Economy Thread

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Here's what I think the biggest problem is: people -- ALL OF US -- hate to admit that we're wrong.

If you've believed your whole life, including vehemently arguing the point, that the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility....then you are INVESTED in being right.  And despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, you'll stick with it -- you'll contort yourself to rationalizing that the GOP is still, RELATIVELY, the party of fiscal responsibility (even though the evidence to the contrary is glaring at you from the recent history books).

It's okay to be wrong, and to admit you were wrong.  Here, I'll start:

1 -- I used to argue that the GOP was the party of fiscal responsibility.  Because that's what they said, they had the rhetoric to go with it, and it made sense.  But given the opportunity to back it up.....they consistently prove the exact opposite.  I was wrong.

2 -- I thought that really cute, but kinda odd girl, who I met through a friend sophomore year, would be a cool chick to date.  She was really cute.  And when lucid, quite engaging.  I thought that the odd stuff would be no big deal.  I was wrong.  

3 -- I supported the War in Iraq.  I thought that the underlying neoconservative thinking of providing an exemplar of non-totalitarian, democratic government in the region could be a good remedy to the madness created by the Sykes-Picot Agreement.  I was, like, SUPER wrong.  I was underinformed and naive, had unmerited faith in our government's ability to execute, and about 100 other things that embarrass me to this day.  I was WRONG.

See how easy that is?  It's actually refreshing.  It's fucking exhausting to have to continue to defend a ludicrous, unsupportable worldview.

I cringe watching @Onboard 2.0 blithely spout partyline bullshittery. That was me 15 years ago. It’s painful thinking about how wrong I was.

For whatever reason, changing your views based on actual events and factual evidence is frowned upon.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Here's what I think the biggest problem is: people -- ALL OF US -- hate to admit that we're wrong.

If you've believed your whole life, including vehemently arguing the point, that the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility....then you are INVESTED in being right.  And despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, you'll stick with it -- you'll contort yourself to rationalizing that the GOP is still, RELATIVELY, the party of fiscal responsibility (even though the evidence to the contrary is glaring at you from the recent history books).

It's okay to be wrong, and to admit you were wrong.  Here, I'll start:

1 -- I used to argue that the GOP was the party of fiscal responsibility.  Because that's what they said, they had the rhetoric to go with it, and it made sense.  But given the opportunity to back it up.....they consistently prove the exact opposite.  I was wrong.

2 -- I thought that really cute, but kinda odd girl, who I met through a friend sophomore year, would be a cool chick to date.  She was really cute.  And when lucid, quite engaging.  I thought that the odd stuff would be no big deal.  I was wrong.  

3 -- I supported the War in Iraq.  I thought that the underlying neoconservative thinking of providing an exemplar of non-totalitarian, democratic government in the region could be a good remedy to the madness created by the Sykes-Picot Agreement.  I was, like, SUPER wrong.  I was underinformed and naive, had unmerited faith in our government's ability to execute, and about 100 other things that embarrass me to this day.  I was WRONG.

See how easy that is?  It's actually refreshing.  It's fucking exhausting to have to continue to defend a ludicrous, unsupportable worldview.

Here here. It was actually the Texas GOP that first planted the seed of doubt in my mind and hardened my heart against their platform. They would say wonderful things while their actions would consist of dismantling education, funneling money to friends through corporate initiatives, think tanks, and extension offices. They would howl at bathroom visitors while ignoring the plight of foster care children for years. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say, it was really not a difficult decision.

[wildcat09 29377]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nope they don't they want free everything. Not a recipe for a healthy society.

I bet you fucking hate libraries.

[wildcat09 29377]

30 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Here's what I think the biggest problem is: people -- ALL OF US -- hate to admit that we're wrong.

If you've believed your whole life, including vehemently arguing the point, that the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility....then you are INVESTED in being right.  And despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, you'll stick with it -- you'll contort yourself to rationalizing that the GOP is still, RELATIVELY, the party of fiscal responsibility (even though the evidence to the contrary is glaring at you from the recent history books).

