Latest tweets by The Donald

[luutzu]

65 completed or under construction with many more in the pipeline. Multiples more than when the Berlin Wall came down.



Not in Australia, but dozens, soon to be over 100 countries think it's a good idea. That's a pretty significant proportion of all the world's countries even if you include the ones like Australia which are literal islands.



Are you trying to earn a cookie or something?



Acting like I have no concept of distance is pointless and silly. Incidentally, I did one of those drives (Melbourne to Cairns, return) recently. I've made at least about 10 international border crossings per year (around 25-30 in 2018) over the last 5 years and have travelled don't ask how many KM; I have a fair concept of distance and international borders.



Estimates of the wall cost range from $5 billion (likely completely unrealistic) up to about $25B. If you think $1B would end US homelessness you probably should go back to finger painting and crayons.



Do you want him to keep giving Americans as much free stuff as possible or let more refugees in? Pick one, they work against each other.



Far, far less than you seem to think.

You seem to think a billion dollars is a lot of money in this context. If we were to take a billion dollars it would buy approximately half a Big Mac for everyone in the USA, even if you exclude undocumented immigrants. You somehow think this is enough to solve homelessness! It's difficult to fathom how you could be so out of touch with the reality of the figures you're talking about, yet this doesn't stop you from making comments about them as though you deserve to be on some high horse of proportional understanding.



That's nice of them. You love your irrelevant points, don't you? It's cool that despite being unable to make ends meet they're able to feed dozens of children.



Sounds like a reason for America to put America first.



Indeed!



This is irrelevant and repetitive.

So not $1B, how much to end homelessness?

ANd does ending homelessness mean building housing or paying for their rent, giving things away all for free? Or could homelessness be ended through such things as temporary shelter first, then vocational training, creating job opportunities so that people can have a chance to get out of the rud then help themselves.

Depends on how you want to define and solve the situation, costs can be inflated to make it too high to not give a damn.

So it'll costs billions and billions to end homelessness. That's too much. But let's spend that tens of billions on a wall, yeah... let's do that! Totally makes sense.

--------

Well, given the stuff you believe in, I was just being cautious about your comprehension of space and reality.

So it's a good idea to build a "big, beautiful wall" like that of Israel from Melbourne to Cairns. What are you high?

Most countries have "walls" made up of barbed wires and other cheap stuff. Nobody goes and build a wall while the country is in poverty. That's like selling the farm to build the fence.

That's why people who know security relies on gunships, helicopters, coastguards, radar and a military to protect their country and not a wall.

Maybe between your travels, at them airports... flick to alternative news channel or lectures and interviews for your reading. Fox is not a real news network.

 

[Sdajii]

So not $1B, how much to end homelessness?

ANd does ending homelessness mean building housing or paying for their rent, giving things away all for free? Or could homelessness be ended through such things as temporary shelter first, then vocational training, creating job opportunities so that people can have a chance to get out of the rud then help themselves.

Depends on how you want to define and solve the situation, costs can be inflated to make it too high to not give a damn.

So it'll costs billions and billions to end homelessness. That's too much. But let's spend that tens of billions on a wall, yeah... let's do that! Totally makes sense.

Generally this issue takes a generation to solve. People generally need to be taught to live productive lives and make the most of themselves, to be driven and motivated and not useless deadbeats. They need education, etc. Once a person is a homeless adult they're pretty much not ever likely to be productive members of society. We can point out exceptions or fawn over PC bullspit, but this is the reality. If you want to just magically solve homelessness, for the majority, you need to do it through welfare so it's an ongoing cost of whatever you consider the minimum ongoing cost of living is. This figure for over a half a million people needs to be expressed per year not as one single figure, and it's a heck of a lot more than $20B as a one off sum.

Well, given the stuff you believe in, I was just being cautious about your comprehension of space and reality.

Shall I start insulting you according to your own standards? It might be fun, although I'll need crayons and crepe paper.

So it's a good idea to build a "big, beautiful wall" like that of Israel from Melbourne to Cairns. What are you high?

Most countries have "walls" made up of barbed wires and other cheap stuff. Nobody goes and build a wall while the country is in poverty. That's like selling the farm to build the fence.

That's why people who know security relies on gunships, helicopters, coastguards, radar and a military to protect their country and not a wall.

Blah blah blah

Maybe between your travels, at them airports... flick to alternative news channel or lectures and interviews for your reading. Fox is not a real news network.

I generally don't watch Fox News other than something around a few minutes every couple of months when it happens to be on wherever I am. It's stupid, although of course nowhere near as bad as CNN, which is often the only available foreign news network available in many areas I travel in, it's shoved down the throats of many people involuntarily (though often gleefully). It's interesting that you would insult Fox News (not that I will defend it) but support the rhetoric of and apparently be in support of CNN despite it being so incredibly disingenuous and deliberately so. Or is it okay for you to accuse me of being a Fox adherent because I oppose some of the left's insanity but you'll employ a double standard if I say the equivalent of you being on CNN's side? Or, perhaps you're insane enough to actually admire CNN and consider it an actual news source rather than a blatant, disingenuous propaganda pushing tool? It actually wouldn't surprise me that much given the amount of mainstream brainwashing which can clearly been successful on you given what you post in many of the threads here.

