Government shutdown

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (63 posts)
  1. Kathleen Cochran profile image77
    Kathleen Cochranposted 5 months ago

    There are two ways to increase our revenue stream. Spend less - usually impacting the most vulnerable among us - and increase taxes - usually impacting the least vulnerable among us. Which choice says who we are as Americans?

    1. tsmog profile image84
      tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      It seems both say who we are as Americans historically in my view. To me, those two binary choices leave little room for reasonable compromise, which is key. Can we do it with what we currently are faced with?

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Good question.  Are we the frugal Yankee, growing the country with hard work or are we more akin to Karl Marx, believing that whatever we work to build actually belongs to the government?

      Do we believe in the freedom to own property or do we believe the government owns what we thought was ours?

      What is America, and what do Americans want?  Will we take responsibility for ourselves or will we live on the charity of others?

      1. MizBejabbers profile image89
        MizBejabbersposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        The government already owns what we think is ours. Just fail to pay your real estate taxes if you don't believe me. My brother's neighbor lost his business because he waited until five minutes before closing time to run into the tax office and pay his delinquent taxes. Too late, he found out that someone had been watching and came in just before he did and paid them and now owns the property. I'm not sure that this was legal, and it's costing him an arm and a leg to go to court to find out.

        1. Nathanville profile image93
          Nathanvilleposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          How does that work?

          In Britain, business taxes are owed by the Company; if someone else paid your business tax, you would be grateful because it’s your tax they are paying; it wouldn’t give them any rights to your property.

          In the UK, if a business doesn’t pay their corporation tax, initially the tax office will send you a reminder/warning letter; if you ignore that letter then they have the legal right to send in a bailiff to identify goods for seizure to the value of what you owe the tax office.

          1. MizBejabbers profile image89
            MizBejabbersposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Nathanville, in the State of Arkansas, if you fail to pay your property taxes, the government notifies you. If after a couple of delinquencies and notifications, you still do not pay the taxes, if someone else pays the delinquent taxes owed, they own the property. It isn't like the debtor isn't given numerous opportunities to pay the taxes. It may sound unfair to you, but in some instances, these people hold out until the last minute before paying. They keep their money in the bank collecting every last penny of interest possible on it. I think this may have been the situation I mentioned because I know the man wasn't broke. However, the legal question here is whether the tax office broke the law by not waiting until the 4:30 (or whatever deadline) to take the second party payor's money and lock out the owner.  We'll see what the court says. But broke or just holding out, the government doesn't discriminate as long as procedures are followed.

            1. Nathanville profile image93
              Nathanvilleposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Most strange; I’m trying to get my head around that because it’s so alien to the tax laws in the UK e.g. in the UK the Tax Office does not own your property, so if you are a business and don’t pay your property tax then ultimately the Tax Office could sell any assets you have, and your property if necessary, to reclaim the debt owed to them -

              But one thing the Tax Office in the UK cannot do is give your property to another person in exchange for them paying your tax bill; simply because in the UK the Tax man does not have ownership of your property.   

              Two common courses of action taken by the Tax Office in the UK to get unpaid tax owed by a business includes:-

              1.    To ask the business owner to release equity from their property to pay the overdue tax, or

              2.    The Tax Office can place a ‘charge on the property’ so that the debt would need to be repaid from the sale/assets if and when the business owner decides to sell his property or re-mortgage it.

              So I struggle to understand how such a barbaric law can be allowed to exist in the USA, when in the UK such a thing would be unthinkable – I shall contemplate this further when I have a coffee break later this afternoon hmm

              1. MizBejabbers profile image89
                MizBejabbersposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I understand your concern. It proves my statement that we just think we own our property. And I agree with you that it is barbaric. This also contributes to the homeless population. I've seen several people post on the Nextdoor app that they were turned out of their homes because they couldn't pay the real estate taxes on them and now live in their cars.

                1. Nathanville profile image93
                  Nathanvilleposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Wow, it does sound very harsh in America. 

                  For clarity, I double checked to see what “real estate taxes” is in British English; and in Britain it’s called ‘Council Tax’, and that tax is payable to your local government (not the tax man).