It's okay to be wrong, and to admit you were wrong.  Here, I'll start:

1 -- I used to argue that the GOP was the party of fiscal responsibility.  Because that's what they said, they had the rhetoric to go with it, and it made sense.  But given the opportunity to back it up.....they consistently prove the exact opposite.  I was wrong.

2 -- I thought that really cute, but kinda odd girl, who I met through a friend sophomore year, would be a cool chick to date.  She was really cute.  And when lucid, quite engaging.  I thought that the odd stuff would be no big deal.  I was wrong.  

3 -- I supported the War in Iraq.  I thought that the underlying neoconservative thinking of providing an exemplar of non-totalitarian, democratic government in the region could be a good remedy to the madness created by the Sykes-Picot Agreement.  I was, like, SUPER wrong.  I was underinformed and naive, had unmerited faith in our government's ability to execute, and about 100 other things that embarrass me to this day.  I was WRONG.

See how easy that is?  It's actually refreshing.  It's fucking exhausting to have to continue to defend a ludicrous, unsupportable worldview.

I hate to admit this, but I used to think libertarians were reasonably intelligent and actually believed in freedom.  Then like 95% of them got really furious at women during that Gamergate shit and now they're all cool with disenfranchising black people. 

[Brisketexan 105278]

5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I hate to admit this, but I used to think libertarians were reasonably intelligent and actually believed in freedom.  Then like 95% of them got really furious at women during that Gamergate shit and now they're all cool with disenfranchising black people. 

Yeah, I very much went through the Libertarian phase as well.  On the surface, there's something attractive about it.  But when you realize that the execution is often little more than anarcho-oligarchy, with a healthy doze of racism and misogyny thrown in....yeah, it's not so attractive.  My flirtation with Libertarianism is something else about which I was wrong.

Also, there was one time where I was totally about to make a connection with this KNOCKOUT -- seriously, I'd seen her across the room in classes all semester, and was finally at a party where she was, and we saw each other, she smiled, and I headed over -- ....till I realized that she was a knockout form the waist up, and from the waist down, she was a BIG gal, and as I was walking towards her and saw it, I peeled off like a fighter plane....I was wrong about that.  I should have stayed on target.  Because she was plenty cute enough, AND I'll never forget the hurt look in her eyes as I visibly peeled away.  That was a dick move.  I was wrong.

[Js1 85536]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah, I very much went through the Libertarian phase as well.  On the surface, there's something attractive about it.  But when you realize that the execution is often little more than anarcho-oligarchy, with a healthy doze of racism and misogyny thrown in....yeah, it's not so attractive.  My flirtation with Libertarianism is something else about which I was wrong.

Also, there was one time where I was totally about to make a connection with this KNOCKOUT -- seriously, I'd seen her across the room in classes all semester, and was finally at a party where she was, and we saw each other, she smiled, and I headed over -- ....till I realized that she was a knockout form the waist up, and from the waist down, she was a BIG gal, and as I was walking towards her and saw it, I peeled off like a fighter plane....I was wrong about that.  I should have stayed on target.  Because she was plenty cute enough, AND I'll never forget the hurt look in her eyes as I visibly peeled away.  That was a dick move.  I was wrong.

 

[The Royal We 3072]

Man, some of these responses feel like I'm staring into a mirror.  Do your fox news devouring parents also question you about why/how you have become so librul?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I troll my Fox News family because there’s no point in attempting an honest discussion when they use easily verifiable lies as the basis for their positions.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[zork 629]

2 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

 

ah yes, the old "because at some uncertain time in the future, we have an uncertain and knowable chance of not being able to make uncertain amounts of spending that we're uncertain that we'll need, we need to crush the economy now" argument.

Um, no, it is already baked into the future budgets(escalator of never-ending spending increases for every single program(last time I downloaded the forward budgets was about 1.5 or so years ago ) unless the House Budget committee has the balls to restrict any of them.  That is a problem given the $500 billion+ we have been adding to the National Debt every year for nearly two decades at minimum and much, much more in most years.

