General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

whyamimrpink78
Secular Talk
comments

Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "'How Will The Left Pay For All Their Free Stuff' Answered!" video.

Wall is much cheaper
47
Economics is far more complicated than what David laid out. He is assuming that we can just raise taxes and people won't react by changing spending habits. They will. Even a 4% increase on income tax will change people's consumption. He is also assuming the programs to pay for will cost X amount where federal government programs typically cost a lot more. For example, look at what happened in the Community Mental Health Act of 1963. When these programs struggle leftists will simply say "it needs more money" and then say "raise taxes". This is actually their response to the fact that Medicare and SS are running out of money. So at what point do you stop raising taxes and stop spending?
9
@plumbus813 , leftists don't know math
5
They are playing a numbers game with current numbers. They are ignoring the human element of the issue. For example, if you raise income taxes 4% how will people spend? Their spending habits will surely change leading some businesses suffering and laying people off. Now you have less people working, less paying taxes, and more collecting from the government. That is just one situation of many.
3
@Rompelstaump , you are ignoring the human element of this situation. You expect humans to keep acting the same when you make drastic changes like these to the economy. It isn't that easy.
3
@kimjong-un5562 , and that is just federal. That does not include state and local.
2
@jojoboko6990 , how do you know it will save money? I pay $0 in healthcare, so my expenses will go up. Also, most people don't understand the issues that well, all they will see is a smaller paycheck and thus will spend differently. This whole argument made by David and Kyle totally ignores the human element of economics, which is big. This is why far left ideas don't get passed, people don't like these major changes.
2
@OO-il6sl , really? Saying "living wage" and "fair share" is intellectual?
2
@GR100ALT , no one is really against government spending. There is a desire to have money spent by government. As is a wall is far cheaper than universal healthcare, is a clear plan and will help. Universal healthcare has no clear plan and it is questionable that if it will work.
2
@blalien777 , our healthcare is a mess due to government involvement. Adding more government is, arguably, not the solution.
2
@draconicgaming8706 , what research? Walls do work. They slow down immigration. I have looked deeply into Medicare for all, I bet more than you have. I don't buy into it as I feel it is simply creating a monopoly in healthcare. Monopolies are the result of government creating expensive regulations where only the large ones can manage and smaller ones suffer. The free market alleviates monopolies. High school was not like college. In high school you spend 35 hours a week in the classroom. In college you spend 15 hours a week. Think about it. And yes, the far left is dying.. With AOC showing she is a communist and people pushing her as the future of the democratic party, and Trump getting his wall with the democrats getting nothing when initially Trump offered them a deal, the far left is dying.
2
@ianbenjiman , the far left plays this number game. They have somewhat of an argument, but they are ignoring many factors such as how will they get the workers to actually provide these programs and how will people react when they see their taxes go up.
2
@Rompelstaump , it is complicated. I am all for improving the system, but to simply say "tax here" and "cut here" and expect people to not react is foolish. Factor in the human element of the issue and you see how complex it will be. This is why leftist's ideas continue to fail or not pass, they ignore the human element of it.
2
The problem is that those on the left are completely ignoring the human element of the issue. All these numbers will only work if humans in society essentially don't change. For example, healthcare will cost that much if people don't seek more of it. However, when people are not the ones paying the bill they will pursue healthcare a lot more adding to the cost.
1
So in short, radically change our economy and assume no major recession will happen.
1
@hellaeric10 , you are ignoring the word "promote". Promote means to encourage, not provide. It says "provide" for common defence though. So thanks for proving the OP's point.
1
@tommyahearn9177 , yes, he showed that the federal government is to "provide" for common defence, but only "promote" the general welfare. So the OP is correct.
1
@0110-q6n , promote does not mean provide. Also, one can argue those are form of oppression. Universal education can be used for indoctrination. If you don't do what the government tells you they can take away your healthcare.
1
@0110-q6n , promoting general welfare is allowing for freedom of the states and people to manage themselves to be in the best position possible. Being at the mercy of the federal government is not promoting general welfare.
1
@0110-q6n , also, read the preamble and than the Constitution. It says "united states", it does not say "the people". When you read the constitution it clearly defines when something involves the "people" and the "states". As for rights, they are what we have that the government cannot take away without due process. It is limitations on government.
1
@hellaeric10 , uh, they did in the past. Many challenges in courts were done and they are still questioned to this day. Look at Obamacare. In order for it to be constitutional it has to be defined as a tax. Even at that states were not mandated to expand medicaid.