                  In the UK, if you can’t pay your Council Tax (real estate tax) you are better off talking to your local government to seek help and advice, and trying to negotiate terms and amount for repayment; that way your local government is more likely to be sympathetic and may give you a once off discount, or reduce your Council Tax if you are on a low income or social benefits (social security).

                  If you don’t talk to your local government, then they are likely to take you to Court, and the Court will decide whether you can afford to pay the tax, and whether you have a valid reason to not pay, and then decide your fate.

                  But even if you do lose your home in the UK because you can’t afford to pay your debts, there is little reason why you should become homeless.  In Britain, if you become homeless your local government has a legal obligation to house you e.g. Council House (State built and State owned housing), alternatives for the homeless are Housing Association Housing (Social Housing provided by non-profit organisation), the rent is a little more in a housing association house than a Council House rent, but still a lot cheaper than private rented accommodation. 

                  And as a poor person, once you get a Council House, or Housing Association Housing, the rent is cheaper and more affordable than in the private sector, and being poor you’d be entitled to Rent Rebate anyway, which helps to make housing for the very poor feasible.  Rent Rebate is a social security benefit for poor people, whereby your local government pays your rent for you.  And with renting, rather than owning, there is then no property tax to pay.

                  New council homes transforming the lives of residents (Council Homes in the UK being social housing for the homeless, built by the State and owned by the State): https://youtu.be/GZzdFH0_4zw

                  1. Nathanville profile image93
                    Nathanvilleposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    With reference to my last paragraph and link above:-

                    If you do get a Council House (State built and State owned) because you're homeless, then years later you get on your feet and get a good job, and can afford a mortgage; then under British law you have an automatic right to buy your Council House from your Local Government at a discounted price.

                    The Discounted price is the market value of your property less all the rent you paid over the years.

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          Too true; government will take some of what is ours. 

          But there is quite a difference, at least IMO, between spending that money for the nation's needs and giving it away to benefit specific individuals.  There is also the small matter that "spending" (including the giveaways) somehow never stop growing; in spite of decades of "fighting poverty" it is greater now than it ever was.  Is that because we continually raise the bar, giving a reason to tax more and give more?

          1. gmwilliams profile image83
            gmwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I concur w/Wilderness regarding the statement that the government gives too many handouts regarding fighting poverty in the United States.  To reiterate endlessly, the main reason why some Americans are in the lower socioeconomic strata are irresponsible life choices.  They refuse to believe in delayed gratification.  They act now regardless of the consequences of their actions.

            They refuse to strategize & plan for their futures.  They won't take responsibility & accountability for their actions.  They have children when they can least afford it.  Some have way too many children thus depending upon outside agencies to support them.  People are poor in America because they don't make intelligent choices regarding their life choices.   

            Poor Americans don't believe in bettering themselves & inculcate their children the same way.  Poor people have a passive psychology towards life.  They believe as opposed to other classes that life OWES them instead of exerting themselves to make a better life.   It is poor Americans' fault that they are in the dire predicament they are in.  I say cut governmental social spending by 80% percent.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image76
              Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              ***

      2. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Karl Marx is the 3nd world's most sold book of economic. Looks like it's making a come back.

    3. Sharlee01 profile image81
      Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Excellent question.  However, it appears that there's a need for additional context when linking this question to the Government shutdown, as the title of the thread implys. At first glance, your question might solicit a quick, emotional response, in my opinion.

      The budget and the looming threat of a shutdown are multifaceted issues. They encompass more than just emotions. Our national debt is substantial, and our economic situation as a nation is far from ideal. Moreover, the budget in question doesn't just involve a small increase in spending; it's actually quite substantial. From my perspective, we find ourselves at a critical juncture where we must not only address the deficit but also contemplate whether we should continue increasing spending or consider pulling back.

      I'm curious if anyone here has taken a close look at the proposed budget. I believe that would be an excellent starting point for discussion.

      To answer your question maybe we do neither, maybe we just stop spending money we just don't have, and not add more to the debt.

      1. tsmog profile image84
        tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        "I'm curious if anyone here has taken a close look at the proposed budget. I believe that would be an excellent starting point for discussion."

        Nah, too cumbersome to read the actual budget. I did read An Overview of the House FY 2024 Budget Resolution by Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget to get the skinny of things last week.

        https://www.crfb.org/blogs/overview-hou … resolution

        Ambitious!!!