It is clear that is not going to change.  I am and many of the fiscal conservatives are not for that.  But the environment has long past to be able to make a reasonable majority of votes that would even bring the budget to just hold it to the nominal spending values from last year, much less any cuts. 

"Crush the economy now?"  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, wait till we are 30, then 40, then 50 trillion in national debt in the next decade.  What will the economy be like when the interest on the debt doubles, triples, etc or can we just Q-Ease our way out again, and again?  Fortunately the rest of the world is in debt for the most part as well.

How about baby steps of: Holding the budget to the same nominal figures for every department as last year.  Then repeat as necessary till the fiscal house is in order.  Let the HoR and Senate and Pres decide on a bi-partisan basis if one dept needs to be cut to add to another.  Or,  cut all of the budget by a nominal 5% then reallocate that clump of budget as the HoR, Senate, and Pres see fit.(so nominal flat budget but some are real cuts and some get more as best decided by the people in charge of such things)

Or just keep the escalator of spending rising to keep the crying to a minimum,  AKA status quo.

I don't expect anything to be done to seriously address the deficit or the debt since the will of the people is to spend more, not less.

What is your solution, elfenix?

[Js1 85536]

But not confident enough to have their name published 

Let’s check the way back machine:

 

[bolverk 29714]

Not only was he spectacularly wrong in 2008, but the Great Recession actually started in December 2007. Yes, it's easily possible to not have enough data points to not know you're in a recession when it first starts, but it was more than obvious by April 2008 the economy was going to tank.

My point? We could actually technically be in one right now but not realize it for another six months. Also, beware of lagging indicators like employment, wages, and consumer spending.

[David Dennison 18945]

40 minutes ago, zork said:

How about baby steps of: Holding the budget to the same nominal figures for every department as last year.  Then repeat as necessary till the fiscal house is in order.  Let the HoR and Senate and Pres decide on a bi-partisan basis if one dept needs to be cut to add to another.  Or,  cut all of the budget by a nominal 5% then reallocate that clump of budget as the HoR, Senate, and Pres see fit.(so nominal flat budget but some are real cuts and some get more as best decided by the people in charge of such things)

That's a great way to lose re-election.

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11820]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Also, there was one time where I was totally about to make a connection with this KNOCKOUT -- seriously, I'd seen her across the room in classes all semester, and was finally at a party where she was, and we saw each other, she smiled, and I headed over -- ....till I realized that she was a knockout form the waist up, and from the waist down, she was a BIG gal, and as I was walking towards her and saw it, I peeled off like a fighter plane....I was wrong about that.  I should have stayed on target.  Because she was plenty cute enough, AND I'll never forget the hurt look in her eyes as I visibly peeled away.  That was a dick move.  I was wrong.

I knew a girl like that once.  Gorgeous curly hair, very  attractive from the waist up.  But then I got a full view of her walking away.  Looked like a poodle riding a hippity-hop.  

[elfenix 34331]

3 hours ago, zork said:

How about baby steps of: Holding the budget to the same nominal figures for every department as last year. 

that, of course, is not at all what you posted previously.  which was 10% cuts across the board year over year for 3 years. 

 

you wouldn't like my solution because it makes the people benefiting the most from the society we've built pay for it. 

[elfenix 34331]

4 hours ago, The Royal We said:

Man, some of these responses feel like I'm staring into a mirror.  Do your fox news devouring parents also question you about why/how you have become so librul?

i was horrified when i finally figured out my parents were democrats back in 1992.  i was a good little republican shithead until i was about 24 or so.

[gmr548 16609]

5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Hah, this is great. I lol'ed.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

Thoughts and prayers for Onboard’s internet. 

