|
Replies: 33
| visibility 1775
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Bill and Melinda Gates are smart people right?
1
May 9, 2025, 9:00 AM
|
|
Just wondering why they fail to grasp that every dollar we send overseas in aid, both are complaining, is a borrowed dollar. So we send $40B in borrowed dollars in aid that we now pay interest on forever? Now the numbers may not sound high but billions add up over time to serious money.It is like buying stuff on sale with a credit card then not paying it off at the end of the month. That 22% interest nullifies any amount saved by the sale.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
There are two options, and the US is kind of forced to pick one.
6
6
May 9, 2025, 9:29 AM
|
|
You can invest in war, or you can invest in peace. Trump is of the opinion we need not invest in either, and that ultimately means we will be forced to invest in war. We've tried the isolationist approach before, and it ended in a World War, several actually.
Since the end of WW2, the US has largely chosen to invest in peace. Over time, that investment has nearly equaled what we spent in WW2. We've spent THAT MUCH since WW2, keeping from having a WW3.
Today, a world war, for the US, is a $50 trillion war. WW2 was about the same, when adjusted for inflation. So when you spread your money around the world, buying peace, fostering trade, you're helping keep peace. China has gone from third world to first world. Same with Mexico largely.
What this has caused is something unheard of in human history really. Your odds of dying in a war, today, as a human on planet Earth, have NEVER been lower. Your odds of starving to death, also, have never been lower. Your life expectancy, has never been higher. This isn't by accident. This is a calculated system that has been created. It is the DUTY of the world's most powerful nation, to lead. Not withdraw.
The dividends paid in investing in peace, are increased trade, higher standards of living, health, and general peace. It is the fault of our Congress that we have overspent though. And that's because American voters tend to reelect leaders who throw money to them as well, forget internationally. And Congress tends to get reelected on spending, so they spend more, always, never less. Sadly, our international investments have paid more overall dividends, than investing in ourselves.
So yeah, Bill Gates and his ex wife are smart people. Sure. Unfortunately, most people are not smart people. And smart people tend to forget that, and not smart people tend to blame the smart people for their woes. It's the circle of life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17173]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 18021
Joined: 2015
|
You got some data to back this up?
May 9, 2025, 9:37 AM
|
|
“our international investments have paid more overall dividends, than investing in ourselves.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
Re: You got some data to back this up?
May 9, 2025, 9:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
Re: You got some data to back this up?
May 9, 2025, 9:45 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
Re: You got some data to back this up?
May 9, 2025, 9:46 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [121126]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 77642
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
Vaccines mostly, followed by antibiotics.
May 9, 2025, 2:19 PM
|
|
Life expectancy is weighted. If the average is say 70 years, then when someone dies at 65yo, it has less impact on the average than if an infant dies.
400 years ago, when "life expectancy" was around 30-32yo., the main driver in that low number wasn't adults dying early, it was children never making it to adulthood. 50% of children never made it to 18 years old, 400 years ago. BUT, if you made it to 20 years old, your odds of living to 55-60yo were roughly the same as today. All of modern medicine had only added maybe 10-15 years to life expectancy. CHILDHOOD VACCINES are what made the biggest impact. And antibiotics as well.
Today we think it's unheard of for a child to die. 400+ years ago it was normal, and expected. People had 6-10 children long ago because they knew half would die. Vaccines for polio, TB, measles, smallpox, tetanus, pertussis, mumps, rubella, etc. those vaccines saved millions of children's lives. And once they reached that magical age of 20yo, they were good until around 60yo.
This is why everyone was so concerned about children with covid. If it impacted them severely, then that would be very bad for life expectancy. As it ended up, they were the most resilient, meaning mostly older people died, which limited the impact on life expectancy. Life expectancy dropped much more with the Spanish flu because that hit middle-aged people the hardest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22186]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 17431
Joined: 1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17173]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 18021
Joined: 2015
|
None of those charts prove his claim******
May 9, 2025, 9:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: None of those charts prove his claim******
May 9, 2025, 2:48 PM
|
|
Okay but here is the thing on the cute charts. Show me where USAID has saved all those lives and extended life expectancy in foreign countries. You are unable to in fact because Keowee was correct and you are incorrect.
This is a specific topic, not to be painted with a WAG broad brush. This topic is about borrowing money to toss away overseas. Money we must pay interest on every day.
One can assume that money is helping those charts but none says so specifically, if mistakes please point it out to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: None of those charts prove his claim******
May 9, 2025, 2:49 PM
|
|
WAG = Wild ** Guess
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20802]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 18731
Joined: 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [121126]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 77642
Joined: 2003
|
Re: LOL!!!***
May 9, 2025, 1:26 PM
|
|
it is like talking to a 4 year old, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: There are two options, and the US is kind of forced to pick one.