 

[luutzu]

Generally this issue takes a generation to solve. People generally need to be taught to live productive lives and make the most of themselves, to be driven and motivated and not useless deadbeats. They need education, etc. Once a person is a homeless adult they're pretty much not ever likely to be productive members of society. We can point out exceptions or fawn over PC bullspit, but this is the reality. If you want to just magically solve homelessness, for the majority, you need to do it through welfare so it's an ongoing cost of whatever you consider the minimum ongoing cost of living is. This figure for over a half a million people needs to be expressed per year not as one single figure, and it's a heck of a lot more than $20B as a one off sum.

For argument's sake, let's say all those who are homeless are deadbeat, lazy, no good bums who didn't pay attention at school. And that to help them will cost good honest taxpayers too much.

How much was Trump's military budget last year? Around $US760 Billion?

How much was the first tax cuts? $1.5 Trillion over ten years. Then another $500B tax cuts from a redefinition of what capital gains is.

There seem to be plenty of cash when wars and bombs got to be dropped; billionaires and shareholders to not at all receive welfare.

But when it comes to feeding and housing the homeless... Who's going to pay for that, right? Where's the money.

Jesus man. You know what they're doing right?

The likes of Trump is driving what little humanity we have. Pitting desperately poor people against more desperate people over crumbs. And some of us just enjoy taking in the bs.

As to why people are homeless... there's a unique story behind every misfortune. Some might come from broken homes. Some make mistakes. Some just never had a chance. Maybe some were given everything but screwed it all up.

Some might even went to war, came back and beside a medal, no shites were given. Mental breakdown, trauma, family break up, no help or assistance... It's all their fault though. Sure.

Just as Trump is a self-made man; or Bush Jr. a god fearing everyday man... they got there because they just work hard and are real smart. Never con anyone; never fail; never take drugs or booze.

What world do you live in to believe that a person's station in life is all of their doing.

Shall I start insulting you according to your own standards? It might be fun, although I'll need crayons and crepe paper.
Blah blah blah

Wasn't an insult if it's a fact. How am I to know you can imagine how long that 5,000 or so Km is.

I mean, if some orange idiot mention fencing "a wall"... doesn't sound too bad. But a wall from Melbourne to Cairns... that's a bit f'ed up isn't it. Rabbit proof fencing or the ones that keeps out zoombies and illegals? 'cause that sounds expensive. Where you going to get the money for that?

Oh... heard that Trump is going to declare a "state of emergency" and then trim back on other useless and unimportant budget to pay for the wall.

Education. Meals for hungry kids. Coast guards... a wall will solve it all.

I generally don't watch Fox News other than something around a few minutes every couple of months when it happens to be on wherever I am. It's stupid, although of course nowhere near as bad as CNN, which is often the only available foreign news network available in many areas I travel in, it's shoved down the throats of many people involuntarily (though often gleefully). It's interesting that you would insult Fox News (not that I will defend it) but support the rhetoric of and apparently be in support of CNN despite it being so incredibly disingenuous and deliberately so. Or is it okay for you to accuse me of being a Fox adherent because I oppose some of the left's insanity but you'll employ a double standard if I say the equivalent of you being on CNN's side? Or, perhaps you're insane enough to actually admire CNN and consider it an actual news source rather than a blatant, disingenuous propaganda pushing tool? It actually wouldn't surprise me that much given the amount of mainstream brainwashing which can clearly been successful on you given what you post in many of the threads here.

You think CNN is the left?

Man, if a news organisation is own by a corporation, chances are 100% it's not a lefty.

 

[noirua]

 

[noirua]

 

[luutzu]

Is it a national security emergency, or is it a humanitarian crisis?

They can't be both, at the same time, cause by the same people.

 

[Sdajii]

For argument's sake, let's say all those who are homeless are deadbeat, lazy, no good bums who didn't pay attention at school. And that to help them will cost good honest taxpayers too much.

Weird that you said this without going on to relate it to anything.

How much was Trump's military budget last year? Around $US760 Billion?

LOL, 'Trump's budget'. You say that like Obama wasn't the biggest warmonger or that the USA was a peaceful nation of people making daisy chains until Trump changed everything.

How much was the first tax cuts? $1.5 Trillion over ten years. Then another $500B tax cuts from a redefinition of what capital gains is.

Makes $20B seem tiny, right? Are you getting any concept of proportion yet?

There seem to be plenty of cash when wars and bombs got to be dropped

Indeed, and by comparison, the funding for the wall is tiny.

But when it comes to feeding and housing the homeless... Who's going to pay for that, right? Where's the money.

Sadly that's a far more expensive thing than the wall. If it wasn't, it would already have been paid for. You say this like you're entirely oblivious to the fact that the USA has already put far more than $20B into looking after the homeless. Or... were you actually unaware of this? Perhaps you actually are that naive come to think of it, since you actually said that far less than the cost of the wall could solve homelessness. Oh, good grief! You actually are that ignorant... wow.

Jesus man. You know what they're doing right?

In light of the above, it occurs to me that you are probably so distanced from reality that I probably have little idea of what you imagine they are doing.

The likes of Trump is driving what little humanity we have. Pitting desperately poor people against more desperate people over crumbs. And some of us just enjoy taking in the bs.

This makes little sense.

