Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
The Truman show

Trump’s Mental Health is a problem

583 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Tatetopa
10 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

He had the opportunity to put your theory to the test--what happened?

Well, it would be too arrogant to claim that as my theory, but I believe Obama was prevailed upon to continue the Bush tax cuts.  He also did a couple of his own and reduced the amount of withholding form most people's paychecks.  He had some breaks for buying a new car to stimulate the auto industry, small business tax cuts, and tax credits for investing in renewable energy or energy efficient appliances. Most of that was done between 2009 and 2012.  Wall Street came to love him.

Health care and the cost of foreign interventions are other issues that were not a boon to the economy.

Yet in the last 6 years of Obama's tenure, the stock market gained over 200%.  That is a huge deal for those of us who have been in the workforce a long time and benefited by  our retirement savings bouncing back after the 2009 recession.  The stock market continued to grow under president Trump.  The ramp is about the same, maybe leveling off a tad this year.  The stock market did not skyrocket when Trump got elected.

The debt grew tremendously under Obama and continues to grow under Trump.   It doesn't matter if you spend it on health care or defense, if we spend more than we take in we have a deficit and the debt goes up.

There are hundreds of charts and tables out there on everything from the manufacturing sector to the price of houses for as far back as you care to look.  The CBO which is supposed to be non-partisan and accurate publishes data too.  They have reported on the  various types of tax cuts and credits  and their different effects on jobs, the stock market, manufacturing, trade, all facets of the economy.  The sum of all of that does not indicate that Obama did a terrible job of handling the circumstances during his tenure or that Trump has been exceptionally gifted at dealing with the circumstances of his presidency.

People that live paycheck to paycheck were glad of the relief under Obama and Trump. My own preference, because I am not hurting and can afford to think about the future of our kids would have been to eschew tax cuts under Trump and used the economy to balance the budget and begin reducing the debt.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
8 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Sure thats what im saying.  :blink: (pssst the emoji thingy means that no im really not and your post is nutso) Not everyone who disagrees with your dear leader is in "the other cult".

Dude it happened and his party didnt blink after seeing Trump's own words in black and white (the word though really is pretty self explanatory btw) . Why would anyone, Zelinsky included, think that Zelinsky's words would make the sycophants all of a sudden decide to turn on the dear leader?

You'd stake the lives of the 42 million citizens you were in charge of on sycophants like Gaetz and Graham turning on their dear leader?

 

Their lives? What we contribute is a drop in the bucket. They certainly weren't worried about those 42 million you keep pompously prattle on about when they turned on Russia. Sorry for you and all the rest of the bubble people, but your bubble is burst. Time to leave fantasy land and deal with the fact this is an election year and your last chance to be rid of Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ian hacktorp
On 1/8/2020 at 5:04 AM, RoofGardener said:

It is unlikely that the Iranian missiles are so sophisticated that they could deliberately target "unoccupied" sections of the base

So they shoot 15 missiles that kill no one...and the explanation is they are too unsophisticated to be accurate?

Then they shoot one more at a moving target and immediately kill 180?

Did they get all "sophisticated" overnight?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
5 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Their lives? What we contribute is a drop in the bucket. They certainly weren't worried about those 42 million you keep pompously prattle on about when they turned on Russia. Sorry for you and all the rest of the bubble people, but your bubble is burst. Time to leave fantasy land and deal with the fact this is an election year and your last chance to be rid of Trump.

This is a little unclear to me.  Did the Ukraine turn on Russia when Russia took Crimea from them, or when they supported rebels in the eastern portion of Ukraine? 

President Obama gave the Ukrainians blankets and band aids, when what they wanted was ordinance.  A Javelin missile doesn't cost that much, but it is a lot more effective than a pile of blankets against a tank.  That is what Zelinsky asked for by name in his conversation with President Trump and that is what the "favor"  hinges on.

