Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Alliance Pip
  • Leader Name
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID
  • Alliance Name

Recent Profile Visitors

3082 profile views

Caecus's Achievements

Exalted Member

Exalted Member (7/8)



  1. The truth is, Trump has been talking about a 30 foot concrete wall spanning the southern border for 2 years now. Even his "sample" walls are all 30 feet tall. Literally ask anyone whether or not the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED FUKIN STATES (which, surely you can reasonably say is "somebody") wants that wall. So yes, you are trolling. No it won't. Cite me, !@#$. No, entitlements are not normal ongoing income. That's taxpayer money being dumped into the economy for people to spend when they otherwise don't have that money. That's called a stimulus. So no u. And your argument is stupid because you are claiming that you're making more money from cutting taxes when you are obvious not. Just in case if you forgot your own dumbass argument: Oh, and this: Literally the only source you have says that the tax cuts don't add shit. Read your own argument. Ah huh. What's this then? Ok, Mr. CIA Seal Team Six who's going to hunt me down and kill me. What's your field, son? 1040 turbo tax with a single W-2? Account me this, u dumb !@#$. When the government loses $202 billion dollars in unrealized revenue due to the Trump tax cuts, is that increasing or decreasing income? Omg. That immigrants commit less crime than native-born Americans. Holy shit, read your own arguments! Do I literally have to quote you line by line? Here: (which, I assumed the correct verb here to be "commit") I'm drawing the line at posting synopsis of the articles I cite and spoon-feeding your dumbass. If you're too god damn lazy to read basic articles I post, stop pretending like you know what they say. Unlike you, everyone else here can read them and know you're a dumb !@#$.
  2. Because I'm out to prove that one side of "used up" arguments is so indefensibly stupid and moronic that people should be reminded that they are. And they should be ashamed for having said indefensibly stupid and moronic arguments. Look at every argument in this thread that's against mine. Everyone has either quietly left after I make them eat their own arguments, or like Mr. Commander Thrawn, denies that my argument exists and claims that I'm somehow the idiot here when he can barely read.
  3. !@#$, stop trolling. The border wall isn't going to save money, it's going to waste money. Entitlements are what allow more spending in the economy to occur for retired and disabled individuals, which stimulates the economy. Go learn economics before lecturing professor dipwad. Read my argument. I'm not debating whether or not revenues are the highest they have ever been. I'm saying that despite that, the old tax code would have generated $202 billion more than the tax cuts. Maybe then, we could have bought a wall. It's like you can't read. READ DAMN IT. See everything above? See how there isn't a single source that makes your point that the tax cuts will be reducing the debt? You've reduced income and blamed the expenses as the reason why you can't get out of debt. Go learn accounting, dipshit. !@#$, read the source. I don't see you citing anyone for your bullshit. I was at least expecting some article from InfoWars, but I suppose even that is beyond you. I see your only method here is to just claim anything you don't like *AS* (correct grammar buddy) "fanatical bs." Add 5th grade English grammar to your list of subjects you should crack a book for.
  4. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trumps-border-wall-a-look-at-the-numbers I tried not to include anything outside of Fox News, because I know that you think only Fox News exists as "news." I'm surprised I had to go find this shit for you. I wonder what caused reduced revenues, low growth, and the continued expansion of entitlements (and other stimulus spending)? Maybe, perhaps, it was the near total collapse of the world economy 10 years ago? Dipwad. So, are you saying that there have been increased tax revenue or not until the long term? You are presenting a red herring here. Double taxation of corporations has nothing to do with deindustrialization, which also has nothing to do with the fact that THE TRUMP TAX CUT LOST 200 BILLION DOLLARS IN REVENUE LAST YEAR. Nothing here refutes that argument, most notably because it's a FU.CKING FACT. List me a single goddamn source that shows the CBO or any think tank group which thinks the Trump tax cuts doing anything other than increasing the debt for any time between now and the end of the republic. I f.uckin dare you. Actually, no. And you're right, this is a red herring and I don't know why you brought it up in the first place. https://www.cato.org/blog/white-houses-misleading-error-ridden-narrative-immigrants-crime Disagree. Trump has alone contributed to the significant acceleration of the deficit timeline, has had more members of his administration out because of corruption scandals than any president in US history, has had the other half of his administration resign because they either couldn't lie for him, couldn't obstruct justice for him, or plain thought he was a dumbass, openly tried to undermine NATO and privately toyed with the idea of pulling the US out, held private talks with an enemy of the United States and confiscated his interpreters notes to cover up god knows what, and has spent more time golfing and tweeting than actually fixing any problems we mentioned above. The only thing you could really say about Trump and his achievements are the two supreme court seats. Good for you, now you can prevent abortions and gay people from getting married in your visionary hellscape where China dominates world politics and owns the US via debt obligation.
