11–20 of 1001 posts
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.
And honestly it’s been both parties who have been more than happy to pay lip service to the problem but instead of paring things add additional oversight that has no enforcement power so they only add more weight to the bureaucracy with a few reports no one reads to show for. In the face of deficits, they don’t retrench as individuals and private entities have to.
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.
That egregious spending bears a family resemblance to the malfeasance that cost Trump the 2020 election and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.
One could agree with the goals of reducing government spending and still argue that "the disruptors" are moving too fast and breaking too many things.
[flagged]
Its not enough to have a plan to tear down. You need a plan to built too. Not seeing that.
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And honestly it’s been both parties who have been more than happy to pay lip service to the problem but instead of paring things add additional oversight that has no enforcement power so they only add more weight to the bureaucracy with a few reports no one reads to show for. In the face of deficits, they don’t retrench as individuals and private entities have to.
both parties invoked in highly assymetrical situation is getting old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And honestly it’s been both parties who have been more than happy to pay lip service to the problem but instead of paring things add additional oversight that has no enforcement power so they only add more weight to the bureaucracy with a few reports no one reads to show for. In the face of deficits, they don’t retrench as individuals and private entities have to.
Totally agree. I think the debt is at 100k per taxpayer. Either taxes or inflation will have to be used to pay that.
Nor for Trump whose lifetime history is to make debt go up and then fail upwards.
I like that the focus is on the issues with the disruptors that have been running for a few weeks, not the egregious spending for decades.