        1. Kathleen Cochran profile image77
          Kathleen Cochranposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          "For the first 200 years of the US’s existence, they did not happen at all. There have been 20 federal funding gaps since 1976." The Guardian

          The view from across the pond:

          https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … Uvc7t4QP2s

          1. Nathanville profile image93
            Nathanvilleposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks for the link; most enlightening.  The American Government shutdown, in hearing it in the news when it happens, has always bemused me because it’s something that just doesn’t happen in Britain (thankfully) so (as an onlooker from across the pond) it’s just a puzzling state of affairs to me; and it can’t be good for the economy.

            The only occasion where there was turbulence in the British system, relating to finance, was a Welfare reform Bill in the Conservative Government Election Manifesto in 2010, to cut £12 billion ($15 billion) of welfare, which would have adversely affected the most vulnerable the hardest.  However, in the autumn of 2010, the House of Lords (unconstitutionally) repeatedly refused to pass the Bill, each time sending it back to the House of Commons with ‘Amendments’; creating what’s known as ‘ping-pong’ in British Politics – And to avert a Constitutional Crisis the Prime Minister eventually decided to drop his proposals to cut welfare benefits:  https://youtu.be/d2zPvzQkeuA

            In the UK the financial year runs from 6th April to the 5th April the following year; and a mini-budget is held in the autumn to allow sufficient time for the Legislation to pass through Parliament, and for the changes to be implemented on time.  Under the British Constitution the House of Lords are prohibited from blocking the Finance Bill, and as the Government usually has a majority in the House of Commons, passing the Finance Bill isn't usually a major issue.  The main Budget held in the spring is just confirmation of the mini-autumn-budget, although it may contain a few minor adjustments as necessary.

            The current economic situation in the UK isn’t that different to the problems faced by America and all other major industrialised nations.  Under our current Prime Minister, taxes were raised last year, but with a General Election looming, and with the Conservatives doing badly in the Opinion Polls, there is mounting pressure from the right of the Conservative Party to lower taxation in the run up to the General Election – We should get a clearer picture of the Government’s intent during the mini-budget on the 22nd November.

            The General Election in the UK will be in just over a years’ time, and currently public support for the different political parties in Britain is:-

            •    Labour = 43%
            •    Conservative = 27%
            •    Liberal Democrats = 10%
            •    Greens = 7%

            1. DrMark1961 profile image96
              DrMark1961posted 5 months agoin reply to this

              If the conservatives had managed to shove that 15 billion welfare cut down the throats of others, do you think that would have been just reason to shut down other parts of government? The complaints I have heard from the Freedom Caucus is that there are things just as bad in the current budget and there has been a year to go over them, yet McCarthy waited to roll this out with no time for adequate debate.

              1. Nathanville profile image93
                Nathanvilleposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                Yep, rolling something like that out at short notice, without adequate time for debate (if that is the case), especially if it’s controversial, is asking for trouble.  Perhaps that is another difference between the UK Parliamentary system and the American system e.g. in the UK a government can’t push Legislation through Parliament without following procedure. 

                The procedure under the British system includes three ‘Readings’ in each House; the second reading being committee stage e.g. where a select committee of politicians from all political parties discuss the proposals in fine detail in committee and then report back to the House, with any Amenments.

                Normally, before major Bills are presented to the House, particularly if they are controversial, the Government will publish a ‘White Paper’.  The ‘White Paper’ provides a basis for consultation and discussion with interested or affected groups, and allows the Government to make final changes to the draft Bill before it is formally presented to Parliament.

                In answer to your first question:  If the Government had managed to push through the $15 billion of welfare cuts in 2011, it wouldn’t have caused the shutdown of any Government Departments, it would have been just one of many cuts made by the Government at the time as part of their austerity measures, in response to the 2008 financial crisis that swept across the world.  In the end, the Government had to make do with making other cuts in public expenditure, without the cuts they wanted to make to welfare, as part of their austerity measures at the time.

      2. gmwilliams profile image83
        gmwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Agree w/your last statement.

    4. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Q.1) What makes people rich,( less vulnerable) and what makes them poor, (more vulnerable)? Are they "vulnerable" or just different in what they do for work and have acquired through habits of saving and spending.

