Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
I like that. Guess what, no more shut downs!😂
Rumors are swirling that the lefts leadership is being pressured not to end the shut down until after the "No King" Protest/Parade, scheduled for this weekend.
Instead of a temporary shut down just make it permanent. CLEARLY they have no fucking clue what they've been doing the last 100+ years hence the $37,000,000,000,000 "debt". When was the last time we had a balanced budget? How about the last time the DOD passed an audit? What happens to you or your business if you fail an IRS audit? Why isn't more being done by the government to hold itself accountable? It's because we keep playing their stupid ass game. If there is one thing the govt does better than the private sector it's fucking away money. They intentionally create problems and then come up with some half assed solution that only results in more of our money being taken and they give it some stupid ass name like Build Back Better or the Big Beautiful Bill. They gift wrap that shit and then gas light the fuck out of us with bullshit about how congress or senate was in session for X number of hours straight. Fucking save it you grifting pieces of shit. My contempt for the govt is infinite. Until they have to play by the same rules as you and I, that contempt will only continue to grow.
One good thing about shutdown is no chemtrails. Sky is clear as ever !!!
The Shop
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
The problem is the fungability of money. The states like CA, IL, NY want to claim the federal funds don't pay for health care for illegals. But if you give them money for (let's come up with a good name) child development. That frees up money in the states general fund, then there's money to then pay for health care and other services for illegals. So if you take them off the dole, of course you going to spend less for Medicaid. Just like whe Planned Parenthood said federal money does not fund abortion, but when federal abortion money stopped, Planned Parenthood offices closed left and right.
The last time the U.S. had a balanced budget was in fiscal year 2001, under President Bill Clinton. The federal government has had budget surpluses in the fiscal years 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001. That is different from not having a national debt though. I'm not sure when that last happened. I'm pretty sure that even though the budget was balanced that there was debt still from before. EDIT, I just did a google search and looks like 1835 almost 200 years ago was the last time the national debt was at $0.
I don't know what the answer is. I don't think that paying congress less or taking away benefits is an answer, that seems like it would just make more incentive to take and make money where they shouldn't be. Banning current pres,congress,etc. from being active in the stock market would be something. But it wouldn't stop them from helping others make money from the same insider info.
Most if not all politicians are feeding the fire to get us all fighting with each other instead of really holding them all accountable. We should all speak out when people we vote for are doing things we dislike. Even if they are also doing things we like. Otherwise it tells them everything is OK. They may listen more if the citicissum comes from their own voters or from inside their parties.
If Your kid is doing something that will lead them down a bad path, but is getting great grades and doing a lot of stuff that is good. You let them know that the other stuff is going to be bad for them. Or at least that's how my parents were, I knew I was still on their good side. But I wouldn't be if I went any farther down that other path.
Its a lot to stay informed about, and there is so much misinformation around though, so it can be much harder to do with politicians.And much easier to believe anything we don't like is just fake news. So I guess we are just doomed.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/14Foh6EvjuC/?mibextid=wwXIfr
If you really want to tin foil hat the shutdown, if they were in session they'd have to give the Oath of Office to Adelita Grijalva, who would be the deciding vote on releasing the Epstein files. All food for thought.
The Democrats had four years to release the files. Why is it different now? Because Trump is in office now and the left thinks he is hiding something. If there was anything in those "files" , Biden and company would have used them to stop Trump from becoming President again. They tried everything else.... and failed. Again.
Never said that was my opinion on what's happening, but there are zero coincidences in politics.
The department that collects taxes never gets shut down.
Because people voted for an administration that promised they would release the files. No one expected a career politician like Biden to release anything that could harm donors 🤷🏼♂️
Why did Trump talk so Bigly about releasing them? Surely he knew what was in them from his first term. Sometime being hidden that’s for sure. Massie claims there’s 20 some high rollers on the “client list” that supposedly doesn’t exist.
Bill Clinton may have signed it, but it was a bill put forth by Republicans lead by GA Congressman Newt Gingrich. It was the cornerstone of the Republicans “Contract with America.” Out of curiosity, I’d like to know how many Democrats supported it and voted for it. Anyone know?