1
@jojoboko6990 , you say most people. Again, how do you know? Sounds like you are making things up. Also, what about quality? Along with that, you are only talking about one part of the overall proposal, healthcare. There are other factors as well. Less expenses where? On healthcare? What about elsewhere? What about the job loss switching to a medicare for all system? What about businesses and how they will react? How about investors and how they will react? These ideas are far left. Noticed how every attempt to pass universal healthcare, even at the state level, has failed? Overall, you are completely ignoring the human element of this issue and you are assuming people will save money but provide no evidence for that.
1
@jojoboko6990 , what about expanding social security and raising the cap on that? How will that save people money? How does tuition free college save people money? You are just looking at healthcare, there are other parts of it as well.
1
@jojoboko6990 , the "average person", what is the median? Also, does that include cost with children? Someone could be paying that much because they have kids. Your numbers are grossly over simplified. People who are making $29,000 a typically young. How about someone earning $120,000 a year with two kids that is responsible for their kids' and their spouses' healthcare? Now they are paying higher in taxes. That is the point.
1
@jojoboko6990 , you said that people will be saving money, I am showing you there is more to it than just healthcare 1. Uh, yes, "free college" will require new taxes. You are making the false assumption that colleges won't jack up prices when demand goes up. They will. Your solution, again, over simplifies the issue. Also, you are ignoring the point where a college degree loses value thus our society is funding for useless degrees. 2. 6% is a large amount, especially considering how many are investors. That means less money in banks, less to loan out if I want to buy a car, less investment to grow businesses thus less jobs, less investment to build new apartments thus rent goes up, etc. You want to know something? Nothing exists in a bubble.
1
@jojoboko6990 , but back on the average person. The average is a poor indicator. You have people with cancer who pay a lot in healthcare that skew the average. A better way to look at it is with the median. Consider this, you have 10 people in a room. Five pay $0 in healthcare a year, four pay $1000 a year. One person pays $50,000 a year because maybe they have cancer or some rare disease or a severe disability. On average those people are paying $5100 a year. But that is because one person skews the average. However, the median is $500 for that group. At 4% increase in income taxes at $29,000 a year that is $1160. That means people will be paying more. In fact, out of that 10, 9 of them will be paying more now. You can't just look at the average as outliers skew it. Also, again, someone could be paying around $9000 a year because they are paying for not only themselves but also for their family. those people are typically more well off. And again, you are ignoring quality and how that will be influenced or how the healthcare industry will react such as will healthcare providers be willing to take a 40% pay cut?
1
@jojoboko6990 1.How? 2. They are investors either in small businesses or in stocks or have their money in banks for banks to loan out. Also, you are assuming they have large co-pays. You are making far too many assumptions here and that is they problem and that is why these policies get faced with a lot of attacks. How many people actually pursue healthcare?
1
@jojoboko6990 , the average is skewed by outliers. That is why many statisticians use the median as opposed to the average.
1
@jojoboko6990 1. An individual can be paying for more than one person such as someone paying for their spouse and kids. 2. What? And now, we haven't been over it. You are assuming quality will be the same. That is a very important part of the argument. You can't just throw numbers out there and ignore the quality aspect. You are avoiding the argument which makes your argument weak.
1
@jojoboko6990 , depends, in this case most statisticians will use the median as outliers skew the average.
1
@jojoboko6990 , to pull out a loan banks need money. If you tax people more that is less money in banks and thus less to loan out.
1
@Frank 1. Asking how to pay for it is a legit question. I just got a hair cut. I made sure I had money before I did it. Why now on these programs? 2. Uh, why do you think that I vote against my best interest?
1
@draconicgaming8706 , "living wage" is subjective. That is why people are paid based on the market rate and not a "living wage". Should my co-worker get paid more than me if they have more expenses? "Fair share" is nothing more than an appeal to emotion talking point, just like "living wage" is. Build a wall is a solid argument as it is clear and will help the illegal immigration issues. No one is saying a wall will completely stop immigration, but it will help alleviate it. By your standard we should not have locks on our doors because is someone really wanted to get in they can. Also, one can argue that universal healthcare will be a waste of money. I look at each policy and I do vote in my best interest. Free healthcare: it is not free, establishing will require major economic change leading to a recession, and it is not clear if it will even improve on what we have Clean energy: I support the market to direct us on that Free college: College is an investment you make as an adult. That is the real value of college.