As to why people are homeless... there's a unique story behind every misfortune. Some might come from broken homes. Some make mistakes. Some just never had a chance. Maybe some were given everything but screwed it all up.

Whatever. I came from a broken home, grew up watching abuse, blah blah blah, I didn't have family support and as a child I never had parental guidance of any worth, it was close to zero and zero would have been better. I spent the night of my 21st birthday sleeping in my broken down car which was my home at the time. I had no tertiary education or work experience. Someone like me wasn't going to let a bad childhood keep me in the gutter, I dragged myself out of it and now live a really cool lifestyle. I don't think giving me a comfortable full time wage for free for a few years would have helped me when I was 21, it probably would have been an expensive way to keep me down. As soon as that money stopped I would have been back to where I started and had a more difficult time sorting myself out because I had become dependent on welfare.

Some might even went to war, came back and beside a medal, no shites were given. Mental breakdown, trauma, family break up, no help or assistance... It's all their fault though. Sure.

It is what it is. People go through hard times. It's sad, it sucks. Some dig themselves out, some don't have the will or they're too broken. Some people are stronger than others, some encounter better or worse luck. This is irrelevant.

Just as Trump is a self-made man; or Bush Jr. a god fearing everyday man... they got there because they just work hard and are real smart. Never con anyone; never fail; never take drugs or booze.

You have a talent for stating the irrelevant.

What world do you live in to believe that a person's station in life is all of their doing.

Luck is part of it, you pretending I don't understand this doesn't mean I don't actually understand it. It is still irrelevant though.

Wasn't an insult if it's a fact. How am I to know you can imagine how long that 5,000 or so Km is.

Insults can be factual. The depth of your stupidity is quite remarkable. Here's a quick lesson hopefully even you can understand. If a person is stupid and you call them stupid, it is both factual and insulting. "You are fat and disgusting" is a factual insult when directed at a fat, disgusting person.

What a peculiar person you are to think it worthwhile to ask the question of how you could know I can imagine 5,000km is! I don't know how much you know about genetics (I'll take a guess at very little), but that's no reason for me to make the assertion you know nothing. The very fact that I don't have any information guiding me to assess you in this way means that I should not insult you by assuming you know less than average. Again, this is a basic concept and I hope you've been able to learn something here. Hint: It's applicable to any facet of any person you interact with.

I mean, if some orange idiot mention fencing "a wall"... doesn't sound too bad. But a wall from Melbourne to Cairns... that's a bit f'ed up isn't it. Rabbit proof fencing or the ones that keeps out zoombies and illegals? 'cause that sounds expensive. Where you going to get the money for that?

Isn't it funny that you literally feel comfortable enough to insult someone, literally based on the colour of their skin. I mean, one would hope even you would be above this, but I suppose that means one would be disappointed by you. As for the funding, apparently not from Mexico! Apparently by declaring an emergency in order to obtain it from national funds.

Oh... heard that Trump is going to declare a "state of emergency" and then trim back on other useless and unimportant budget to pay for the wall.

Not how I would have worded it, but apparently that's the reality causing you so much grief.

Education. Meals for hungry kids. Coast guards... a wall will solve it all.

Nice strawman! No one made that claim, but thanks for removing any doubt about your complete lack of credibility, just in case anyone was wondering.

You think CNN is the left?

Man, if a news organisation is own by a corporation, chances are 100% it's not a lefty.

This is quite amusing. Okay, I'll play. So if CNN is not left, would you say it is right or centrist? Is Trump right? Is Fox right or left? Do you believe CNN is neutral or pushing an agenda of any sort at all? You you believe CNN is credible?

 

[sptrawler]

The great thing about Trump, whether people like it or not, he is testing the Republic system.

 

[luutzu]

Weird that you said this without going on to relate it to anything.

Weren't you saying that the homeless can't be helped? That they're too far gone, too useless they were helped but just didn't take the help so it will not costs too much to house them?

Something like that?

LOL, 'Trump's budget'. You say that like Obama wasn't the biggest warmonger or that the USA was a peaceful nation of people making daisy chains until Trump changed everything.

Did I ever say Obama was a peacenik?

Trump increased the military budget by about 10% in his first few months. Then in add another $60B on top of that increase in his second year.

Literally, his admin gave more cash than what the generals at the Pentagon was asking for. You can google it.

But ey, priorities.

Makes $20B seem tiny, right? Are you getting any concept of proportion yet?

Indeed, and by comparison, the funding for the wall is tiny.

They just set aside some $1.5B for an estimated 55miles of wall.

US/Mexico border is about 2,000 or 2.5K miles? Say 2K.... that's how much? Assuming it all averages out the same as current budget [which it won't given the terrain, distance from nearest steel manufacturer etc

$1500m / 55 = $27M per mile. Or $54.5B ??

Please check my maths 'cause that sounds like a lot of money.

They wouldn't even put out some $200M to upgrade a damaged potable water system for Flint... literally poisoning the entire city's citizens.

American citizens hair are literally falling off. American kids are literally being poisoned with lead from drinking or having food cooked from corroded pipes and after some 4 years, still not farking fixed like it's not going to kill anybody.

But ey, a border to protect and secure all Americans.

What a joke.