      Q.2) Why would spending less or taxing more indicate "who we are as Americans?"

    5. gmwilliams profile image83
      gmwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I say spend less.  The government spends an EXORBITANT amount already.  They spend money on useless research, superfluous social programs, & housing illegals.   The INTELLIGENT solution is to stop spending UNNECESSARY money on useless programs, fire half of government employees who perform useless jobs, & send all illegals back to their countries of origin.

  2. Credence2 profile image79
    Credence2posted 5 months ago

    “We made a deal, we shook hands, and said this is what we’re going to do. Now, they’re reneging on the deal,” Biden said late Monday.

    But Trump is pushing Republicans to dismantle the deal with Biden. “Unless you get everything, shut it down!” Trump wrote in all capital letters on social media. “It’s time Republicans learned how to fight!”
    --------
    So, we have now  identified the head of the serpent....

    1. Ken Burgess profile image80
      Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Sounds good.

      We are funding an entire nation's budget, and arming them with plenty to help facilitate WWIII.

      That's not what I want American money spent on, I think I speak for plenty of others who have no interest in helping the criminals in DC laundering any more billions through Ukraine.

      Spend those billions helping migrants and drug addicts in our own country and secure the border.

      Stop starting new wars and destroying other nations.

      1. Credence2 profile image79
        Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Why should the entire Congress be held hostage by a handful of Republican far right fruitcakes? The points you make are valid, but a consensus is needed and the the hold outs will bring the Government down and they will be blamed, r egardless.

        1. Ken Burgess profile image80
          Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          They may be fruitcakes.

          Or they may be the only ones left with integrity and willingness to do right by the American people.

          I would have to do some serious research into those of whom you speak, to really determine the matter, but a quick glance this is what I find:

          Five House conservatives voted against advancing a Pentagon funding bill Tuesday.

          OK, that sounds like something I support. I don't want any more money going to Ukraine, or the Pentagon for that matter.  We spend way too much money on making war all over the world... its the predominant reason why we have 32 Trillion dollars of debt and a Dollar that isn't worth half what it was a decade ago.

          Republican Reps. Dan Bishop (N.C.), Ralph Norman (S.C.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Matt Rosendale (Mont.) and Ken Buck (Colo.) all joined Democrats in voting against the rule for the appropriations bill, bringing the final vote to 214-212.

          Wait a minute, they joined the Democrats?  Am I reading that right?

          At the center of the conservatives’ opposition is their demand to see spending levels cut across all 12 appropriations bills. The coalition of Republicans have suggested that they will hold up approving the appropriations bills until the GOP leadership meets their demands.


          Hmmm?

          They requested, or demanded, something back in January be addressed and they were ignored and then they stuck to their demands?

          They showed some integrity and remained adamant about not just handing over a blank check to put the money into whatever?

          How dare they!!!

          “Leadership has yet to provide us with that number, which is why I voted against the rule this afternoon! Why are they keeping it a secret?”

          These sorry, pathetic individuals. wanting accountability and integrity in our government spending... what morons... this is what you get when you are stuck dealing with decent people that want honest answers.

          This is why you need to hang on to the Pelosi and Bidens, despite them looking and acting the Crypt Thing out in public, they know the deal, just shoveling off a couple trillion dollars more into various donor and corporate pockets, running the war racket in Ukraine, its a shame when people like this get in the way of business as usual in Washington.

          https://thehill.com/homenews/4212843-th … ding-bill/

          1. Credence2 profile image79
            Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

            OK, that sounds like something I support. I don't want any more money going to Ukraine, or the Pentagon for that matter.  We spend way too much money on making war all over the world... its the predominant reason why we have 32 Trillion dollars of debt and a Dollar that isn't worth half what it was a decade ago.

            When one goes realistic, we need a functioning military and thus the Pentagon establishment. Holding back funding can be nothing more than a political stunt. It is just simplistic to blame Democrats for spending excesses.
            ------
            "At the center of the conservatives’ opposition is their demand to see spending levels cut across all 12 appropriations bills. The coalition of Republicans have suggested that they will hold up approving the appropriations bills until the GOP leadership meets their demands."