[elfenix 34331]

*thinks the US should be running surplusses generally*
*watches the US run a surplus for the first time in his lifetime*
*watches the republicans pass not just one but two tax cuts which put us on the path of not having surplusses*
*watches the republicans administration get us into a war of choice which cost trillions and counting*
*watches the republicans pass yet another tax cuts tho we're already over 100% debt-gdp ratio*
ThE dEmOcRaTs ArE tHe PrObLeM

[Brisketexan 105278]

8 hours ago, elfenix said:

*thinks the US should be running surplusses generally*
*watches the US run a surplus for the first time in his lifetime*
*watches the republicans pass not just one but two tax cuts which put us on the path of not having surplusses*
*watches the republicans administration get us into a war of choice which cost trillions and counting*
*watches the republicans pass yet another tax cuts tho we're already over 100% debt-gdp ratio*
ThE dEmOcRaTs ArE tHe PrObLeM

This.  It's just a fucking head-scratcher.  They bitch about spending items that are a pretty minimal part of the budget (you know, welfare queens and all, buying soda with food stamps).

It's like looking at a family budget that's straining under a skyrocketing $3k a month rent, $1k a month in health insurance premiums, etc.....and saying "your problem is that Friday night you served your family a dinner containing ground beef that cost $3.29 lb.  That was an irresponsible extravagance, and you have nobody but yourself to blame for your economic dire straits."

When it comes to HUGE hits to our bottom line, the modern GOP reigns supreme, and nobody else can even hope to compete.  That's not opinion, that's not something Hannity says, or Maddow says -- it's data.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13522]

The problem isn't with Democrats or Republicans, it's with politicians. And to be fully honest, the problem is with a selfish and/or ignorant public since we elect the politicians.

Politicians have very little incentive to be conservative with the public's money. Most wise financial decisions would pay off long after the politician is out of office. Therefore its about what can move the needle today so they can get re-elected next year. Spending by printing money is the American way.  

The public also frequently embrace idiots as they are everyman. Advanced degrees along with they accompanying knowledge are looked up as elitists. Think about how many rolled their eyes at Sarah Palin when she put down an Ivy League education as being out of touch. That concept is now fully embraced by many.

[David Dennison 18945]

3 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The problem isn't with Democrats or Republicans, it's with politicians. And to be fully honest, the problem is with a selfish and/or ignorant public since we elect the politicians.

Politicians have very little incentive to be conservative with the public's money. Most wise financial decisions would pay off long after the politician is out of office. Therefore its about what can move the needle today so they can get re-elected next year. Spending by printing money is the American way.  

The public also frequently embrace idiots as they are everyman. Advanced degrees along with they accompanying knowledge are looked up as elitists. Think about how many rolled their eyes at Sarah Palin when she put down an Ivy League education as being out of touch. That concept is now fully embraced by many.

Yep.

Exhibit A.

"Forty-six states rely on jobs created by the F-35 and in 17 of them, the jets generate at least $200 million of economic impact . . ."

[DixonHur 11364]

4 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The public also frequently embrace idiots as they are everyman. Advanced degrees along with they accompanying knowledge are looked up as elitists. Think about how many rolled their eyes at Sarah Palin when she put down an Ivy League education as being out of touch. That concept is now fully embraced by many.

The education thing is tough for the Pubs.  On the one hand, you have people like @Smax decrying the "lazy freeloaders" for not having a college education, but on the other hand you have people like @Smax saying that colleges are brainwashing people with liberal nonsense like science, math, history, and economics.

How do you circle that square?

Edited August 15, 2019 by DixonHur

[SimonBolivar 10958]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

The education thing is tough for the Pubs.  On the one hand, you have people like @Smax decrying the "lazy freeloaders" for not having a college education, but on the other hand you have people like @Smax saying that colleges are .brainwashing people with liberal nonsense like science, math, history, and economics.

How do you circle the square?

Liberty should have 100 million students instead of just 110,000.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

30 year treasuries drop below 2% for the first time ever...is that good or bad?

[DixonHur 11364]

9 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Liberty should have 100 million students instead of just 110,000.

I was shocked that they had 110,000 students, then found out that 95,000 are online students.  How fucked up do you have to be to choose Liberty as your online school?

[David Dennison 18945]

1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

30 year treasuries drop below 2% for the first time ever...is that good or bad?

It's great for the government. Super cheap borrowing.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It's great for the government. Super cheap borrowing.