Sadly that's a far more expensive thing than the wall. If it wasn't, it would already have been paid for. You say this like you're entirely oblivious to the fact that the USA has already put far more than $20B into looking after the homeless. Or... were you actually unaware of this? Perhaps you actually are that naive come to think of it, since you actually said that far less than the cost of the wall could solve homelessness. Oh, good grief! You actually are that ignorant... wow.

Have they?
Why not show us the figures. And don't tell me it's over decades.

But I supposed they've tried and have failed. So let's give up on it like they gave up on trickle down economics where tax cuts to the rich didn't create any jobs but try and try again anyway.

In light of the above, it occurs to me that you are probably so distanced from reality that I probably have little idea of what you imagine they are doing.

This makes little sense.

Whatever. I came from a broken home, grew up watching abuse, blah blah blah, I didn't have family support and as a child I never had parental guidance of any worth, it was close to zero and zero would have been better. I spent the night of my 21st birthday sleeping in my broken down car which was my home at the time. I had no tertiary education or work experience. Someone like me wasn't going to let a bad childhood keep me in the gutter, I dragged myself out of it and now live a really cool lifestyle. I don't think giving me a comfortable full time wage for free for a few years would have helped me when I was 21, it probably would have been an expensive way to keep me down. As soon as that money stopped I would have been back to where I started and had a more difficult time sorting myself out because I had become dependent on welfare.

Imagine what a little bit of good parenting could have done for you.

But sure, tough love's what needed. It turn kids out real nice.

The Yanks have done better though. No heat at school. No food for their welfare Queen mums. Lots of prisons for petty crimes though.

And ey, if you're ever a teacher and one of your primary school students caught a viral infection that could be life threatening if not treated... and the kid can't be treated because his parent doesn't have health insurance... and God forbid you lie to an insurance company, saying that the kid is your kid so he could be treated. You'll be sued and possibly face prison time.

Stealing hundreds of billions though and you'll get to have trillions more to play with.

It is what it is. People go through hard times. It's sad, it sucks. Some dig themselves out, some don't have the will or they're too broken. Some people are stronger than others, some encounter better or worse luck. This is irrelevant.

Maybe you like your tax dollars going towards worthy welfare receipients like billionaires and corporations. I prefer mine to help those in dire need no matter if it's their own fault, society's or just bad luck.

Different people, different preferences.

You have a talent for stating the irrelevant.

Luck is part of it, you pretending I don't understand this doesn't mean I don't actually understand it. It is still irrelevant though.

meh.

Insults can be factual. The depth of your stupidity is quite remarkable. Here's a quick lesson hopefully even you can understand. If a person is stupid and you call them stupid, it is both factual and insulting. "You are fat and disgusting" is a factual insult when directed at a fat, disgusting person.

What a peculiar person you are to think it worthwhile to ask the question of how you could know I can imagine 5,000km is! I don't know how much you know about genetics (I'll take a guess at very little), but that's no reason for me to make the assertion you know nothing. The very fact that I don't have any information guiding me to assess you in this way means that I should not insult you by assuming you know less than average. Again, this is a basic concept and I hope you've been able to learn something here. Hint: It's applicable to any facet of any person you interact with.

Well, I take that back. Seeing how you can obviously picture how far thousands of miles is but still reckon it's a good idea to walled all that distance... must be some kind of special.

Isn't it funny that you literally feel comfortable enough to insult someone, literally based on the colour of their skin. I mean, one would hope even you would be above this, but I suppose that means one would be disappointed by you. As for the funding, apparently not from Mexico! Apparently by declaring an emergency in order to obtain it from national funds.

What colour is Trump's skin? Orange or is he white? I was insulting his unique brand of pizz orange.

Well, no kidding Mexico is not going to pay for it.

Good luck with the Wall though...

You do realise that Trump and his team of warriors is about to liberate the heck out of Venezuela right.

Do you seriously think the Venezuelans will just sit by and let a foreign-backed douche they never heard of before self-declared himself "interim president", be president? Then backed out quietly if the US send in the marines?

Saddam Hussein was a total complete a-holes. He was a real dictator who butchered his own people. Most Iraqis hates him.

Even then, the US have a nightmare in Iraq.

Venezuela is democratic. Its elections were approved by the UN and other western organisations as fair... its gov't, flawed as they might be, aren't exactly butchering dissenters or locking up activists.

To now go in and reckon the people will sit by and welcome with open arms. Might God...

If the US think they got an illegal immigration problem now, wait til this coming war drags on and spreads all over Latin America.

Didn't do too well for Europe once Libya was liberated and its borders open, letting thru refugees in the overflow camps into Europe.

Trump's team predicted this, hence the wall. But good luck with a wall stopping desperate people fleeing another series of wars.

Not how I would have worded it, but apparently that's the reality causing you so much grief.

Nice strawman! No one made that claim, but thanks for removing any doubt about your complete lack of credibility, just in case anyone was wondering.

This is quite amusing. Okay, I'll play. So if CNN is not left, would you say it is right or centrist? Is Trump right? Is Fox right or left? Do you believe CNN is neutral or pushing an agenda of any sort at all? You you believe CNN is credible?

I don't watch or read news for their commentaries and opinions. I prefer to read the news wires.

 

[Sdajii]

Weren't you saying that the homeless can't be helped? That they're too far gone, too useless they were helped but just didn't take the help so it will not costs too much to house them?