1
@GabbertEvergreen , I have been actually laying off lately. Semester started and this semester is very busy for me. Also, considering how AOC is acting and how Trump is going to get his wall, the far left is dying and will be completely dead come 2020.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , I am not racist. I just support immigration laws so that people who work to earn their way into this nation gets in. Yes, overstaying their visas is a problem. But do you ignore other problems just because of that? The left has very poor arguments on MFA. I have heard their arguments, they are shallow on a complex issue. I have done a lot of research on healthcare. I have read works by prof. Katherine Baicker, books by Prof. Scott Atlas and Prof. Robert Ohsfeldt, and I have read "Being Mortal", a medical doctor where that book is required reading for the nurses in the nursing program in my university. The market is pushing for clean energy. Exon Mobil help fund for wind farms in CA. I bet you didn't know that. College is a person investment. The value in college is that you show employers you are willing to invest time and money to complete a long term goal. If you make college "free" than you remove that part of college. College is strongly dependent on you. The success in college is strongly dependent on the individual. It isn't high school where teachers hold your hand, you are on your own. The cost of the university is worth it. I am pursuing a PhD myself, my job opportunities are very high right now.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , the US has not moved far right. As Ann Coulter said, we elect republicans to get rid of the federal department of education and we end up getting NCLB.
1
@GabbertEvergreen , they are far left. And yes, the far left is dying. There will still be a political left, they will just be more moderate. But right now AOC is showing how the far left is essentially communism and when Trump gets his wall with democrats getting nothing the people will vote in more moderate democrats that are willing to work with Trump and actually listen to the people.
1
@GSP-76 , no it won't.
1
@jojoboko6990 , he declared a national emergency which he has a great chance of winning. How will the prosecution tear him up? Look at what Trump did. 1. He owed up to the shut down to get his wall 2. He eventually gave the democrats a deal giving things they wanted which they immediately refused even before he offered it 3. He opened the government on the idea that federal workers will get paid and that Congress will work something out. Democrats said to open the government and then they will talk. He did, nothing got done with the wall 4. There is a long history of democrats opposing Trump simply because they hate him Trump is very smart and this entire time he has always been 5 steps ahead of democrats. That is why he won in 2016 when people wrote him off. That is why the economy is better. That is why his SOTU was so popular and so on. He knows what he is doing. He has a great chance to win this case and get the wall where democrats get nothing. Maybe then they will take Trump seriously and stop underestimating him. A major problem we have had for years is that these established politicians have been in DC and weren't challenged. Now Trump is challenging them and winning. They still feel they can have things their way, well, they aren't.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , no one is saying a wall will completely stop immigration, it is a barrier to slow it down. The locks on your doors don't stop someone from breaking in if they want to. It slows them down. You are essentially saying if something is not 100% efficient than why bother. That is not really an argument. I know what a monopoly is. In the free market if a monopoly exists than that is because they are a very strong company that provides great goods/services and pay high wages. There is no desire for a company to compete. But beyond that in the free market there is competition, especially today with competition. In a free market smaller companies will be able to develop and compete giving people options forcing other companies to cater to society better. Government creates monopolies by creating expensive regulations that smaller companies cannot afford. And yes, as the way Medicare for all is written it is a monopoly as it makes private insurance illegal. But besides that, you say it creates a baseline. That baseline means that only large companies can succeed and smaller ones can't as smaller ones trying to enter the work force simply can't afford to keep that baseline. Just like the min. wage eliminates job opportunities for low skilled workers. PBS, NPR and BBC don't outlaw other news stations. Medicare for all outlaws other insurance companies. College and high school are vastly different. You say you spend 30 to 35 hours a week on college, exactly. That is on you. College is your personal investment where you are investing your time to succeed. In high school you spend 35 hours a week in class simply due to how it is schedule. Not in college. In college it is on your to find time to study and get work done as it is an investment you make. AOC is communist. Trump has a great chance of getting his wall. You say he caved to democrats. You are wrong. He is showing he is the reasonable one here. He opened the government to pay federal workers and did so after offering democrats deals that they refused. He opened the government because democrats said they will then talk about a wall where they essentially did not. Trump is showing he is trying to work with democrats but they keep refusing. That is a strong argument in court. The left keeps taking Trump for granted when in reality he is 5 steps ahead of them. I am going to laugh if Trump gets his wall and would love to see the reaction on the left. Your brother needs to do some more research bud. Look at the travel ban. It was ripped on by the left and the lower courts turned it down. In the end the SC supported Trump. He knows what he is doing.