Yeah but we've got a republican administration that's shown principled financial leadership with regards to our budget and understands the implications for future generations should we continue borrowing money we don't have. 

as i type that, i lol'd thinking about how insane it must feel to spout the company line these days as a GOPer. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26523]

15 hours ago, elfenix said:

*thinks the US should be running surplusses generally*
*watches the US run a surplus for the first time in his lifetime*
*watches the republicans pass not just one but two tax cuts which put us on the path of not having surplusses*
*watches the republicans administration get us into a war of choice which cost trillions and counting*
*watches the republicans pass yet another tax cuts tho we're already over 100% debt-gdp ratio*
ThE dEmOcRaTs ArE tHe PrObLeM

This guy gets it. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26523]

On 8/14/2019 at 8:55 AM, Onboard 2.0 said:

The party members who need to get elected may be bought, and paid for, but classic conservative republicans do not agree with that concept.  Free market with a gov't over sight to maintain a fair, and level playing field, and controlled spending are what most voting republicans care about (that think beyond go my team).  I'd vote for either party that made those actual platforms of gov't reform and responsibility.

Me too, but I don't have that option, so I vote against the party that is most hostile to it. It's the GOP, the party that you vote for no matter what. 

On 8/14/2019 at 9:29 AM, Onboard 2.0 said:

No I support those things I listed, as do millions and millions of other conservatives.

No, you don't. You oppose those things in the only way that matters - by voting GOP consistently no matter what GOP politicians do. There's never been a less fiscally conservative or responsible president than Donald Trump. Ever. You gonna vote for him again?

On 8/14/2019 at 12:50 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

My rates are acceptable to me other than they're wasted beyond belief thru a poorly managed gov't bureaucracy.  To achieve your world vision rates would be north of 65% for middle class folks.

No it wouldn't, that's just not the math. And I don't support those things either. Just because you vote Republican doesn't mean you have to be a sucker. 

On 8/14/2019 at 12:52 PM, David Dennison said:

Oh, I thought you were serious.

Never mind.

He isn't. 

On 8/14/2019 at 12:57 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yes, let's just abandon THE system that created the most prosperous nation on the planet....  

Too late! The GOP already destroyed it, with your help.  The question is whether we can build a functioning market economy, a stable political system and a thriving middle class with equity in the future from the rubble, and I honestly don't know. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Bozo_Casanova

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Me too, but I don't have that option, so I vote against the party that is most hostile to it. It's the GOP, the party that you vote for no matter what. 

No, you don't. You oppose those things in the only way that matters - by voting GOP consistently no matter what GOP politicians do. There's never been a less fiscally conservative or responsible president than Donald Trump. Ever. You gonna vote for him again?

No it wouldn't, that's just not the math. And I don't support those things either. Just because you vote Republican doesn't mean you have to be a sucker. 

He isn't. 

Too late! The GOP already destroyed it, with your help.  The question is whether we can build a functioning market economy, a stable political system and a thriving middle class with equity in the future from the rubble, and I honestly don't know. 

Man you fuckers, and your absolutist philosophies....    That you think my know who I'll vote for pretty much negates everything else you think you're right about.

[Bozo_Casanova 26523]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Man you fuckers, and your absolutist philosophies....    That you think my know who I'll vote for pretty much negates everything else you think you're right about.

I'm not an absolutist at all, and it's not what I think. It's what you have said you have done and will do. Your support for the president and other Republicans in the form of your vote is more meaningful than your stated opinion. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Bozo_Casanova

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I'm not an absolutist at all, and it's not what I think. It's what you have said you have done and will do. 

Watch out.  You're being so mean to him that he might have to vote for Trump again.  

[hobbes2702 13058]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Man you fuckers, and your absolutist philosophies....    That you think my know who I'll vote for pretty much negates everything else you think you're right about.

How is that your reply to what he said? You vote for people who do things antithetical to the positions you claim to hold.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Man you fuckers, and your absolutist philosophies....    That you think my know who I'll vote for pretty much negates everything else you think you're right about.

teach us about trickle down economics!