May 9, 2025, 11:05 AM
[ in reply to There are two options, and the US is kind of forced to pick one. ] |
|
After parsing through the long post I am left to assume your position is that it is fine to borrow money to give away? Your assumptions are also based upon your position that the USA needs to involve itself in any country with issues? For someone who is supposedly concerned with US debt levels that is a surprising position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
It is fine to borrow money to give away
1
May 9, 2025, 11:12 AM
|
|
AS LONG AS YOU DON"T SPEND TOO MUCH AND GET INTO A DEBT PROBLEM.
What I'm really for is term limits in Congress and a balanced budget amendment. But that's a pipe dream. So I'm just waiting for the inevitable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7692]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: It is fine to borrow money to give away
May 9, 2025, 11:36 AM
|
|
Well if we are ever to have a balanced budget you've got to accept that one of the first things to go will be giving free stuff to non Americans. So which is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
I give free stuff away all the time.
1
May 9, 2025, 11:46 AM
|
|
Some even that isn't a tax write-off. I also manage my budget and at times, I cut spending.
There's no reason someone shouldn't loan me money, or that I shouldn't feel like I can take out a loan, IF MY BUDGET IS BALANCED.
I give $500 every Christmas to a "non-American" and I can't even write it off.
And I can downgrade my internet and phone and still give the $500 every year.
So no, helping non-Americans is NOT my first thing to go. May be yours though, sobeit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: I give free stuff away all the time.
May 9, 2025, 11:52 AM
|
|
You are now conflating personal money, IE what you earned with the mandatory taking of tax monies. You are certainly free to give away your entire net worth, borrow or whatever, taxpayers money is a different ballgame entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
No, it's entirely the same. Taxpayer money should be managed exactly like
1
May 9, 2025, 12:21 PM
|
|
everyone manages their own money.
For example, I would never go out, get a $260K line of credit on a credit card, and run up to the limit, and not even be able to make the MINIMUM payment. That's something a ####### does. And that's what our Congress does.
Honestly, we would have gone broke long ago but for imports and immigrants. They are an economic tool to keep deflationary pressure on the dollar, allowing debt to be easily serviced. In our current situation, you don't FIX the problem by eliminating the things that allow the problem to keep going. You eliminate the debt, and cut spending, and KEEP the illegals and imports flowing. Once you have solved your DEBT, THEN you can eliminate the other problems that facilitate it.
It's like coming off drugs. You go cold turkey and you will die. But taper off on methadone and STOP USING DRUGS, and you can fix yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108406]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70366
Joined: 2002
|
We have a massive debt problem and it's mostly from spending on ourselves.***
May 9, 2025, 11:51 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: We have a massive debt problem and it's mostly from spending on ourselves.***
May 9, 2025, 11:53 AM
|
|
$40B here $60B there adds up to real money budget wise. It is also because we elect politicians who scream tax cuts instead of telling the truth, taxes need to rise and ALL gotta put some skin in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: There are two options, and the US is kind of forced to pick one.
May 9, 2025, 11:13 AM
[ in reply to Re: There are two options, and the US is kind of forced to pick one. ] |
|
Also I would suggest that instead of borrowing money to give away maybe tax rates on ALL need to rise for this to continue. That way we can at least vote on it as part of a platform. Would love to see a VAT on the Federal level to wake people up to what their money is being spent on currently, no skin no cares so they say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25305]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 17097
Joined: 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5425]
TigerPulse: 44%
38
Posts: 17583
Joined: 2005
|
It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation
1
May 9, 2025, 1:27 PM
|
|
If we borrow $5 billion to give a tax cut to the richest earners, then use that $5 billion to purchase food products from American farmers. Then we donate that food product to a foreign country.
Did we we really give away $5 billion dollars to the foreign country?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25305]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 17097
Joined: 2024
|
Re: It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation
May 9, 2025, 2:41 PM
|
|
Hmmm...good point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25305]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 17097
Joined: 2024
|
Re: It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation
May 9, 2025, 2:59 PM
|
|
No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [334]
TigerPulse: 96%
15
|
Re: It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation
May 9, 2025, 3:01 PM
|
|
Supply is still the same? Basic Econ 101 as far as supply and demand theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25305]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 17097
Joined: 2024
|
Re: It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation
May 9, 2025, 3:03 PM
|
|
Yeah there are basic economics of even things such as utility value. The reason why it doesn't drive the price up is the surplus is so extreme. It would have been burned or thrown away. No it does not raise the price. The surplus is so extreme that it's a non factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5425]
TigerPulse: 44%
38
Posts: 17583
Joined: 2005
|
No because the supply is artificial because it's just a subsidy to farmers
May 9, 2025, 7:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: It's hard to have a conversation when you don't really understand the situation ] |
|
disguised as foreign aid.
You, take $5 billion in unwanted food and stop growing it, some farms are going to go out of business. Then the price of food is likely to go up because there are fewer farmers and less supply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2474]
TigerPulse: 94%
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 1775
|
|
|
50