Thanks for the down vote!
Truth hurts!
The house controls the purse strings. All spending and budget bills originate in the House of representatives. Then they have to pass the Senate. Then they go to the President where he can sign it into law or veto it. Newt Gingrich was the speaker of the house that wrote the balanced budget. Let’s give credit where credit is due.
If only we could get back to doing something like that again. Getting both sides to work together to do something that benefits the country. Not splitting every little thing into Left or right.
Its insane that things are at the point that anytime some accident, or some sort of crazy person goes and kills somebody, that the first question many ask , is what political party do they belong to. Why they did it seems to not even matter, it's a race to blame the other side. And even though the majority of people from both sides are doing whatever they can to try and blame the other side, there are still people thinking that the opposite side supports whatever thing it is that happened because of a small or non existing amount of people who say something dumb.
There was a plane crash ( a private plane flying in a storm to fly organs for a transplant) not far from me yesterday, and the posts on photos and videos of the crash scene are just horrible and distasteful. People walking around taking video and nobody checking the plane, nobody trying to put out any of the fire. Just filming away. And then the people that posted on some of the news reports about it were saying all kinds of dumb stuff. People in general can be assholes, its not an exclusive right or left thing.
Owning the libs, or bashing Trump has become way too important for so many voters. Its crazy that they will vote against their best interests just to see people talk shit like they are teenagers on the internet.
After reading a little bit about history . I was in high school back then I think my second year, I graduated at 16 and only had bikes and girls on my mind. So I figured I would look into it. I tried to find sources that were NOT opinion or that leaned either way politically.
The Contract with America wasn't a bill. It was an agenda , ideas for proposed bills and spending cuts that was put together by a conservative think tank. It ,itself wasn't a bill that was signed into law. It was more like the Project 2025 thing in that it was an agenda that a conservative think tank put together.
I just looked up the voting on the bill that is credited with balancing the budget ( Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993) and it looks like it was mostly Democrats that voted for it. it ended in a tie, 49 to 49. with the VP breaking the tie. There was still a Democrat majority when it was passed. Looks like a slim one.
I was just a little lad back then , so I do not remember a lot of that stuff. But while reading up on some of it, it looks like Clinton also vetoed 2 bills that were passed by republicans to cut taxes that would have resulted in reversing some of what that bill was able to do according to the info I read. The bill credited with balancing the budget raised taxes on the top 1% and cut taxes for lower income people.Lower income being relevant to the richest people in the country. You have to be paying taxes on $780K+ per year to be bumped into that 1% bracket at this point in time. With write-offs it's likely that people claiming that much would be pulling in a lot more .
Just imagine if they could work together and cut spending( R idea) and raise taxes on that 1% ( D Idea). It could reduce the deficit and be a win for both parties. Doing it together would help spread out the hurt a little more and give both parties a win. Compromise a little on how much is cut, and how the taxes are changed.
Link to voting record for the bill that is credited with balancing the budget.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1031/vote_10…
Pit Row
There are a lot of states that pay more in Federal income taxes than they get back . California is one. All of the Purple states get more than they contribute. There are 4 states that together contribute over 1 third of the entire US government's revenue. California, Texas, Florida, and New York in that order.
This info should matter when it comes down to complaining about what a state spends money on. If the voters of that State who paid their taxes agree on how that money is spent, shouldn't that be what matters? It is their money just coming back. And if not for them, a lot of the Purple ( in this case the color is NOT political and is JUST a color they used) states would have less of a budget too.
I can understand covering certain medical stuff for anybody , just as a basic way of keeping everybody healthy. Allowing treatment at an emergency room could help prevent spread of stuff.
Those people in those same blue states that are successful and contribute to the federal coffers are the same ones that scream,
"MAKE THE RICH PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE" so the others can do with it what they want. So, let the rich blue states pay their fair share.
Isn't that what they have been asking for. Make them live by their own words.