Something like that?

You're exaggerating, but the point was that you can't simply solve the country's homeless problem by asking the whole population for a one off donation of half the cost of a Big Mac. Regardless of what you do with that money, it won't work. Even if you gave them a million dollars each you would only solve homelessness for a short time. But what I was saying here is that you didn't relate it to anything. So, was your point simply to agree with me? Okay, at least you've learned something. If not, as usual, your statement was irrelevant.

Did I ever say Obama was a peacenik?

No, but you said 'Trump's military budget' as though Trump was anomalous in increasing military spending. Which President decreased military spending? Looking over time, has US military spending been increasing or decreasing? So, yeah, obviously Trump increased it. Hillary Clinton would have, Obama did, if any ever don't they're very unusual exceptions, yet, you speak of Trump like he's doing something others wouldn't or haven't.

Literally, his admin gave more cash than what the generals at the Pentagon was asking for. You can google it.

Why would I google it? The only times you make any sense I already agree with you.

But ey, priorities.

You realise what would happen to the USA if it didn't have the world's biggest military, right?

Oh, wait, you literally thought everyone donating $3 would end homelessness. Why would I assume any capability in you?

They just set aside some $1.5B for an estimated 55miles of wall.

US/Mexico border is about 2,000 or 2.5K miles? Say 2K.... that's how much? Assuming it all averages out the same as current budget [which it won't given the terrain, distance from nearest steel manufacturer etc

$1500m / 55 = $27M per mile. Or $54.5B ??

Please check my maths 'cause that sounds like a lot of money.
[/quote]

Presumably the cost of the wall in different areas will be different due to remoteness/transport/labour costs, etc. Also presumably the first sections will be more expensive than the last. Most grownups understand basic concepts like these, and I encourage you to try too

They wouldn't even put out some $200M to upgrade a damaged potable water system for Flint... literally poisoning the entire city's citizens.

Ah, the cherry picking game. You're such a bad debater it's almost cute.

American citizens hair are literally falling off. American kids are literally being poisoned with lead from drinking or having food cooked from corroded pipes and after some 4 years, still not farking fixed like it's not going to kill anybody.

Pulling out the emotional manipulation card along with cherry picking and irrelevance. Nice!

But ey, a border to protect and secure all Americans.

That's what was voted for in the democratic election, yep.

What a joke.

Indeed you are.

Have they?
Why not show us the figures. And don't tell me it's over decades.

So you simultaneously want to compare a one off building cost with an ongoing homelessness cost, and then cry when your own stupid standards are used? Or did you actually think a one off donation of half a Big Mac would solve homelessness?

But I supposed they've tried and have failed. So let's give up on it like they gave up on trickle down economics where tax cuts to the rich didn't create any jobs but try and try again anyway.

You whinge a lot about the tax cuts for someone on an investment forum. I'd explain the concept to you, but these posts are already too long and you wouldn't believe it even if you were capable of understanding it. But if you feel inclined and have a grownup who can explain it to you, do some research into it.

Imagine what a little bit of good parenting could have done for you.

But sure, tough love's what needed. It turn kids out real nice.

Funny how when something shoots your point down you change the context and make it irrelevant, distracting from the issue.

The Yanks have done better though. No heat at school. No food for their welfare Queen mums. Lots of prisons for petty crimes though.

You sure make a lot of irrelevant whinges.

And ey, if you're ever a teacher and one of your primary school students caught a viral infection that could be life threatening if not treated... and the kid can't be treated because his parent doesn't have health insurance... and God forbid you lie to an insurance company, saying that the kid is your kid so he could be treated. You'll be sued and possibly face prison time.

You sure make a lot of irrelevant whinges.

Maybe you like your tax dollars going towards worthy welfare receipients like billionaires and corporations. I prefer mine to help those in dire need no matter if it's their own fault, society's or just bad luck.

Different people, different preferences.

Another irrelevant stawman. Nonsensical too! Nice!

What colour is Trump's skin? Orange or is he white? I was insulting his unique brand of pizz orange.

Ah, okay, so you're defending that sort of body image shaming. Gotcha.

Well, no kidding Mexico is not going to pay for it.

Heh heh heh, yeah, Trump was totally full of $#!t on that one!

Good luck with the Wall though...

You say that like it's my wall or something.

You do realise that Trump and his team of warriors is about to liberate the heck out of Venezuela right.

Yep. I'm literally banking on it.

Do you seriously think the Venezuelans will just sit by and let a foreign-backed douche they never heard of before self-declared himself "interim president", be president? Then backed out quietly if the US send in the marines?

Are you even trying to relate this to anything relevant?

Saddam Hussein was a total complete a-holes. He was a real dictator who butchered his own people. Most Iraqis hates him.

Are you playing 'who can be the most irrelevant?' I think you're winning.

Even then, the US have a nightmare in Iraq.

Another point to Luutzu!

Venezuela is democratic. Its elections were approved by the UN and other western organisations as fair... its gov't, flawed as they might be, aren't exactly butchering dissenters or locking up activists.

Jesus, I don't know how to score this game but you must be doing extremely well!

To now go in and reckon the people will sit by and welcome with open arms. Might God...

It's okay, you win.

