Can we afford all the free stuff the Democrats promised last night?

SPC Nathan Freeman — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:26:23 -0400

They want free college, no guns, no banks and open borders for illegal immigrants. Who wants to pay for all this free stuff? By the way, we have to raise our debt ceiling again to keep from defaulting on our debt. So much for lowering the deficit.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Oct 14 at 2015 12:27 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:27:44 -0400

We can't afford any free things from any politicians.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 14 at 2015 12:27 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:27:51 -0400

In a word NO SPC Nathan Freeman.
I am opposed to "free" college, no guns, no banks and open borders for illegal immigrants.
I am in favor of reasonably priced colleges that teach our sons and daughters the skills to learn and apply what they learn and focus less on indoctrination.
I am in favor of local banks where bank staff know their clients.
I am in favor of attracting legal immigrants to this nation and encouraging illegal ones to leave or start the process to become citizens.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Oct 14 at 2015 12:28 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:28:41 -0400

If we are going to give things away for free it should be to our jobless and homeless vets!

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Oct 14 at 2015 12:30 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:30:25 -0400

We paid for a whole war off money we didn't have, so why not? Sarcasm folks.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Oct 14 at 2015 12:35 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:35:06 -0400

Put up a straw man. knock it down! At least you feel better about your life choices.

We really do need to look at college being either free or damned near it though. We're lagging in the education department and that's going to knock us off the top faster than anything.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2015 12:41 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:41:30 -0400

If we become communist and then start killing off the rich, we sure can afford all of it. I think ...

Response by SGT Curtis Earl made Oct 14 at 2015 12:56 PM

SGT Curtis Earl — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:56:16 -0400

You're aware that nothing in your image is true? It's an absolute lie. You shouldn't frequent websites that post this garbage and you shouldn't converse with anyone who's dumb enough to think this is accurate. I don't mean to sound harsh, but we have the most powerful tool in the history of the known universe at our finger tips and this bullshit is what someone posts.

You don't understand what the debt ceiling is or what it's actually used for. We don't borrow money for the sake of borrowing money. A basic Econ 201 class will explain how our monetary system works. Basic tenet of Econ 201: Borrowing creates wealth.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2015 1:03 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:03:05 -0400

I love the word "free" when used by politicians - and I have to sit back and chuckle at the people who don't understand what "free" means when a politician says it.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2015 1:07 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:07:24 -0400

Funny how these posts seem lifted off the Fox News Facebook page, GOP sycophantic comments and all.

"Them liberalz are giving all those illegals our jobs and money and food and free everything so we're bankrupt now and we needs a wall to keep them out!"

Time for the inevitable patting each other on the back by repeating gross over-simplications and disingenuous arguments that have a tenuous connection to reality at best.

Going to agree with Sgt. Brookins' comment, this meme certainly embodies the Straw Man fallacy. Make up a non-existent argument to represent your perceived opponents so you have something easy to attack.

So to address those issues:

1. No one is promising illegal immigrants free college. <citation needed>

2. Gun control debates are empty rhetoric, trying to disarm 320 million people of their 300 million firearms that are heavily connected to our cultural heritage isn't happening overnight, if even in our lifetimes. We've heard that as a scare tactic since the 80s/90s by the NRA, yet gun carry permit laws are the most liberal yet, and the number of guns in the country is at an all time high (also firearm homicides as well as violent crime have been dropping since the 1970s). TL;DR - The "They're coming to steal our guns and liberty!" argument is pretty ignorant.

3. No banks...? Last I checked the big 4 US banks had basically overtaken the big 4 Chinese banks in terms of market capitalization. And Hillary's top 6 campaign donors include 4 large financial institutions (JP Morgan, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley). Not sure where you were going with that, but banks are not going away and no one said they would be.

4. Open borders for illegal immigrants? I saw some criticism of Obama's deportation policies as being too harsh and calls for immigration reform. Feel free to cite where someone "last night promised open borders for illegal immigrants." (Fun fact: since 2013, China and India have been the largest sources of immigrants, not Mexico).

5. We're raising our debt ceiling because our economy is growing. Our total debt to GDP ratio is on par with Germany and Canada's, and about half of the UK's and Japan's. China's on the other hand has quadrupled in 7 years ($7 trillion in 2007 to $28 trillion in 2014) and is increasing at a rapid rate; officially they've reached about the same ratio (debt compared to economy size) as ours, with no hope of slowing down (fixed investment is making a larger and larger chunk of their GDP as economic growth slows) anytime soon. And that's not getting into the trillions in non-performing loans and shadow banking that's in the "grey" economy and state run asset management companies that are used to get bad debt off the books and out of sight for now. Keeping a government debt to gdp ratio of around 100% (which is where we are at now) is easily sustainable, Japan has managed levels over 200% for years now and the UK has managed levels around there in the past as well. Selling government debt at bare minimum interest rates (like we have been doing) that gives us liquidity and a higher rate of return is a great deal. Sell bonds to China that pay 2% interest, and get 5% returns on spending the money they gave us. Sucks for them.

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/images/EMRG-ChinaBankingSystem-07292011.gif (This is a couple of years old, China's ratio is closer to 280% now, not 159%).

So to conclude, the Democrats in the debate didn't "promise all this free stuff we can't afford."