            It is not all about what the Republicans want, what do the Democrats want and how do Republicans think that anything is going to happen without compromise?

            -------

            Republicans are the last people to speak of fiscal accountability, they simply want to gore your ox while protecting their own

        2. Ken Burgess profile image80
          Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          So there you go Credence, nothing shut down after all:

          House passes spending bills to fund federal agencies, provide aid to Ukraine as government shutdown looms

          The House of Representatives passed multiple appropriations bills Thursday night to fund the State Department, the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security through fiscal year 2024 as lawmakers work to avert a government shutdown.

          Provisions in the annual spending bill to provide $300 million to Ukraine as its war against Russia continues faced opposition from some Republican House members. Greene called the bill a "blank check" for President Biden to "fund his proxy war in Ukraine," according to the New York Post.

          House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., removed the Ukraine funding from the Defense spending bill Wednesday night to gain more support from the members of his party who take issue with additional funding for the eastern European nation.

          A separate bill to provide the $300 million in aid to Ukraine passed in a 311 to 117 vote, with more than 100 Republicans joining House Democrats to advance the legislation.


          ---- END

          1. Sharlee01 profile image81
            Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Business as usual.

            1. abwilliams profile image67
              abwilliamsposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              MTG is my hero right now!

              1. Sharlee01 profile image81
                Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                So needs to be posted ---   "WASHINGTON - The House voted to approve an amendment from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., to cut Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s salary to $1 on Wednesday - a move that comes amid the growing tension in the House to avert a government shutdown.

                “Secretary Austin has not fulfilled his job duties,” Greene said on the House floor Wednesday. “As a matter of fact, he’s destroying our military.”

                She criticized Austin for his handling of military recruitment and the withdrawal of Afghanistan on the House floor and said in a video on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, after the House vote that “there’s a loss in confidence in Lloyd Austin’s leadership and he deserves to be fired."

                This entire administration is extremely corrosive and poses a significant danger. It is crucial to expose the harm they have already caused and the potential damage they may continue to inflict. Their actions are clearly having a detrimental impact on America, and it's essential to address these concerns openly. As MTG has done...

              2. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
                Kathryn L Hillposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                I do not mind her one little bit!

                Protect our OWN borders, not Ukraine's!!!!
                Our tax dollars should not be used to fund that war.
                This body of politicians has does Russia wrong and Russia will stop at nothing.

                N O T H I N G

          2. Credence2 profile image79
            Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Compromise or else, nothing. I want to watch McCarthy get sent to the woodshed by hard right wingers for "caving in". Just a natural part of the disravelling of the GOP, I am privileged to witness.

            1. Ken Burgess profile image80
              Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              Its a Uniparty Credence.

              There are enough corrupt and criminal politicians on both sides of the aisle to make sure the country continues on course, no matter what comes.

              That was proven long before this. 

              When Trump was elected and had the majority, they stopped him from repealing the ACA, they stopped him from making legitimate/permanent changes to tax laws.... and the Republicans that chose to do so are the very ones who promised their constituents that they would repeal the ACA, they were elected on that promise.

              For more than three decades, a bipartisan collection of politicians, think tanks, business leaders, media moguls and policy experts, lets call them the Uniparty, have supported internationalism over national interests (IE- NAFTA, Global Compact on Migration).

              The NWO it has been called by people in power like Bush Sr. back in the 90s, the Great Reset was bantered about during Covid lockdowns, what is it? 

              A top down control of society, globally, run by (and for) International Corporations and Trillionaires (IE - Bezos, Bill Gates) unquestioning commitment to the free flow of people, goods and capital around the world.

              So closely synced were the bipartisan coconspirators that their arguments and talking points were virtually indistinguishable. On trading freely and ignoring borders, there was no daylight between Democrats and Republicans, no debate. It hardly mattered who would be president; both nominees desired a world governed by markets, not the people.

              And then the backlash came, the election of Donald Trump, Brexit, and other populist events that were revolts of the people, the deplorables, the uneducated unwashed masses that had no right to decide how a government was run or what was best for them.

              The Uniparty would have none of it, they would rather destroy the world then allow such filth to take power or control away from them.

