|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 28, 2016 4:38:57 GMT -6
Tman talking about your nominee on the left Hillary and your backing and defending of such, when,You stated why should they be immune to such?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 28, 2016 7:22:13 GMT -6
you defend your man Donald Trump
I'll back Bernie
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 28, 2016 15:37:50 GMT -6
I do not need to defend anyone. But thanks. Hillary and Bernie supporters have plenty to worry about on their own.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 29, 2016 7:15:28 GMT -6
no you won't defend anyone- but you are first in line to be negative about everyone
why is that? Do you vote? sounds like you don't since you state you don't need to support anyone lack of convictions?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 29, 2016 17:02:08 GMT -6
Sure I vote in many elections. Convictions really? I have plenty of those as well. What have we been talking about all this time?
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 30, 2016 6:37:25 GMT -6
so you do have convictions-
lets see if you stand by them-
who do you support, if not Donald trump?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 30, 2016 16:21:19 GMT -6
My convictions are mine not anyone persons. I look at candidates for any office and they must pass my convictions test before they will ever get my vote!
If your anti gun, anti free enterprise, anti freedoms of choice, if your into bigger central govts and not smaller, then you will not get my vote.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Mar 31, 2016 7:22:06 GMT -6
who gets your vote? why so afraid to make your, according to you strong, convictions out for all to see?
lets see- the GOP under their last president was anti gun, the GOP is anti choice, and their hero Ronald Reagan raised taxes and increase govt more than any recent president-
so-
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 31, 2016 18:51:20 GMT -6
Sorry but your anti rhetoric on Reagan is not the entire facts.
The following table shows the number of government employees, total population and the GE/P Ratio. It essentially takes a snapshot at the end of each presidents term and compares it to the point when they took office.
End of Term
Date
# Government Employees (GE)
Population (P)
GE/P Ratio
Obama Dec. 2012
21,925
315,255
6.9%
GW Bush Dec. 2008
22,555
306,004
7.4%
Clinton Dec. 2000
20,804
283,696
7.3%
GHW Bush Dec. 1992
18,878
258,413
7.3%
Reagan Dec. 1988
17,736
246,056
7.2%
Notice how the GE/P Ratio held steady for Obama’s predecessors, hovering around 7.3%. However, by the end of Obama’s first term, the ratio fell to 6.9%, a decrease of 7% from the end of the Bush era. To glean the full picture, we’ll need to look at the percentage increase for the population and for the number of government employees. If the population increases by a rate similar to the increase in government employment, that would be expected. From 1980 to 2008, the percentage increase in total government employees at the end of each of their terms (compared to when they took office), was between 6.4% and 10.2%. This is relatively close to the percentage increase in the population over the same period (5.0% to 9.8%). However, during Obama’s first term, the population increased by 3.0% while the number of government employees fell by 7%. This is the reason for the decline in the GE/P Ratio shown above.
End of Term
Date
% Increase in GE
% Increase in P
GE/P Ratio
Obama Dec. 2012
-2.8%
3.0%
6.9%
GW Bush Dec. 2008
8.4%
7.9%
7.4%
Clinton Dec. 2000
10.2%
9.8%
7.3%
GHW Bush Dec. 1992
6.4%
5.0%
7.3%
Reagan Dec. 1988
8.3%
7.6%
7.2%
This decline is largely a result of the financial crisis. With revenue in shorter supply, state governments which have a mandate to balance their budgets, cut staff.