And now to inevitably get flamed for daring to disagree with the common argument.

Full disclosure: I'm not a democrat and never have voted for one. Just tired of ignorant political opinions that tend to clog up the military community while being constantly repeated no matter how far from the truth they are.

mmmÞ,\ATSlXJM04yëúB^,ÐÐÐ@tÞ)µÎ@ÀáÝÃ»Ý ÿÎ Æ ÿ Fô*A ääåu»Qÿ2ðôàèï ºÎ0hÅÖ??ÂºÔ9íÀËããä¿Uj¿ $É>_ß`VÛÙ ÈÛßèïÎ )ÖÖêÏéçD4 ¿ËÚàóàðîßðî ÒÌp¶Ýáî ÕÕXpªÿÞ ã|345ï§{xyµE5ÖLÇÇÇìÂ2íïö9!IQ`dei++,ê"§ÀöôõÒÚè v E|Uÿÿÿ!ù , X ÿ ÿ H Á*\È¡Ã#JHÅ3jÜÈÇ CIÉ(Sª\ÉË0cÊIÍ8sêÜ)Ò~ý`ûîÄ^ûèåÓWá>tZTÂ ëWÌÉálsª$XT6u*µÓÏ>,únÉKyêÝëQØÖp?aü{ÕR)ôöÊÉb@«8Ð¡»*Qñ+ÆöFÒóH/-MhêÅ~"áboOâåË»·EÅE&lé7ylåW

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Oct 14 at 2015 2:19 PM

1LT Aaron Barr — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:19:59 -0400

We can't even afford the debt we have now, let alone the 'freebies' the communists in democrat clothing offer.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2015 3:22 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:22:43 -0400

Thank you, SPC Nathan Freeman, for posting this question. It allows me to add to your post with this article from "American Patriot".
For more than a year, Clinton has endeavored to escape accountability for unlawfully maintaining all of her official communications outside of official networks when she was secretary of state. Clearly, this was an effort to protect her 2016 presidential bid from the plethora of nefarious activities reflected in those emails.
Unfortunately, careless remarks by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy two weeks ago bolstered Clinton's claims that the Benghazi investigation was just political. In fact, the business of that committee is deadly serious.
In the debate, Clinton claimed, "[The Benghazi] committee is basically an arm of the Republican National Committee. It is a partisan vehicle, as admitted by the House Republican majority leader, Mr. McCarthy, to drive down my poll numbers. Big surprise. And that’s what they have attempted to do."
Further, regarding her electronic communication charade, Clinton insisted, “I’ve been as transparent as I know to be.” That vacuous remark is completely meaningless.

Her evasive efforts notwithstanding, there are two things that need to remain front and center about Clinton's felonious email communications — and her subsequent cover-up efforts.
First, her emails show her complicity in formulating the political lie about the murder of our personnel in Benghazi — Christopher Stevens, his aide Sean Smith, and two diplomatic security officers, former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods. Her Benghazi lie was an effort by Clinton and others in the State Department to provide Obama political cover for his “al-Qa'ida on the run” campaign theme just weeks ahead of the 2012 presidential election.
So determined was Clinton to propagate this lie that she shamefully stood in front of those four flag-draped caskets and declared to the families of the dead, “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with."

Second, despite Clinton's claims, “I did not email any classified material to anyone” and “There is no classified material,” it is now apparent that hundreds and perhaps thousands of her unsecured email communications contained significant classified content. Transmitting that content is a felony.
But not only was her arrogant "above the law" use of unsecured email illegal, it was deadly dangerous because it exposed policy directives and the names of covert operatives. And only the most naïve Clintonista would insist that Russia and China did not have access to all of her unsecured communication.

Last weekend, Barack Obama declared, “I can tell you that [Clinton's unsecured email server] is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.” His minions are now walking back that absurd assertion.
Fact is, the greatest threat to America's national security has been, and remains, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
In an address to the nation in 2010, Barack Obama declared, “The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.”

Obama and Clinton have avoided the truth as if their political lives depended on it — which of course, they do.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Oct 14 at 2015 3:27 PM

SGT Jerrold Pesz — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:27:52 -0400

I never thought that I would say something like this but if we really want free education, free healthcare, free housing for the poor, open borders etc. the obvious place to get the money is out of the military budget. We haven't won a war in seventy years and refuse to even try. Our borders are wide open. We have carriers, billion dollar planes and all sorts of high tech gear but regularly get our asses kicked by illiterate poorly armed people living in mud huts. While we pat ourselves on the back for "taking the high road" those who don't kick our asses. While we worry about collateral damage we murder tens of thousands of American troops by sending them to fight in wars that we have no intention of even trying to win. In fact I am not even sure why we have a military. The money that we spend building pretty toys could pay for all of the free stuff that people want. I am not critizing most of our men and women in uniform. They are the best that the world has ever known (except for those who are just there for the money) but they will never again win a war and many more will die for nothing. It is a waste to have a military if you are not going to use it and no one has ever won a war trying to fight it the way that we do. Better to abolish the military, bring everyone home and trust the world to leave us alone in our socialist utopia.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2015 4:59 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2015 16:59:35 -0400

Can we afford all the subsadies and tax breaks for corporations that ship jobs over seas ?