1
@idkmynametho8391 , i agree, but the wall is tackling one issue and that is those who cross illegally. Just because there is more than one problem does not mean we can't try to solve the smaller one.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , Trump never said it will end all immigration. In a recent speech he said it will slow it down by, at best, 50%. Also, how much do the walls in your house cost? You can't compare the cost of a lock in your home to that of the cost of a border wall. A lock is pointless without a wall. My point was that even with barriers when there is a will there is a way. It is there to slow down people. In fact, Kyle did a video about immigrants climbing a wall in Arizona claiming it did not work. In fact it did. Is slowed them down to allow for cameras to recognize them easier and border patrol to get there and they were caught. The wall worked. At this point the left has almost no argument against the wall. Your only argument is "well it won't stop it completely so why bother". Ok, well speed limits don't stop everyone from speeding, so I guess we should remove all speed limits. If you are a bad company a competitor will take you out, that's capitalism. You have not shown how the free market creates monopoly besides mocking me and claiming I watch PragerU (I don't). I have described to you how government regulations create monopolies as it makes business more expensive for smaller competitors. For example, Walmart in the past supported a min. wage increase knowing it will harm smaller businesses. Tell me how the free market creates monopolies? And be in detail. If there is a shitty company in a community than a local bank would be more than willing to loan out money to someone to compete with that company. If a large business is overcharging for their prices guess what you can do in the free market? You can go elsewhere. For example, one company charged me $100 for an oil change. They told me the price after they changed my oil. You know what I did? I left a bad review and I don't go there anymore. In the free market there are plenty of companies to get my car worked on. I go to one company now constantly. They provide great services because they know I can go elsewhere. The other day they saved me $1000 for a cracked fuel pump by finding out it was under a recall. They provide that kind of service because I take my car there often. If not I would go to another company and have. Another example is how H&R block ripped me off on my taxes. My response? I now go through Turbo Tax. You talk about Big Pharma. The reality is that we don't have a free market in healthcare. We have a heavily regulated and subsidized healthcare system. Read the following link https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive Tell me, how do we have a free market in healthcare when companies can't compete across state lines? Or when most people rely on their employers for insurance as opposed to buying it themselves? Your idea of the free market is essentially 100% wrong. It wasn't the free market that jacked up prices, it was government regulations, it was lack of a free market. Medicare for all does outlaw private insurance https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1804/text Read section 107. Small insurance companies are tough to start due to government regulations that prevent competition. Minimum wage does eliminate jobs for low skilled workers. Not every state has illegal immigrants. In fact, besides southern states near the border, most don't have illegal immigrants. My home state has essentially none. Really, do you think about what you write? And no, those companies don't have billions at their disposal. College is very affordable to be honest. When there is a will there is a way. Stop making excuses. Trump took credit for the shut down. All I will say is this. You leftists keep under estimating him. I am waiting for the reaction from the left when the SC rules in his favor. The travel ban was shut down by district courts. The SC ruled in favor with a 9-0 vote. Saying your brother bases his ideas on "common sense" is a very poor argument. These issues are not "common sense" when there is a debate to begin with. Also, I am a PhD candidate in physical chemistry, so it is safe to say I know more science than you and your brother. You claim I am losing my marbles when you argument is "common sense" according to you which essentially is dismissing my point, and you can't even get basic facts correct such as Medicare for all does outlaw private insurance.
1
@jojoboko6990 , there is a lot on his side. First off, border patrol supports a wall saying it will make their job easier. Next, Trump can get the secretary of defense to show how much of a threat it is. For example, human trafficking and illegal drugs. People claim that most illegal drug flow is through legal ports of entry. However, the flaw in that is that those are the drugs that are caught. You don't know how many get through and aren't caught. Thus that number will be challenged heavily in court. Also, in the past both sides, and including now, has said that we need to do something to alleviate illegal immigration. People on the left, including Schumer, has stated a barrier is needed and voted on it in the past. Now they are refusing to simply because they hate Trump. So overall, he can easily show that illegal immigration is a problem. He can show that both sides admit to that. He can show that he tried to work with democrats this entire time where democrats simply refused because they are simply playing politics. So with that, since Congress is not doing their job to fix a problem, despite his efforts, he can show this is a case of national emergency. He has a very solid case. You guys keep taking Trump for granted. If he wins this case I am going to enjoy the reaction from the left.