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I'm not an absolutist at all, and it's not what I think. It's what you have said you have done and will do. Your support for the president and other Republicans in the form of your vote is more meaningful than your stated opinion. 

Dude I've crossed the aisle in my voting habits many, many, many, times over the years, our last state elections were the last time.  Please stop trying to paint the us vs them thing, that's an issue  right now that's killing our discourse.

[hobbes2702 13058]

He’s not painting us vs them. He’s pointing out the hypocrisy of how you vote.

[David Dennison 18945]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Dude I've crossed the aisle in my voting habits many, many, many, times over the years, our last state elections were the last time.  Please stop trying to paint the us vs them thing, that's an issue  right now that's killing our discourse.

Did you vote for Barack Obama?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

9 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Please stop trying to paint the us vs them thing, that's an issue  right now that's killing our discourse.

may that be the last thought that crosses your mind when you pull the lever for trump in 2020.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[4th&Five 41586]

It’s not just millennials. Almost everyone in the country has little to no savings. 

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

7 hours ago, DixonHur said:

I was shocked that they had 110,000 students, then found out that 95,000 are online students.  How fucked up do you have to be to choose Liberty as your online school?

When you blow your Princeton and University of Illinois interviews.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

18 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

It’s not just millennials. Almost everyone in the country has little to no savings. 

I was crushed in the 2007/08 crash.  

I’ve been preparing for the next one by investing in assault weapons.  

Hopefully they get banned and skyrocket in value. 

Just kidding, but not really. 

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

On 8/14/2019 at 3:28 PM, Mrs Whiggins said:

Here here. It was actually the Texas GOP that first planted the seed of doubt in my mind and hardened my heart against their platform. They would say wonderful things while their actions would consist of dismantling education, funneling money to friends through corporate initiatives, think tanks, and extension offices. They would howl at bathroom visitors while ignoring the plight of foster care children for years. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say, it was really not a difficult decision.

Exact same thing for me. Lifelong Texas Republican until around 2011. I remember the specific moment that they lost me. I was driving home from work at an elementary school where we just told a bunch of hopeful, first year teachers that they didn’t have a job because the legislature cut our budget significantly. Our superintendent at the time was a budget master and had been a CPA before getting into education. He cut everything possible (25% of the admin building) and even found ways to make money for the district. He even started selling ads on the sides of busses to try to keep as many teachers as he could.

I got in the car and rick Perry was on the radio blaming superintendents for teacher layoffs. It was absolutely unreal considering the situation. Patrick and the rest of the clowns continuing to embarrass the state was the nail in the coffin. As time has gone on I’ve really come to hate the GOP.

[David Dennison 18945]

55 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

It’s not just millennials. Almost everyone in the country has little to no savings. 

Well, they live in a country that beats you over the head with the message that you're a complete loser if you don't spend money.

[BradInATX 9208]

6 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Dude I've crossed the aisle in my voting habits many, many, many, times over the years, our last state elections were the last time.  Please stop trying to paint the us vs them thing, that's an issue  right now that's killing our discourse.

I agree with your last two sentences, and I don't have the venom for you that others do. Polarization is not the way and all that. And I believe you've voted Democrat once or twice. You don't need to prove anything to anyone. But you just can't vote for Trump. It's not normal. You know better. I know you do. Cut it the fuck out.

Edited August 16, 2019 by BradInATX

[Judge Roybeanbag 11820]

17 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Well, they live in a country that beats you over the head with the message that you're a complete loser if you don't spend money.

Well that and you tend to get punished for saving, in some ways.  

[EuroHorn 3268]

3 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Well that and you tend to get punished for saving, in some ways.  

Yea, you get all that interest...  and have to pay taxes on it...  fuck!

[BradInATX 9208]

13 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Well that and you tend to get punished for saving, in some ways.  

Legitimate question - how so? I don't really see it.

[David Dennison 18945]

14 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Yea, you get all that interest...  and have to pay taxes on it...  fuck!

Well, yeah. It is income.