  5. Still my argument. I think it's reasonable to fund certain aspects of the Trump budget, such as road improvements, a wall in certain sections of the border, and other "surveillance technology." And if you look at the bipartisan bill passed before the shutdown, all of those things are included. And yes, a wall in small sections of the border where it makes sense should be funded. Just not $5.8 billion for a continuous 30 foot concrete wall along the entire southern border, which most people familiar with border security would agree is useless or has a low cost/benefit ratio in most areas. Not to mention going through the eminent domain shitstorm, that alone is going to cost you the entire 5.7 billion in legal fees. Notice how even in the FY19 budget published by the WH, there isn't any mention of a stupid, fiscally irresponsible 5.7 billion dollar continuous 30 foot concrete border wall. It's because even everyone in his own white house thinks Trump's idea of a continuous wall is stupid. Let's be clear here, the debt may have skyrocketed under Obama, but the reason was largely due stimuli to the economy to combat the Great Recession. Republicans were correct in saying that we need to make changes to government spending to deal with the rising debt. What they did instead when they control all three branches of government was (A) not make any significant changes to spending and (B) cut taxes. The Trump tax cuts happened at a time when the American economy is at its peak strength, and when taxes should be rising to curb the deficit. So yes, politicians on both political sides have contributed to the debt, but at least Democrats have the excuse that they raised the debt to get the economy going again. Why did Republicans cut taxes again? Oh yeah, it's because all those billionaires and corporate investors need the extra dollars. Both deserve blame for the stupidity going on, but one side deserves more. Some corrections here: immigrants are statistically less likely to commit crime than native-born Americans. And again, do not mistake my argument for a lack of a continuous border wall (that is a waste of taxpayer money) as me being against border security. I would entirely agree with a border wall, if say, another country was fronting it. I mean, why not accept something that's free. But again, you got to be either a dumbass or a socialist to believe that money grows on trees. And I don't see no socialists here. I would agree with you on the last sentence regarding increased skilled labor and immigration to supplement the traditional "trickle-down" economics idea of the tax cuts to begin with, if it wasn't for the fact that the Trump administration has been providing less visas (9% drop in 2017, and 12% drop in 2018) and are looking to get rid of Dreamers (who hold down real jobs and contribute to the US economy). So, good sentiment, unfortunately, Trump doesn't share yours. Also, also. It's true that the government revenues grew to a record level this year, but this is misleading. You need to compare the government revenues of the Trump Tax cuts to the government revenues that you would have gotten under the old tax system, not compare the revenues to the previous year. In which case, the actual amount of money that the previous system would have gotten (according to the CBO) is $3.5 billion, around $202 billion more than the measly $14 billion. That extra $202 billion would have covered the increased $127 billion in spending for this year. If you want to balance the budget, stop electing short-sighted !@#$ who want your approval numbers more than a good future for your children. Reforming entitlements is on a long list of things, but at the top of the list is stop electing dumb shits like Trump who wastes taxpayer money, erodes America's geostrategic position on the world stage, and spends more time misspelling words on twitter than actually learning how to govern properly. Literally everything I've mentioned above is easily googiable. Let me know if you need references.
  6. Damn frickin straight. 'MURICA.
  7. No u. In the full context of the sentence, the "Trump supporter" is doing the action of questioning (privately or publicly). You misread what I wrote. Semantics, and I don't see a point to it. Engage, my friend, don't just sit there and criticize my sentence structures.