              Shut down the entire world.  Enrage them and divide them by race and religion.  Support the most extreme extremists and let them flourish in your society (IE - Antifa, BLM) whatever it takes, regain control, make them beg to be subjugated by an overreaching government.

              But then something happened, some countries no longer wanted to play along with their plans for dominating, subjugating the world.  Perhaps the global pandemic lockdowns shocked them awake, perhaps it was the arrogance with which they ordered other nations to do their bidding... or else.

              As Russia's invasion of Ukraine and China's saber-rattling toward Taiwan make clear, globalization is not the natural state of affairs. It is not something that all nations want to buy into.

              Open borders to the world and the flow of real investment out of the domestic economy was disruptive and harmful to the United States and its closest allies. The Uniparty pulled the wool over our eyes, a betrayal of American interests that occurs even now.

              It has made Russia and China powerful enough to ally much of the world to their cause, and against the hegemony of the Dollar.

              America had shown arrogance before, in taking down Libya and trying to take down Syria, with no reasoning behind it other than they wanted to do so... they certainly were not a threat to America, or its citizens.

              The decision to go after Russia, and flirt with nuclear Armageddon, to attempt to destroy a 1st world nation with the largest cache of nukes in the world, had to be alarming to most non-Western world leaders.

              The United States has been on a destructive course for a while now. America was not forced to give China "favored nation" trade status, they were not forced to allow businesses of national importance to flock there.  Democrat Xavier Becerra, years ago a California congressman and now Joe Biden's secretary of health and human service stated that "globalization is a fact, not a policy option."

              Feigning powerlessness was convenient for politicians who didn't want to exercise their power to protect American interests or save domestic industries.

              After far too many years, globalization is finally facing a public reckoning. What was once a durable bipartisan consensus now faces bipartisan scrutiny. Between pandemic-ravaged supply chains and the prospect of a long war in Europe, the promise of a rules-based global order, governed by free markets and filled with free people, seems as quixotic as ever.

              But the "ruling elites" of which the Biden Adminstration is part of and caters to, does not recognize the pressing systemic failures now facing us.  The millions now pouring through the border, the economic crisis befalling the EU because of warmongering efforts to control Russia which cut off the EU from cheap energy and raw materials it needed to sustain its economic wellbeing.

              Alienating the Saudis on which the PetroDollar has depended for decades and forcing them into the camp of China and Russia was no small feat by Biden either. If it weren't for his drawing down the National Reserves to near empty, we would have been facing $10 a gallon gas prices for a while now.

              Today we are suffering the devastating consequences of the Uniparty's radical globalization program. Our industrial strength has atrophied as production has moved offshore. Domestic growth and investment have stagnated as investors send their capital overseas. Meanwhile, the typical American faces poorer job opportunities, greater dependency on government and a lower life expectancy than at any point in nearly two decades.

              This is most definitely to continue, so long as Biden remains at the helm.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
                Kathryn L Hillposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                What are the political differences between Trump and Kennedy?

                1. Ken Burgess profile image80
                  Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  If you listen to Kennedy's position on vaccines, Ukraine, immigration, etc. he is a viable option for people who dislike Biden's Administration, but don't want to support Trump.

                  In other words, he aligns close enough to Trump on all the major issues, that he can pull enough votes away from Trump to ensure Biden gets the win.

                  I think that was the plan all along and why he will be in the mix.  Like Perot pulled far more voters from Bush Sr. than he did Clinton.

                  There is, what I believe to be a well founded belief, that if it is straight up Biden vs. Trump in 2024, it could prove difficult to convince America that Biden won.

                  Throw a 3rd candidate into the mix however, one that pulls ten percent or more of the votes nationally... then you don't have to worry about it.

                  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                    ... well oh my goodness and Yikes! yikes  yikes  yikes

                    Could Kennedy Jr. actually win?
                    .... and what if he does?

              2. tsmog profile image84
                tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                Wow! Book bookmarked this page of this forum topic with your post to go back to. A lot of new information I am unfamiliar with. Thanks for a future road of discovery ahead of me.

  3. abwilliams profile image67
    abwilliamsposted 5 months ago

    Give him one dollar...love it!
    Tenacious!!