Conclusion
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 31, 2016 18:53:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Mar 31, 2016 18:58:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 1, 2016 11:09:27 GMT -6
Under Reagan, the national debt almost tripled, from $907 billion in 1980 to $2.6 trillion in 1988 Under Reagan, the federal workforce increased by about 324,000 to almost 5.3 million people. (The new hires weren't just soldiers to fight the communists, either: uniformed military personnel only accounted for 26 percent of the increase.) In 2012, the federal government employed almost a million fewer people than it did in the last year of Reagan's presidency. chart you shouldn't look at: www.politicususa.com/2012/06/26/comparing-employment-levels-government-reagan-obama.html
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 2, 2016 7:07:53 GMT -6
2.6 trillion LOL. Obama increased it by 6 times that amount! Even with the advent of the i ternet no way Bill Clinton could have eaten away 20 trillion in debt! Reagan also never had 1/5 people on gotvt assistance either. Give me the 80's over today anytime. We had a strong nation, lower u employment, more FT than PT jobs. Obama care has added millions of PT jobs and has taken away FT jobs. The magic number of 30 hrs per week. Reagan was a job creator and also need the Cold War and down go came the wall in Germany among many other things. Reagan was a visionary and a much better oresident than Obama could have ever thought to be. He also took inflation from 10 percent in 1980 to 4 percent by the end of his term. He also created more GDP per person as well and productivity of workers was higher as well. 324,000 over 8 years? Ok. Yet you think the military had little to do with such? He increased the military budget by a lot . In 2012 the govt had to cut back for obvious reasons. I am using govt numbers and your using some Liberial website to show Obama versus Reagan head to head LOL. This is a break down of govt and private sector jobs created by all presidents. From a much better source than your left biased one. www.truthfulpolitics.com/http:/truthfulpolitics.com/comments/u-s-job-creation-by-president-political-party/
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 2, 2016 7:08:59 GMT -6
and I'm done with this one as well-
you can have the table any shape you want
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 2, 2016 7:33:49 GMT -6
Tman the table is shaped by the true numbers. You see I give you govt sourced numbers and you counter with a Liberial biased web site. I am trying to keep this as unbiased as I can. I am not afraid of the true numbers at all. I know under Reagan our country was far,far better off than under Carter or Clinton. Now clintons numbers are something to really look at, but yet we have to account for a major boon in what is the Internet as that put billions and billions into our economy. Times where surely good on that front for many, but we had nothing like it past or present, so we know wonder why Obama has the bet to 20 trillion dollars?
Simple out govt needs to account for every dollar in and out and. Quit borrowing money with no backing. The word inflation has not been used in many years, I trust in the FACT that when it does come back and it will have too, we haven't seen nothing yet! Keeping inflation at bay is not good for the country, as look at returns on investments, super low and at some point inflation will have to rear its head and will leave many in real trouble.
We have to start cutting away at the debt and not adding to it, even if low amounts, we certainly cannot keep adding to it, this I know for sure.
The entire ideas of the left to raise more taxation for more social programs is ludicrous at best. We will still have super big debt and people will just have less and less to spend on things, it will go to a central govt to control and divide out as it seee's fit. Not a good plan at all. With no regard to spending caps it even thinking about a balanced budget, the end results will stifle productivity and job growth. It really is not that hard to see at all.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 2, 2016 7:35:09 GMT -6
Yet again we get sidetracked from the topic of who is the best choice for pro gun people LOL?
Again I will vote for no one who wants to end freedoms of the 2nd amendment. I am all for instant background checks and the things states like SD and Other right leaning states are doing for the legal gun owner, making it a faster and more complete process to purchase firearms, I will not vote for anyone with the mindset of people like California or NY or Illinois as they take away more choices and freedoms for ZERO gain on the gun violence issues.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Apr 9, 2016 9:07:08 GMT -6
and I'll never vote for anyone that has your mindset-
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Apr 11, 2016 23:55:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Apr 11, 2016 23:57:29 GMT -6
"Hillary and Bernie supporters have plenty to worry about on their own."
Not nearly as much as Trump and Cruz supporters. Those two are just plain scary!
Pam
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Apr 12, 2016 5:02:07 GMT -6
The liberials did one thing right with all of their anti gun rhetoric over the last 8 years and with Hillary and Bernie continuing on with such talks the gun industry is only becoming a lager force to deal with.
Firearms Industry Economic Impact Rises 158% Since 2008
NEWTOWN, Conn. - The total economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the United States increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $49.3 billion in 2015, a 158 percent increase, while the total number of full-time equivalent jobs rose from approximately 166,000 to almost 288,000, a 73 percent increase in that period, according to a report released today by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the industry's trade association.
On a year-over-year basis, the industry's economic impact rose from $43 billion in 2014 to $49.3 in 2015, a nearly 15 percent increase while total jobs increased from approximately 263,000 to almost 288,000, a 9 percent increase in the same period.
"Our industry is proud to be one of the truly bright spots in our economy as an unprecedented number of Americans have chosen to exercise their fundamental right to keep and bear arms and to safely enjoy the shooting sports," said Stephen L. Sanetti, NSSF president and chief executive officer. "In response to that dynamic, we have increased our direct workforce by about 21,000 in the last two years alone, adding jobs that pay an average of more than $50,000 in wages and benefits. In addition, since 2008 we increased federal tax payments by 144 percent, Pittman-Robertson excise taxes that support wildlife conservation by 92 percent and state business taxes by 96 percent."
The Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report: 2016 provides a state-by-state breakdown of job numbers, wages and output covering direct, supplier and induced employment, as well as federal excise taxes paid. Access the full report here.
About NSSF The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 13,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, visit nssf.org.
|
|