I am not sure why it seems so unbelievable for an intelligent man to smile and nod and refrain from contradicting the most powerful man in the world for a couple hundred of those things.  Is it pompous for the leader of a country to put the welfare of his country ahead of himself?   I also might point out that it was not Zelinsky in power when the conflict broke out with Russia, so to argue he did not care about his people then is rather off the mark. 

 

Share this post


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

This is a little unclear to me.  Did the Ukraine turn on Russia when Russia took Crimea from them, or when they supported rebels in the eastern portion of Ukraine? 

President Obama gave the Ukrainians blankets and band aids, when what they wanted was ordinance.  A Javelin missile doesn't cost that much, but it is a lot more effective than a pile of blankets against a tank.  That is what Zelinsky asked for by name in his conversation with President Trump and that is what the "favor"  hinges on.

I am not sure why it seems so unbelievable for an intelligent man to smile and nod and refrain from contradicting the most powerful man in the world for a couple hundred of those things.  Is it pompous for the leader of a country to put the welfare of his country ahead of himself?   I also might point out that it was not Zelinsky in power when the conflict broke out with Russia, so to argue he did not care about his people then is rather off the mark. 

 

I didn't say he, I said they. You can indulge in speculative fantasy narratives if you want, I take them at their word. In any event, as recent headlines show, Hunter Biden has a few skeletons in his closet after all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
1 minute ago, Hammerclaw said:

didn't say he, I said they. You can indulge in speculative fantasy narratives if you want, I take them at their word. In any event, as recent headlines show, Hunter Biden has a few skeletons in his closet after all. 

Speculative fantasy seems a little dismissive, but no doubt taking people at their word is best.  Nixon said he was not a crook.  Trump said it is a witch hunt.  Pelosi says it is their duty for love of country.  I am sure all were telling the truth as they saw it.

  In any event, what does Hunter Biden, honest or otherwise have to do with javelin missiles?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Speculative fantasy seems a little dismissive, but no doubt taking people at their word is best.  Nixon said he was not a crook.  Trump said it is a witch hunt.  Pelosi says it is their duty for love of country.  I am sure all were telling the truth as they saw it.

  In any event, what does Hunter Biden, honest or otherwise have to do with javelin missiles?

Political Cartoons by Pat Cross

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
20 hours ago, simplybill said:

At what point did I stop being average? I’m still just a common working man. I use the tools that are available to me and everyone else. In our economy today, there are very few people at risk of being left out if they use the tools I used. 

Yes, the stock market is like gambling, except that you have more control over the odds. The BDS Movement helped a lot, because I got angry and started investing only in small Israeli companies. Those Israeli dudes are smart.

Those cardboard car shades?  Two Israeli students came up with the idea.  Made a fortune... Israel has one of the greatest startup economies on the planet.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
3 hours ago, hacktorp said:

So they shoot 15 missiles that kill no one...and the explanation is they are too unsophisticated to be accurate?

Then they shoot one more at a moving target and immediately kill 180?

Did they get all "sophisticated" overnight?

No they just did the exact same thing Trump did in Syria.

Quote

he strike was the first unilateral military action by the United States targeting Ba'athist Syrian government forces during the Syrian Civil War.[11][12] Trump stated shortly thereafter, "It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons."[13][14]

The Syrian Air Force launched airstrikes against the rebels from the base only hours after the American attack. The ability to continue to use the base for these attacks has been attributed[by whom?] to the advance warning the US gave to Syria's ally, Russia, prior to the missile strike.[15

 

Share this post


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

Political Cartoons by Pat Cross

Nice cartoon, I am still not clear what that has to do with Hunter Biden being a crook.

 

Related image

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

Nice cartoon, I am still not clear what that has to do with Hunter Biden being a crook.

 

Related image

M'aiq sees some strain at a gnat and swallow a camel and worry about a splinter in another's eye, while having a two-by-four in their own. Skyrim is a snowy place with many snowflakes.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Quote

Questions about an Adderall addiction have popped up several times during the last few years. Comedian and actor Tom Arnold made the claim that Trump “abused Adderall” on the set of Celebrity Apprentice. Comedian Noel Casler made a similar claim as well, saying it was because Trump would get nervous when he had to read.