1
@jojoboko6990 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/2/border-patrol-agents-back-trump-wall-survey-finds/ https://www.npr.org/2019/01/10/683861960/border-patrol-professionals-weigh-in-on-what-s-needede-wall-or-fence If the resources are there a wall will help them. The secretary of defense won't say talking points. What is said to the media and what is said in courts and meetings is different Trump has talking points to the media because he is there to sell to people with short attention spans and not much knowledge. The secretary of defense will be talking to SC justices. He will have data and great detail to support his case. It is hard to determine how many illegal drugs cross the border. People have the talking points that most come through legal ports of entry. But experts and intelligent people will admit that number only exists because those are the ones the caught. You have no accurate numbers on those you don't catch. Compare it to the talking points that illegals commit less crime than citizens. The problem with that stat is you only go off what is reported. If one illegal commits a crime to another illegal that victim won't report it out of fear of deportation. That drives the number down. In court experts will argue that point and it is a strong point. l wall will allow us to make better use of our drones and agents. Also, I support more drones and more agents and more cameras. I also support a wall. At this point people opposing a wall are doing so simply out of hate for Trump, period. It is an emergency because it is a problem both sides admit is happening and needs to be fixed but neither side is really agreeing. The democrats are refusing to work with Trump simply because they hate him. What is a good argument against a wall? You admit we need more agents and drones, but why not a wall along with that? The democrats don't provide any. They are refusing to work out a deal with Trump simply because they hate him. So since our politicians in congress are not working to fix this problem, despite Trump trying hard to, it became an emergency. Again, you are not taking Trump seriously.
1
@jojoboko6990 , way to completely misrepresent me. In my responses I have great details. I point to stats and describe them well. You seemed to have been triggered. Take that study you just referenced. I point to the study and go into details on it even quoting it. For example, on the job loss. I have questioned if they factored in the change in cost of housing. For example, when Medicare for all kills jobs the study said that it accounted for training people and giving them new jobs. That may require them to move. So you change the demand in housing in certain places. Their current home may lose value causing those people to lose money, and new homes they buy may become more expensive. They throw out a number but give essentially zero reasons for it and ignore many factors. Or what about kids changing schools? What about the psychological effects of that? So yes, I have read that section and I have commented on it. You, however, have not responded. Instead you just misrepresent me. You stick to short comments because you have no real rebuttal.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , uh, no. No one is saying the wall will stop all illegal immigration. They are saying it will alleviate it. Nothing is ideal, but what you are saying if it isn't 100% efficient than we should not do it. That is incredibly asinine. Again, speeding laws don't stop all people from speeding, I guess by your standard we should scrap all speed limits. As for barbed wire, it is a humanitarian issue. Barbed wire leads to cuts, infections, diseases and people dying. If you want to go to the barbed wire point than we might as well shoot them. People are not looking to kill these people, they are looking to prevent them from entering our country illegally. And extend to my speed limit analogy, it creates a deterrent. With a wall they are less likely to cross over, and it slows them down to allow for us to allocate our resources better. With a wall we can make better use of our current agents and drones. Monopolies occur due to government actions. Here, I will give you an example with Southwest Airlines. Back in 1971 Southwest was pushing to create their HQ in Texas and fly into Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. At the time Texas International, Braniff and Continental existed. Continental used political power to try to snuff Southwest by making the creation of that airline more expensive. As a result the "Wright Amendment" was create. The amendment prevented direct flight into Love Field so anyone flying Southwest will have to buy separate tickets. It was pushed by other airlines to stop Southwest. It was a business using government to kill the free market to create a monopoly. You say my argument is cartoonish but don't explain how. Regulations increases business cost. Regulations to hinder growth of success businesses simply punishes success. Also, federal regulations increases the powers of the federal government so it can be bought so that regulations favor the highest bidder. Also, one can argue that unions do a much better job at protecting workers. Deaths in mining in the early 1900s dropped a lot because of the power of unions in the free market. And businesses provide safety for workers because of liability and also because they insure them. It keeps their cost of insurance down. So businesses offer safety already. And if a job is not safe they pay more. For example, my dad works in a dangerous factory with lead in the air. The company can't prevent it. Because of that they pay their workers over $30/hr