If the US think they got an illegal immigration problem now, wait til this coming war drags on and spreads all over Latin America.

It's okay, I hear their president is building a wall to deal with this issue, but I guess you tried to relate it to something. It doesn't quite work, but you definitely lose some points in that irrelevancy game by attempting to relate it back. Sorry.

Didn't do too well for Europe once Libya was liberated and its borders open, letting thru refugees in the overflow camps into Europe.

They will freely allowed in. Trump wants to build a wall to keep them out, have policies to assess them, etc.

Trump's team predicted this, hence the wall. But good luck with a wall stopping desperate people fleeing another series of wars.

Hey, I think we'll get to see it being tested.

I don't watch or read news for their commentaries and opinions. I prefer to read the news wires.

Refusing to comment when pulled up on saying something utterly ridiculous. Quite like you.

 

[luutzu]

You're exaggerating, but the point was that you can't simply solve the country's homeless problem by asking the whole population for a one off donation of half the cost of a Big Mac. Regardless of what you do with that money, it won't work. Even if you gave them a million dollars each you would only solve homelessness for a short time. But what I was saying here is that you didn't relate it to anything. So, was your point simply to agree with me? Okay, at least you've learned something. If not, as usual, your statement was irrelevant.

No, but you said 'Trump's military budget' as though Trump was anomalous in increasing military spending. Which President decreased military spending? Looking over time, has US military spending been increasing or decreasing? So, yeah, obviously Trump increased it. Hillary Clinton would have, Obama did, if any ever don't they're very unusual exceptions, yet, you speak of Trump like he's doing something others wouldn't or haven't.

....

Where did I say Trump was the only president that increases the military budget?

Merely pointing out that in two years, he added to it about $150B [some $50B extra first year; top up another $50 second...]

That and the tax cuts, the stupid wall... All that was to show how ridiculous it is for you to say there's not enough money to help the homeless, or the poor, or the sick.

Oh look... costs to end "chronic" homelessness about $1B a year. End all homelessness, $10B.

"About 3.5 million Americans will experience homelessness at some point in time, but only about a half-million are homeless at any given time, and roughly 87,000 of these are chronically homeless. By some estimates, housing a homeless person and providing them with a caseworker to see to their needs costs about $10,000 a year. That means for less than a billion dollars a year, chronic homelessness could be ended in the U.S. If temporarily homeless people were housed in temporary housing, and if each temporary residence were occupied half the time, homelessness of all kinds could be eliminated for about $10 billion a year. That’s less than a seventh of what the government spends on food stamps."
-- Bloomberg


But sure, it won't work. So let's stop trying.

If you have Netflix, watch the last episode of Dirty Money. It's about Trump and his BS.

The douche never gave a crap about anybody but himself. But now that he's the president, that's all changed and he cares a heck of a lot for all Americans.

Since you believe that, believe you me I got a Harbour Bridge you can buy.

 

[noirua]

Is it a national security emergency, or is it a humanitarian crisis?

They can't be both, at the same time, cause by the same people.

The real emergency from America's point of view evolves around drugs being brought across the border through Mexico from Colombia. Note the Colombian President's visit to the Whitehouse to see The Donald. Stopping the drugs reduces the violence and illegals making their way into America from the South.

A metal wall isn't really anything other than time needed and traffickers having to have quality steel blades to cut through it. The present old walls take less than two minutes to penetrate and the new steel barrier about 20 minutes - depending on the quality of the blades and battery drive.

It also means far less troops will be needed and a reduction in the horse backed riders having to chase those bringing drugs in.

 

[Sdajii]

I notice your cowardly avoidance of all the nonsense points you made being addressed, but anyway...

Where did I say Trump was the only president that increases the military budget?

You stated Trump did it. They all do it. Why bother pointing it out? What point were you attempting to make?

That and the tax cuts, the stupid wall... All that was to show how ridiculous it is for you to say there's not enough money to help the homeless, or the poor, or the sick.

I'm not sure if you didn't attempt to think this through or you're not capable of it, but I suspect the latter so I won't bother trying to explain.

Oh look... costs to end "chronic" homelessness about $1B a year. End all homelessness, $10B.

"About 3.5 million Americans will experience homelessness at some point in time, but only about a half-million are homeless at any given time, and roughly 87,000 of these are chronically homeless. By some estimates, housing a homeless person and providing them with a caseworker to see to their needs costs about $10,000 a year. That means for less than a billion dollars a year, chronic homelessness could be ended in the U.S. If temporarily homeless people were housed in temporary housing, and if each temporary residence were occupied half the time, homelessness of all kinds could be eliminated for about $10 billion a year. That’s less than a seventh of what the government spends on food stamps."
-- Bloomberg

Right, so you find some absolute garbage to quote from the internet. I mean, the internet is very big and if you just want to play by cherry picking quotes which agree with you, there's really not much point.

You probably are incapable of and/or will refuse to understand this, but in case anyone else is bothering to read this and it's relevant to someone, here's a quick analogy to the concept of welfare.

If you look at a forest it's full of animals. They all live by doing their thing, hunting or gathering or chasing down a host to parasitise or whatever it is they do for a living. A few for various reasons can't manage and they die. If you come along and start giving free food to these animals, the first ones to take it will be the crappy ones which were struggling, and they'll often end up having babies which will also be dependent. You'll also be attracting more and more animals to the free feed source and they will forget how to do their thing and become dependent. The number of animals living on the free handouts will continue to grow as long as this happens and you will only be making things worse the longer you do it.