  8. But it got torn down though! Now all the Mexicans can go from East Germany to West Germany without Soviet troops machine gunning them down. Hey! That's what we should do! We should have the Soviets come and build a wall on the border, station Soviet troops to machine gun those dirty immigrants, and we'll never have this problem again! I think that's why Trump has such a good relation with the Russians. That makes sense now. Yes, and let's get a giant moat of molten gold in front of it too, with diamond-encrusted alligators to swim in the moat and bite any immigrant that tries to enter. I mean, why stop there? Sometimes the immigrants can fly over it, right? Let's build a giant net in the sky that catches those dirty buggers.
  9. You ask if I'm an idiot in a rhetorical way while not knowing how to use quote. It's funny, because you're the idiot here. Again, making my point. You're wall is an expensive, ineffective way that does not replace border patrol agents. I can't believe I have to say the same thing over and over again. They count by catching people at the border. They catch people at the border by using drones, satellites, and modern security measures to tell border agents where people are crossing so they can drive out to meet them. Your wall being there doesn't do anything.
  10. Wait, what the frick is this suppose to be? This is making my point: Trump in this tweet is suggesting that America's obligation to NATO is contingent upon Germany's military GDP spending, an idea that the past 70 years of Republican and Democrat administrations would never have even thought of, much less utter it on a public platform. You think he's siding with NATO on this one? It's one thing to privately complain to Merkel that Germany doesn't have enough military spending and encourage them with private diplomatic channels to strengthen the alliance. It's an entirely different thing to tweet that dumb shit and make it sound like America's not going to deploy troops if a Russian tank column rams its head up your ass. So yes, absolutes are dangerous, but you're not proving that with this photo. No, you are still making my argument. Your argument is still this: Goal: Stop illegal immigrants Method: Wall Argumentative flaw: But admits that wall doesn't entirely stop immigrants, the border agents do. The chances of crossing successfully into the US is equal if there aren't any border patrol agents to stop them. It's like you can't comprehend that people can't just get ladders, or break down parts of the wall, or literally an infinite amount of other things. Border patrol agents, drones, satellites, and modern detection equipment stop illegal immigrants. !@#$ please. Don't talk like you think you know my positions. Obama added to the national debt to stimulate the economy because a combination of stupidity, greed, and corporate irresponsibility led to the greatest financial disaster since the Great Depression. You are obviously too young to remember, so you're welcome for the free history lesson. Republicans say they could have done better for less, but anyone could say that when they're standing on the sidelines. Every administration since Coolidge has poured money into the economy for relief out of the recession. You talk a big game when you ask me if I'm against tax relief for American families and businesses, when you blame Obama for the rising national debt and forget the reason why he added to the national debt was for the same financial relief for American families and businesses. The only difference is, when Obama added to the debt, it was to break us out of the recession. When Trump added to the debt when the economy recovered, it was because it personally benefits him and all his rich friends and you're the idiot that voted for it. Good luck with that 401k, !@#$. You'll need it if you make it to 65. Social Security and medicare will be dead when you retire because idiots like you who can't see past next Tuesday. And you literally don't know jack shit about the tax code, Mr. I-didn't-take-accounting. The tax cuts removed the personal exemption and capped state/local taxes deduction. Most people are withholding more because of that, not less, especially in states like California and New York, where the property taxes are your entire year's salary. The people who do have less to pay in taxes are anyone who makes above $140,000, the greatest benefit being corporations. Maybe if Trump didn't give Tim Cook and Jeff "Bozo" a $1 trillion tax cut, we can have a wall. By the way, I'm opposed to the spending on the wall because it's a shit ton of money for a really inefficient method of border security. On the other hand, if someone else, say, Mexico, were to pay for the wall, I wouldn't mind. But fat chance, amirite? I mean, you would really have to be a giant dumbass to believe that someone else besides the US taxpayer would be paying for something so stupid. You're all dumbasses.