Should not / would not the same rules apply to Trump? He didn't have his guys in the FBI like he does now. I know he supposedly appointed Wrey after firing Comey, but I guess he didn't realize that Wrey was cut from the same cloth as Comey.
Yah why not? They already do contribute MORE than they get back . If it really is the top 1% , its not going to impact a lot of people negatively. Maybe rich people will donate a little less money and pay taxes with it instead and and then along with some cuts work towards a balanced budget that pays the deficit down.
1% is a very small amount of people that would be impacted. Again that's what You pay taxes on , not the gross earnings.
Stop changing the subject. You were talking about the states, now you're shifting to individuals.
TM
That's interesting, despite R66's claim the bill was put forth by a republican, no republicans voted for the bill in the senate...
Yup the last time we had balanced budget was the day before 9/11. I remember explicitly George Bush being asked if he would raise taxes to pay for Afghanistan war and his response was that war time is one of the justifications for deficit spending. Then the wars lasted almost 20 years and never a look back. In the meantime, the interest rate was kept at record lows to stimulate economy, then the subprime mortgage crash, and then Covid. In the meantime, the government couldn’t help pumping trillions into economy “for stimulus” even when the work force was stymied and supply chains were down causing at least two massive inflation eras in my opinion.
However, Clinton does deserve credit for being last president to balance the budget. The economy he was credited for was largely due to booms in the computer industry and the internet though.
The same thing is happening now with AI
I've been talking about both, as it seemed that You were. Wouldn't " giving them what they want" be increasing the tax on the 1 % richest people and decreasing taxes on the rest? That is what has been said for as long as I can remember hearing them ask for an increase on anybody's taxes
Of Course a lot of blue states will contribute more overall, there are way more people in those areas. In the last 3 Presidential elections the Democrat ( Clinton ,Biden and then Harris) all won the same 421 counties each time. At the time of the 2024 election, the total population of those 421 counties was 160,662,201, or 48.1% of the U.S. population. If You look at the voter maps that show all that Red and the little bits of Blue. 40% of the population lives in the pure red areas . Its crazy to think so many people live in such a small area of the country ( the blue areas). So if You did raise the Federal income tax on that 1% chances are it may impact more people in Blue areas anyway , since they are also often more expensive to live in and have way more people living there, the chances of there being more wealthy people living in them is pretty good.
Why would it be a bad idea? what did it do that was bad back in the 90's? It seems like the same basic idea as what worked back then( raising taxes on the top 1% and lowering them on other people while making cuts to spending ) . While I have not heard a lot of Democrats say they want to cut spending , that could be a part of working together that could give Republicans a win too. Along with both parties getting the win of being part of balancing the budget.
Glad I looked into it more. The Democrats still had a majority when that Bill was voted on too. I was pretty surprised that reality was so different from their post.
Its a reason I like to include links so people can see the info. I try and fact check myself before posting if I'm not saying something as an opinion. But the past year has been tough with much less time and a higher level of stress that has also clouded my thinking. So I state less things as facts more often.
I referenced this post
"There are a lot of states that pay more in Federal income taxes than they get back . California is one. All of the Purple states get more than they contribute. There are 4 states that together contribute over 1 third of the entire US government's revenue. California, Texas, Florida, and New York in that order. "
The point I was making is that, to apply their talking point "make the rich pay their fair share". Only on a state level, which is what you were claiming, not individuals.
But in reality, it's a dumb talking point. Why? Because no person can define "what their fair share is" since the top 1% already contribute 45% of federal income tax collected and the top 10% contribute 72% of all federal income tax collected. And Trump gave a significant tax hike to the top 10% by reducing the SALT deduction and if you close your eyes and carefully listen, you can still hear them squeal about it in DC.
The balanced budget bill originated in the house. The speaker of the house controls the agenda and what comes to the floor for a vote. Republicans wrote the bill, passed the bill, and sent it to the senate. The senate passed it and sent it to the president. The democrat president signed the republican balanced budget bill. This bill would not have materialized without a Republican controlled House led by Georgia Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.
Post a reply to: Government Shutdown