This is why ecologists, park rangers, etc etc, say 'don't feed the animals'.

Are you clever enough to see how this relates to chronic welfare?

Now, I'm not saying that welfare shouldn't exist in a species like the human. It has its place. But, dealing with homelessness by simply giving people enough money in a chronic supply so that they're no longer homeless is not a good form of welfare, it is counter productive both in terms of the effect it has on the recipients (with a few exceptions, but certainly on the whole it does more harm than good) and the budget. It without doubt will continually increase the longer the policy of giving free money to homeless people so that they won't be homeless exists.

But sure, it won't work. So let's stop trying.

Fortunately, we're not trying to the same level of counterproductive insanity that you want, but unfortunately we are already doing it enough that it's a problem.

As I said, I'm not against welfare. If it's done properly it is effective and inexpensive. I'm currently in Thailand and they actually have a really fantastic welfare system here. It would be unpalatable to bleeding hearts like yourself because it's cheap and effective which means the people brainwashing you don't want it because it would solve the problem, but basically, welfare is never available to people who aren't Thai citizens (and if you weren't born here you'll never be eligible), and if you're in a position where you're down and out, no money, no home, no job, the government will let you sleep and eat for free at a temple (you'll be on a mat on the floor in a temple, but it's safe, you'll be eating very basic food, but it'll keep you going), you'll do work while you're there (whatever they feel like getting you to do), and the government will get you a job according to your capability - if you're skilled and smart it'll be something good, if you're not so bright you'll be literally sweeping the street or something, but you'll get enough money to survive. If at any point you don't like it, you're welcome to sleep on the street.

This system would actually solve homelessness for anyone who doesn't want to be homeless at a far lower cost than the welfare system of the USA (or Australia).

If you have Netflix, watch the last episode of Dirty Money. It's about Trump and his BS.

I have no interest in ever having a Netflix account. I do however already watch a mix of pro and anti Trump nonsense on various sources, as well as other political propaganda. You clearly live in an echo chamber and probably assume I think Trump is perfect.

The douche never gave a crap about anybody but himself. But now that he's the president, that's all changed and he cares a heck of a lot for all Americans.

I think there's some truth in him never caring about anyone other than himself, as is the case to a similar extent with almost all politicians (again, you single Trump out inappropriately), but Trump's motivation for becoming president, as is clearly to be seen if you bother to research it in a meaningful way rather than to blindly follow what is thrown at you in your echo chamber, is that Trump's empire is in the USA, if the USA fails or falters, his empire is screwed, and he wanted to come along as save the USA from being destroyed. Of course he is going to do what he can for himself while he's there, you'd be an idiot to fail to see that. Which president hasn't been that way? Which Australian PM hasn't? But, like some and unlike others, he genuinely does want the USA to be prosperous and isn't willing to disproportionately hurt the country for his own gain, and in this way he is relatively unusual (especially compared to Obama, the Clintons, and quite arguably the Bush family).

Since you believe that, believe you me I got a Harbour Bridge you can buy.

It's funny, isn't it? Blindly believing what you are told is such a way of life for you that you assume I am the same, and you also jump right to the incorrect assumption that I believe Trump is a perfect person or something. Do you honestly think I thought he'd changed who he was or that I think he's a perfect role model or something?

 

[luutzu]

The real emergency from America's point of view evolves around drugs being brought across the border through Mexico from Colombia. Note the Colombian President's visit to the Whitehouse to see The Donald. Stopping the drugs reduces the violence and illegals making their way into America from the South.

A metal wall isn't really anything other than time needed and traffickers having to have quality steel blades to cut through it. The present old walls take less than two minutes to penetrate and the new steel barrier about 20 minutes - depending on the quality of the blades and battery drive.

It also means far less troops will be needed and a reduction in the horse backed riders having to chase those bringing drugs in.

Heard from news report that most illicit drugs entered the US hidden in cars driving through legal ports of entry.

The rest, I'm guessing, were thru tunnels and known mules.

It doesn't make sense to hand over packs of drugs to some refugee who might not even make it through the desert.

It's organised crime you know.

That and the US current opiod crisis is not cause by these cokes. They're caused by the legal ones, produced in China under license by this billionaire family who's donating to modern art museums and all other good charities from money their company got from lying to GPs and hospitals about how safe and non-additive it is.

I'm not kidding, you can look it up.

The illegal drug and its users... Not Trump, not Clinton, not Obama give a damn about those. In fact, most of those drugs are used by poor black and brown people... and that's why Clinton privatised prisons and fill them up with poor trash.

 

[luutzu]

I notice your cowardly avoidance of all the nonsense points you made being addressed, but anyway...



You stated Trump did it. They all do it. Why bother pointing it out? What point were you attempting to make?



I'm not sure if you didn't attempt to think this through or you're not capable of it, but I suspect the latter so I won't bother trying to explain.



Right, so you find some absolute garbage to quote from the internet. I mean, the internet is very big and if you just want to play by cherry picking quotes which agree with you, there's really not much point.