“He crushes up his Adderall and he sniffs it because he can’t read and he gets really nervous when he has to read cue cards.”

Those rumors combined with Trump’s performance at the podium have #AdderallTrump and #SniffyMcAdderall trending on Twitter.

:lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
8 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

:lol:

Why would someone waste time counting how many times Trump sniffed?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
18 hours ago, hacktorp said:

So they shoot 15 missiles that kill no one...and the explanation is they are too unsophisticated to be accurate?

Then they shoot one more at a moving target and immediately kill 180?

Did they get all "sophisticated" overnight?

Oh please.. the two scenario's are completely different. 

In the first one, Iran was firing missiles at long range.. several hundred miles ? In addition, the base is HUGE. It has three runways that are over 2 miles long. It is unlikely that Iranian Intelligence knew precisely WHERE the troops slept at night, so they couldn't launch a lethal attack even if they wanted to. We don't yet know what TYPE of missiles that Iran used (strange that ? ), or where they landed in the base. (this might be deliberate to prevent Iran discovering just how accurate their missiles WHERE. ). 

In the other case, we have a short range GUIDED missile attacking an aircraft just a couple of miles away. Oh.. and the missile system was probably Russian, rather than being of Iranian manufacture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ian hacktorp
31 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Oh please.. the two scenario's are completely different.

Plus, in the first one, Iran has admitted to aiming their missiles to avoid hitting US troops.

Quote

Iran deliberately missed causing maximum damage to two US bases in Iraq, with most of its ballistic missiles failing to hit their target, intelligence sources claimed today.

foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the attack was now 'concluded', praising Iran's 'proportionate' response and adding: 'We do not seek escalation or war.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7865559/Iran-DELIBERATELY-failed-hit-military-targets-fear-escalating-conflict.html

 

So, there's that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly

I just want to toss in my take on the 2009 recession...which I saw as being directly caused by the Cheney/Bush presidency's severe and greedy escalation of Petroleum Prices. !    EVERYTHING to from and in this country moves by Petroleum... Thereby making EVERYTHING more expensive.   I think they did it to simply cash in..as well as to leave the economy in bad shape so the next Democratic president could take the blame for the situation !   The economy has rebounded...in a way, but only at the immense expense of the national debt !

     On an older note... I remember as the Vietnam war was a lost 'cause' and everyone knew it.  So Nixon, under advisement I'm sure, ordered the secret bombings of N. Vietnam ,Laos, and Cambodia !   They poured millions of tons of bombs on the jungles..    Why?   To make MONEY for the arms industry .  period.  (and of course,as always, the petroleum pigs)    Remember when Eisenhower warned us about the Military/Industrial complex ?     Well, it's more rich and powerful than ever and shapes most of "our" foreign policy!    

Edited by lightly
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029

Looks like Iran has joined an exclusive club:  nations that have shot down a civilian airliner.  Russia (2), US (1), Iran (1).

So how do you score an accidental shoot-down?  US:  1     Iran:  -176.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis
32 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

Looks like Iran has joined an exclusive club:  nations that have shot down a civilian airliner.  Russia (2), US (1), Iran (1).

So how do you score an accidental shoot-down?  US:  1     Iran:  -176.

Doug

I would have thought you were above smug gloating .

Edited by Dumbledore the Awesome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
7 minutes ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

I would have thought you were above smug gloating .

It's not gloating.  Iran obviously screwed up, whether it wants to admit it or not.  The shoot-down was unintentional.  Still, it occurred during a response to the US missile attack.  Probably some new recruit who didn't know what he was doing.

