Sadly, we will all be paying for it. (I should add that I’m Canadian, so I won’t be paying for it the same way you guys will. But Trump probably gets a little egg on his face from this, and an embarrassed Trump will be an (even more) unhinged Trump who will probably restart tariffs, which I will then be paying for….as will all of you).
It's a great bill, the only problem is the lawmakers who have no spine to cut spending where they know it needs to be cut...SS, Medicare, and Medicaid.
'cause taking healthcare away from seniors and kids is dumb. That's why there's only so much you can cut there: ultimately taxes have to rise if anyone actually gives a damn about dealing with the debt
Maybe you might say the bill DT would have wanted would have been great. Or some other iteration of it that doesn’t involve a 2.3T deficit. But the one that’s actually happening is going to be a debacle.
Ask yourself what you would say if a Dem WH and congress passed a bill with those numbers. Would you not be apoplectic?
I'm not trying to wave away the "but for," I'm saying that at some point, probably sooner than many realize, the 3-headed monster will HAVE to be dealt with. You can kick the can down the road only so far, then you have a dead end.
Continuing tax breaks and even building on them for the ultrarich are just insane. Are you surviving on Social Security Cameron? Do you currently have Medicare? I can tell you we are barely getting by and we are terrified what these cuts to Medicare would mean to being able to find a provider that’s willing to accept lower payments.
I'm on SS but I'm against it in principle because it has been a big ponzi scheme. Not on Medicare yet, but if I could choose to not accept it, I would. And why be terrified if these programs would be cut, or go away altogether? God will provide, and even if He doesn't, there is a verse in the book of Job that says, "though He slay me, yet will I trust Him."
Relevant here: "we’re all going to die, but it matters a great deal when, how and why. There’s a tremendous difference between dying after living a long and full life that’s enabled at least in part by access to decent health care, and dying a premature and perhaps needlessly painful death because you can’t afford the care you need."
Of course, a big part of the problem is that we have slaughtered some 70 million people who could have contributed over the years to the solvency of these programs, but in any case, they are doomed to failure because they were never sustainable over time.
I am making popcorn and enjoying the show. It really is too bad we the people are the real losers in this.
This will be a great show.
Sadly, we will all be paying for it. (I should add that I’m Canadian, so I won’t be paying for it the same way you guys will. But Trump probably gets a little egg on his face from this, and an embarrassed Trump will be an (even more) unhinged Trump who will probably restart tariffs, which I will then be paying for….as will all of you).
It's a great bill, the only problem is the lawmakers who have no spine to cut spending where they know it needs to be cut...SS, Medicare, and Medicaid.
'cause taking healthcare away from seniors and kids is dumb. That's why there's only so much you can cut there: ultimately taxes have to rise if anyone actually gives a damn about dealing with the debt
Taxes do not have to rise if those dumb programs are eliminated. In fact, the 16th amendment could, and should, be repealed.
Go ahead and run on that - see how it works.
I know, too many people like to suck at the teat of big government...
Really: run on explicitly removing care from kids, the elderly, and the disabled - all while claiming to be a Christian. Let me know how that works.
Christians DO have an obligation to help kids, the elderly and the disabled, but the government doesn't.
It’s projected to cause a further $2.3T deficit in 10 years.
It’s a “BIG” bill, to be sure. But ugly AF.
What you seem to be saying is “it’s a great bill….except for all the stuff in it”.
You don't get it, it's a great bill BECAUSE of what's in it. That 2.3 trillion could be cut, but for the lack of backbone of the House and Senate.
You can’t just wave away the “but for”.
Maybe you might say the bill DT would have wanted would have been great. Or some other iteration of it that doesn’t involve a 2.3T deficit. But the one that’s actually happening is going to be a debacle.
Ask yourself what you would say if a Dem WH and congress passed a bill with those numbers. Would you not be apoplectic?
I'm not trying to wave away the "but for," I'm saying that at some point, probably sooner than many realize, the 3-headed monster will HAVE to be dealt with. You can kick the can down the road only so far, then you have a dead end.
Continuing tax breaks and even building on them for the ultrarich are just insane. Are you surviving on Social Security Cameron? Do you currently have Medicare? I can tell you we are barely getting by and we are terrified what these cuts to Medicare would mean to being able to find a provider that’s willing to accept lower payments.
I'm on SS but I'm against it in principle because it has been a big ponzi scheme. Not on Medicare yet, but if I could choose to not accept it, I would. And why be terrified if these programs would be cut, or go away altogether? God will provide, and even if He doesn't, there is a verse in the book of Job that says, "though He slay me, yet will I trust Him."
If you're over 65, it's basically guaranteed that your medical plan uses Medicare 'cause seniors would basically be uninsurable without it.
The death cult strikes again. Willing to let thousands die cuz of his believe in a "loving" god.
David French opined on this a bit: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/opinion/ernst-apology-christianity-evangelicals.html (or https://archive.is/PqVV6 if you don't have access).
Relevant here: "we’re all going to die, but it matters a great deal when, how and why. There’s a tremendous difference between dying after living a long and full life that’s enabled at least in part by access to decent health care, and dying a premature and perhaps needlessly painful death because you can’t afford the care you need."
I am glad to see some people realize how immoral these stances are but cutting these programs have been a republican goal since Reagan. It isn't new.
Of course, a big part of the problem is that we have slaughtered some 70 million people who could have contributed over the years to the solvency of these programs, but in any case, they are doomed to failure because they were never sustainable over time.
As you're clutching your pearls, how did people survive before the 1930s?
Quite poorly.
And as a result of these government programs, everyone's rich? Lol