    Our own James Watkins shared some interesting stats on FB -

    It basically describes how men are becoming more and more conservative and women, more leftist and liberal!
    I already knew that women put Biden/Harris into office and women put progressive leftists into office, but why and how can we get through to them?!?
    Not to mention the further divide created between men and women!

    1. tsmog profile image84
      tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      I got a 'content not found' when I went to it.

      1. abwilliams profile image67
        abwilliamsposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Yeah, I couldn't share it after all, I've revised post. Sorry!

        I will try to find a shareable version.

    2. gmwilliams profile image83
      gmwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      That sounds interesting.  Maybe you should do a forum thread on this topic.  I would be glad to participate.

  4. Ken Burgess profile image80
    Ken Burgessposted 4 months ago

    The threat of a federal government shutdown suddenly lifted late Saturday as President Joe Biden signed a temporary funding bill to keep agencies open with little time to spare after Congress rushed to approve the bipartisan deal.

    The package drops aid to Ukraine, a White House priority opposed by a growing number of GOP lawmakers, but increases federal disaster assistance by $16 billion, meeting Biden’s full request. The bill funds government until Nov. 17.

    1. tsmog profile image84
      tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Good that we are funded in my eyes. Yet, the ongoing struggle continues, right?

      1. Ken Burgess profile image80
        Ken Burgessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Like I have stated elsewhere, the biggest issue is removing the Biden Administration... and then worrying about trying to fix things.

        Get rid of Biden, then there is hope that we can avoid WWIII, that we can address the open border, that we can make amends with foreign nations we need to be on good terms with, or else face economic ruin... so long as Biden remains, there is only going to be a worsening of problems all across the board.

        1. gmwilliams profile image83
          gmwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Totally concur w/your last statement.

  5. Willowarbor profile image61
    Willowarborposted 3 months ago

    Well here we go again with another government shutdown looming over us.  I think one of the sticking points will continue to be aid for Ukraine. I see the same old arguments being dragged out about the US footing all the bills and how the rest of the world doesn't pay its fair share.  Well I found an interesting tracker in terms of worldwide support for Ukraine.

    Total EU commitments are now almost double those of the US. When adding other Western European countries that are not part of the EU (UK, Norway, Switzerland), the gap widens further. Specifically, the Tracker lists a total of €156 billion commitments by all main European donors (EU and non-EU), compared to less than €70 billion by the US.

    As a percentage of GDP and considering these multi-year programs, Norway is now the biggest supporter of Ukraine, with aid to Ukraine amounting to 1.7 percent of its GDP.

    Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia follow in this ranking, and remain in the top spots even when factoring in multi-year commitments. Denmark now takes the 4th spot, with aid amounting to 1.1 percent of its GDP.

    While the U.S. has sent the most aid in total dollars, Ukraine’s neighbors are contributing the most on a per GDP basis. 

    Foreign aid is always an easy hot button for the right to push. Most Americans have no idea how much the US spends on foreign aid, and they grossly overestimate how much goes to such programs. Most Americans think it’s about 25 percent of the U.S. budget and want it reduced to about 10 percent. Their wish is already granted: It’s actually about 1 percent.

    Americans  also do not understand that most foreign assistance is not a cash handout as extremist politicians push that narrative on an uninformed public.  Americans think of assistance, mistakenly, as bags of untraceable money handed to foreigners to do with as they will, which is why opportunists such as DeSantis (who once supported aid to Ukraine) try to exploit provocative terms such as blank check to describe helping Ukraine. DeSantis knows better; so do other Republican leaders.

    https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/ne … -as-large/

    1. abwilliams profile image67
      abwilliamsposted 3 months agoin reply to this

      I too once supported assistance to Ukraine, but not indefinitely, not forever!

      1. Ken Burgess profile image80
        Ken Burgessposted 3 months agoin reply to this

        The problem, as I have stated repeatedly, is Biden.

        As this thread stands testament to, as seen in my previous posts, things are only going to get worse while he is President.

        Ukraine, Israel... soon Iran... after that China... WWIII.

        Biden is doom for America... I knew he was going to be bad news but had no idea anyone... any administration... could be this incomprehensibly bad for the country... for humanity itself.


        EDIT/ADD

        JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon issued a stark warning to investors as geopolitical tensions are reaching a boiling point around the world.