You probably are incapable of and/or will refuse to understand this, but in case anyone else is bothering to read this and it's relevant to someone, here's a quick analogy to the concept of welfare.

If you look at a forest it's full of animals. They all live by doing their thing, hunting or gathering or chasing down a host to parasitise or whatever it is they do for a living. A few for various reasons can't manage and they die. If you come along and start giving free food to these animals, the first ones to take it will be the crappy ones which were struggling, and they'll often end up having babies which will also be dependent. You'll also be attracting more and more animals to the free feed source and they will forget how to do their thing and become dependent. The number of animals living on the free handouts will continue to grow as long as this happens and you will only be making things worse the longer you do it.

This is why ecologists, park rangers, etc etc, say 'don't feed the animals'.

Are you clever enough to see how this relates to chronic welfare?

Now, I'm not saying that welfare shouldn't exist in a species like the human. It has its place. But, dealing with homelessness by simply giving people enough money in a chronic supply so that they're no longer homeless is not a good form of welfare, it is counter productive both in terms of the effect it has on the recipients (with a few exceptions, but certainly on the whole it does more harm than good) and the budget. It without doubt will continually increase the longer the policy of giving free money to homeless people so that they won't be homeless exists.



Fortunately, we're not trying to the same level of counterproductive insanity that you want, but unfortunately we are already doing it enough that it's a problem.

As I said, I'm not against welfare. If it's done properly it is effective and inexpensive. I'm currently in Thailand and they actually have a really fantastic welfare system here. It would be unpalatable to bleeding hearts like yourself because it's cheap and effective which means the people brainwashing you don't want it because it would solve the problem, but basically, welfare is never available to people who aren't Thai citizens (and if you weren't born here you'll never be eligible), and if you're in a position where you're down and out, no money, no home, no job, the government will let you sleep and eat for free at a temple (you'll be on a mat on the floor in a temple, but it's safe, you'll be eating very basic food, but it'll keep you going), you'll do work while you're there (whatever they feel like getting you to do), and the government will get you a job according to your capability - if you're skilled and smart it'll be something good, if you're not so bright you'll be literally sweeping the street or something, but you'll get enough money to survive. If at any point you don't like it, you're welcome to sleep on the street.

This system would actually solve homelessness for anyone who doesn't want to be homeless at a far lower cost than the welfare system of the USA (or Australia).



I have no interest in ever having a Netflix account. I do however already watch a mix of pro and anti Trump nonsense on various sources, as well as other political propaganda. You clearly live in an echo chamber and probably assume I think Trump is perfect.



I think there's some truth in him never caring about anyone other than himself, as is the case to a similar extent with almost all politicians (again, you single Trump out inappropriately), but Trump's motivation for becoming president, as is clearly to be seen if you bother to research it in a meaningful way rather than to blindly follow what is thrown at you in your echo chamber, is that Trump's empire is in the USA, if the USA fails or falters, his empire is screwed, and he wanted to come along as save the USA from being destroyed. Of course he is going to do what he can for himself while he's there, you'd be an idiot to fail to see that. Which president hasn't been that way? Which Australian PM hasn't? But, like some and unlike others, he genuinely does want the USA to be prosperous and isn't willing to disproportionately hurt the country for his own gain, and in this way he is relatively unusual (especially compared to Obama, the Clintons, and quite arguably the Bush family).



It's funny, isn't it? Blindly believing what you are told is such a way of life for you that you assume I am the same, and you also jump right to the incorrect assumption that I believe Trump is a perfect person or something. Do you honestly think I thought he'd changed who he was or that I think he's a perfect role model or something?

Maybe I ignore because they're irrelevant? And I have better things to do?

I best not reply to most of what you say 'cause it'll get me pretty upset.

"don't feed the animals"... did you just refer to homeless and poor people as animals? wtf man?

And sure, Trump cares for the country and its people.

I think that speaks for itself there.

 

[Sdajii]

Maybe I ignore because they're irrelevant? And I have better things to do?

It's funny that you would call it 'irrelevant' when your misinformation is called out!

I best not reply to most of what you say 'cause it'll get me pretty upset.

Yes, people who base their beliefs on dogma and emotion rather than logic and evidence are usually upset when forced to face reality. I can see why it would upset you to be confronted with it.

"don't feed the animals"... did you just refer to homeless and poor people as animals? wtf man?

No, I didn't. Do you not understand what an analogy is or are you being deliberately disingenuous? Once again, you find a stupid excuse to avoid facing how incredibly wrong and destructive your ideas are, and you do so by employing one of your usual strategies (a strawman in this case, once of your favourites).

 

[noirua]

Few people are 100% narcissists but beware a person who fits or nearly fits every box: https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/ss/slideshow-mental-narcissism?ecd=wnl_spr_021519_REMAIL&ctr=wnl-spr-021519-REMAIL_nsl-LeadModule_cta&mb=rdkRubj8zXFn4Y9Sa6bseuHnVev1imbCexA6bcodQzU=

 

[noirua]

WASHINGTON -- President Trump said Wednesday he would impose auto tariffs on the European Union if a trade deal can't be reached between the two sides, as tensions over trade between the traditional allies continue to build.
https://uk.advfn.com/stock-market/s...ump-continues-to-weigh-eu-auto-tariffs-update

 

[noirua]

 

[Tink]