with great benefits, not bad for a job you only need a high school diploma for. H&R block is not owned by Intuit. They used the software they provide, different issue. It is like saying I work for Coherent because I use a Coherent laser. And if the point on Intuit lobbying to prevent taxpayers from having more freedom is true than you literally proved my point. The company is using government to kill the free market and push for a monopoly. The cereal I buy is the store brand. As for Robert Reich, for as intelligent he is he is a politician and is deceptive. He is the one that claimed wages have been stagnate despite the data suggesting it isn't. Here is a video on that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6FmhXQ32Wo&t=160s Uh, what is wrong with the article I linked you? It is from someone's Masters thesis. Also, you are pulling a logical fallacy. You can say that about any source really. That is like saying "David Duke support brushing your teeth. Since he is the leader of the KKK I won't take his opinion on that seriously so I will stop brushing my teeth". You need to point out where the article I linked you is wrong, not pull a logical fallacy. I never said there is a free market in healthcare. We don't have a free market in healthcare. We have a heavily regulated and subsidized healthcare system where insurance companies have all the power. Going to Medicare for all will simply centralize the problem making it, arguably, worse. I agree with your interpretation of the outlawing private insurance part. The issue is that it forces everyone to use the same system and there is nothing for Medicare to compete with. That is a monopoly. Also, this same problem happened in Canada where a lawsuit happened pushing Canada to allow for private insurance as people were dying. Minimum wage does kill jobs for low skilled workers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-BGi4NIFww&t=228s Go to the 3:30 mark and listen to Walter Williams. On the $1000 point you can get this thing called a loan, or you can ask friends or family for money. Or maybe if the min. wage did not kill teenage jobs they could have a job while in high school, save money, and then pay. You just make an argument against the min. wage. The fact there is a debate to begin with does not make the common sense. You see here we are having a debate, thus it is no longer common sense but issues people, including experts, disagree on. Also, I have people skills. I studied education for over a year, I am also pursuing my MBA and I have a hobby that requires me to converse with others in a short amount of time in a calm way. You say I am "bullshitting" you but don't explain how. Your only argument is that this is all "common sense" when it isn't. There is a debate to begin with. I am not saying you are wrong and I am right. I am saying there is an argument that exists on both sides making this far from common sense. And if your brother is pissed at me than he clearly does not have people's skills. I am not going to squirm. I am going to go to work, get things done there, study for my MBA class, and then go to the gym. I am relaxed here. . Also, I am not here to make you like me. You don't have to agree with me. I am simply showing you that these issues are complex and there are strong arguments on both sides. I encourage you to dig deeper, that means listen to much more intelligent people than Kyle who is deceptive and foolish. But again, if your brother is pissed he needs to work on his peoples skills.
1
@draconicgaming8706 , I try not to act like a smart ass, but when you say something is "common sense" you are essentially calling me dumb to not know something you think is "common sense".
1
@draconicgaming8706 , common sense suggests that something is so well known there is not debate. These issues are not "common sense" as there are experts on both sides of the argument who disagree. What is "common sense" is that the sun is bigger than the earth, that is common sense. What isn't common sense is the healthcare debate, or economic debates. If you just used "common sense" on these complex issues as an argument you are not going to win people over.
1
@Dav , it is highly debatable if Medicare for all will be cheaper. All numbers I have seen have many shortcomings. As for the wall being useless, what makes you think that way? In fact, the example you gave those people were caught. So the wall worked. He didn't have to go with a National Emergency because Congress could have done their job. Also, he does have authority to do this. Congress passed a law in 1976 to allow for this. You, apparently, never read laws.
1
@rameelahmed4407 , the deficit fell under Obama because it was so high to begin with. Also, it fell when republicans took over the just like when republicans took over Congress under Clinton. During Reagan's time the democrats control congress. Which branch runs the purse?
1
@tonedowne , pooling resources to be managed by whom? That is an issue. You want to pool resources together to get the best results, now who manages it?
1
Wait a minute? An increase in the payroll tax saves businesses money?
1
Anyone can play the numbers game. The problem here is that leftists are completely ignoring the human element of this issue. How will humans react to all this change? If you raise income taxes 4% people will spend differently harming many businesses.
1
@koukkoufos2000 , here, how about you respond to this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQwBA2QlJ3w
1
@henrygustav7948 , their debt crisis was due to rebuilding. They are successful because they have a society that works very hard. We have a society that is obese and lazy in comparison.
1