks, and planes aren't going to have much of an impact in the cyber world.  That's for another thread though.  

To the bold, is it fair to assume that you don't like the farm bailouts that are going on right now?  The sugar/corn subsidies that have been going on for decades and/or the latest tax cuts to businesses and the super rich?  Those are all redistribution of wealth and things we can't afford.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Commish said:

:lol:

You're probably right.  I do admit, the most bizarre thing to me in this whole "socialist" debate is that the lack of understanding is rampant.  It comes from all directions/sides.

Half my facebook feed:  "I'll never vote for a socialist!  Also keep your grubby hands off my social security!  And stop calling it an 'entitlement'!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, parrot said:

Half my facebook feed:  "I'll never vote for a socialist!  Also keep your grubby hands off my social security!  And stop calling it an 'entitlement'!"

I have this very conversation with my mother frequently.  I think I made some headway on education though.  She was a teacher and when asked why 13 years of education is not socialist but 17 years is, I get a :mellow:  "Good point son"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.