        “This may be the most dangerous time the world has seen in decades,” the CEO said. He warned the ongoing war in Ukraine and the latest war between Israel and Hamas could have “far-reaching impacts on energy and food markets, global trade, and geopolitical relationships.”

        Its critical to understand that IF we do like that F'n idiot Lindsey Graham has recently repeatedly stated, and bomb Iran's oil refineries, we have started WWIII... and there will be no going back.  The devastation to the world will make WWI and WWII look like kids play.

        I cannot stress to you enough, how incredibly dangerous... delirious... evil... I don't know what words to use for this cabal in control of DC today, but they seem intent on getting WWIII going, whatever it takes.

        How deranged is it, that Biden removes all the sanctions and restrictions on Iran, releases what (?) a hundred billion dollars to them, shhhip, lets see what this idiot has done:

        $6B Prisoner Swap Was ‘Just a Drop in the Bucket’ for Iran. Here’s How Much Tehran Has Raked in Under Biden.
        https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/10/18/ … ck-israel/

        Oh, even better!  Biden is going to give them another 10 Billion as of today!

        Biden Mulls Approval of Fresh $10 Billion for Iran
        https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/1 … rs-giving/

        Do you see the insanity? 

        Do you not realize the reason for these wars emanates from who is in the WH?

        1. Willowarbor profile image61
          Willowarborposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          If you were in Biden's position what would you do in this scenario?

          Biden must weigh loosening sanctions that did little to prevent Iranian oil from reaching China via the dark fleet. Barrels reduced under Trump were simply due to a decrease overall in oil usage due to covid.

          The nuclear deal that Trump got us out of with Iran ( only because it was Obama's) must also be factored in.  Trump's own administration said the deal was working but his hatred of Obama  got the better of him and we pulled out of the historic deal. As a result,
          under Trump's  watch Iran was able to enrich uranium like never before. So now we have that issue to deal with.

          So what are the options?  Loosen sanctions on oil in hopes that Iran will return to the nuclear deal? 

          Continue or strengthen sanctions that do little to prevent the flow of cheap oil to China while Iran continues to advance their nuclear capabilities?

          In terms of curbing Iran from getting their oil to China, I think senator Graham is correct in his assumption that we would have to attack those facilities.  There is really no other feasible way to blockade their oil from reaching China. 

          So if you were at the helm, what would you do taking into consideration all the relevant factors?

          Is there any deal or financial incentive/ sanction  that will make this regime a peaceful international actor?

          1. Ken Burgess profile image80
            Ken Burgessposted 3 months agoin reply to this

            First... its not what I would do now... its what I would have never done.

            If I were at the helm, there would have been no war with Russia.

            There would have only been harsher restrictions on Iran, very easy to deny their ships access to the seas.

            As for what Iran has been able to produce because of Biden's lifting of sanctions.

            https://hubstatic.com/16794748.jpg

            After Trump imposed sanctions, Iran's oil exports fell off a cliff (see above) before Covid ever hit.

            Iranian oil exports rise to 2 million bpd in 2016 and reach a peak of 2.8 million bpd in 2018. It takes time to wind down and allow American allies time to establish new sources.

            Iran refrains from coming back to the negotiating table to discuss a new nuclear pact as sought by Trump, and vows to sell "as much oil as it can" despite the sanctions.

            Iran does not disclose its oil exports data, but assessments based on tanker tracking show exports fall as low as 200,000 bpd.

            Joe Biden wins the U.S. presidential election.

            Iran instructs its oil ministry to prepare installations for production and sale of crude oil at full capacity within three months.

            China increases its imports of Iranian oil to almost 800,000 bpd in January and almost 1 million bpd in March, although imports drop again in April.

            Biden releases held Iranian assets estimated to be between 80 and 100 billion dollars.

            That information dispels both your theory about China and Covid.

            The sanctions worked, and could have become even more restrictive.

            Instead, Biden flooded Iran with money and ability to sell their oil.

            These are the results.

        2. gmwilliams profile image83
          gmwilliamsposted 3 months agoin reply to this

          Biden is quite problematic.  To reiterate, he isn't presidential material.  The Democrats are making America worse.  America keeps descending into an abyss which can be described as infernal.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)