  11. For 70 years, NATO was the shield that prevented Soviet expansion. Every administration, Republican or Democrat, all collectively agreed that NATO was necessary to defend America and her interests abroad. Now, with a militant and ultranationalist Russia aggressively expanding its influence, it seems that the withdrawal of American troops from Syria and Trump's interest in breaking up NATO seems to only benefit our geopolitical enemies. Combined with the fact that there WAS COLLUSION (don't take my word for it, take the word of the dumbass Manafort lawyers who leaked the documents and Rudy Juliani on prime time TV) between the Trump campaign and Russia, any 3rd grader can make the connection that Trump is a traitor. So to you, Russian bot, I say this: America has had its problems and continues to have them, yes. But you're just an over-glorified gas station with subpar military tech. Your days of glory are long behind you, and let's face it: America's next geostrategic threat isn't you, it's China. The next administration is going to walk sanctions up and down your ass, and you'll go back to being the wannabe China that you are. And yes, you are a Russian bot. Because the first visceral reaction that any real American would have is "frick Putin." Even if they are a Trump supporter, they would be at least questioning why Trump always seems to be on the side of the Russians privately, and ignore it publicly.
  12. Literally this: And who is the one flooding the tunnels? You? You going to electric scooter your ass down to the border and get your squirt gun out? And just to be clear, the Democrats are willing to spend money on increasing border agent staff, new drones and security technologies, just not your dumbass useless 30 foot concrete wall. Do your opposition research son. Also, your argument doesn't make sense. "Lowest number of illegals crossing" at places with physical barriers isn't "zero illegals crossing." Also, how the frick do you think people know that there are people even crossing in that area? You think there is some walmart greeter with a punch counter sitting on the top of the fence taking those numbers? I'll tell you how: drones, modern security measures, more border patrol agents. You're still making the same argument as I am.
  13. Like what? The border patrol agents that got replaced by ur dumbass wall? Your entire paragraph is essentially this: 1. Border wall isn't totally foolproof and only slows people down. 2. When determined people get through there are "things" that prevent that. 3. I'm not making the same argument as you, ur a stupid anti-trumper. When my argument is this: 1. Border wall isn't totally foolproof and only slows people down. 2. When determined people get through there are "border agents, drones, and modern security measures" that prevent that. 3. 5.7 billion dollars later, and you will still be funding border agents, drones, and modern security measures elsewhere without any real cost/benefit being seen from the border wall. I see your "do some research dude" and I raise you a "read your own argument dumbass." In case if everyone forgot, you dumb !@#$es just cut taxes when we have a historical crisis-level of debt. Typically when the economy is good, we raise taxes and revenue to support the economic stimulus of the previous downturn. Interest payments (not principal payments, and if you don't know the difference, go to school) on the debt is going to eclipse all discretionary spending by the end of this year and will be 4th behind military, social security, and medicare. Social Security and Medicare are going to run out by 2034. If I honestly believed that you even worked a day in your life, I would tell you that you wouldn't be retiring until 75.
  14. Let me start by saying thank you for replying to my post, because I've been so frustrated with Trump and his supporters and I just can't get anyone to debate me back SO I CAN CRUSH THEIR PUNY LITTLE EGOS AGAINST THEIR WALL OF IDIOCY !@#$, u dumb. And here's why: a wall doesn't stop people from getting into this country. People can climb that shit, dig under it, fly over it. I can go to Home Depot today and climb that 5 billion dollars worth of stupid in under a minute. Fact is, border agents stop people from getting into this country, not ur dumbass wall. Border agents find people trying to cross via satellite/drones, drive out to meet them, and take them into custody. So why spend 5 billion dollars on a wall? Why not dump that money into something that's actually useful and actually stops people from entering into the country like drones and more officers? Also, Trump said Mexico was going to send us a check. What happened to that check? THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN DUPED BY A FAT CON MAN FROM LIBERAL NEW YORK! Also, also: I don't particularly care about domestic policy. In the grand scheme of things, domestic policy is only debated in the framework where the American hegemony exists. Trump is trying to break up NATO, and the only person in the world with any geostrategic understanding of foreign policy who wants that is Putin. Trump is a traitor, and you are all traitors for supporting his treasonous ass. History will look back and see that you betrayed your country because Trump promised you that brown people won't be coming to your country. Eat shit.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.