So those 176 victims were a consequence of Trump's attack, even though nobody intended that.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 hour ago, lightly said:

I just want to toss in my take on the 2009 recession...which I saw as being directly caused by the Cheney/Bush presidency's severe and greedy escalation of Petroleum Prices. !    EVERYTHING to from and in this country moves by Petroleum... Thereby making EVERYTHING more expensive.   I think they did it to simply cash in..as well as to leave the economy in bad shape so the next Democratic president could take the blame for the situation !   The economy has rebounded...in a way, but only at the immense expense of the national debt !

     On an older note... I remember as the Vietnam war was a lost 'cause' and everyone knew it.  So Nixon, under advisement I'm sure, ordered the secret bombings of N. Vietnam ,Laos, and Cambodia !   They poured millions of tons of bombs on the jungles..    Why?   To make MONEY for the arms industry .  period.  (and of course,as always, the petroleum pigs)    Remember when Eisenhower warned us about the Military/Industrial complex ?     Well, it's more rich and powerful than ever and shapes most of "our" foreign policy!    

Before Nixon, Johnson was cashing in on arms sales with the viet nam war.  Kennedy had plans to pull the U.S. troops out of viet nam, but when Johnson took over he sent more troops instead, because his wife's family made big money off of ammunition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
On 1/2/2020 at 4:39 PM, Doug1029 said:

It is to be hoped that those jobs pay a living wage.  I hear lots of screaming about jobs with nobody to fill them.  If those employers paid a fair wage, they'd have no trouble finding employees.  I don't know anybody who likes working three jobs to make ends meet.

Doug

Not every employer can afford to pay luxurious wages and not every unemployed person can afford to be picky about a job. Just as the cost of things have gone up for working class people so has the cost of doing business. I pay as much as I can and it's definitely fair to more than fair in most cases but can't afford to offer benefits because the niche I've found myself in isn't going to pay the prices of need to charge if I did offer those things. Technically I probably could afford to offer some type of benefits at the cost of my own take home pay but the truth is that I'm just not interested in running this business for anything less. I'd be better off financially working alone or working for someone else and then there'd be one less job provider out there. It makes it tough for me when trying to hire new people and I understand the reasons why but we still do well. The catch to paying and offering more in my situation is that I'd generate less work cause it would be harder to sell at higher prices. The trade-off is that except for one year and only for a month or so I've had consistent year round work for well over 10 years and not many small crew contracting companies in the construction/remodeling can say that. We're almost never slow. So do you want a steady year round paycheck at pretty decent wages or uncertainty and layoffs with either higher wages or lower wages that include benefits? 

Not everything is so cut and dry or driven by greed.

Edited by F3SS
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
1 hour ago, Doug1029 said:

Sorry, Doug. I misread your post.

Edited by simplybill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
1 hour ago, F3SS said:

Not every employer can afford to pay luxurious wages and not every unemployed person can afford to be picky about a job. Just as the cost of things have gone up for working class people so has the cost of doing business. I pay as much as I can and it's definitely fair to more than fair in most cases but can't afford to offer benefits because the niche I've found myself in isn't going to pay the prices of need to charge if I did offer those things. Technically I probably could afford to offer some type of benefits at the cost of my own take home pay but the truth is that I'm just not interested in running this business for anything less. I'd be better off financially working alone or working for someone else and then there'd be one less job provider out there. It makes it tough for me when trying to hire new people and I understand the reasons why but we still do well. The catch to paying and offering more in my situation is that I'd generate less work cause it would be harder to sell at higher prices. The trade-off is that except for one year and only for a month or so I've had consistent year round work for well over 10 years and not many small crew contracting companies in the construction/remodeling can say that. We're almost never slow. So do you want a steady year round paycheck at pretty decent wages or uncertainty and layoffs with either higher wages or lower wages that include benefits? 

Not everything is so cut and dry or driven by greed.

If your business is so marginal that you could make more working alone, or working for somebody else, then maybe that's what you should do.

So how long have your employees been working for you?  That will say a lot about how well off they are.

I have issues with employers who try to justify low wages/lack of benefits with the "I can't afford it" line.  If you can't afford it, maybe you should change businesses.  There's nothing wrong with working for someone else.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.