One of these guys who posts about 80% of the time on why tax money should go to things he wants instead of things other people want, posted again about where he thinks the big Loot Pile should go. Something about how Trump would be the end of the world and Hillary Clinton would save America from certain doom. I said there is no difference between them. Another person responded to me like so. Let’s take it apart line by line. I’m doing this because I told him I would, and when I said that his words were meaningless I wasn’t just saying that as an insult. I was saying they have no substance. I will bold the parts that are especially meaningless political nonsense:

Rafi – A great deal of the difference is simple to see. In short, by Executive Order, the Republicans want to remove a lot of things that amount to equality for the masses.

Equality for the masses. Executive order? Obama has had plenty of those. This means nothing specific and things that he thinks are equality for the masses in his mind probably mean things like minimum wage and minimum income assurance. “Equality for the masses” is a phrase that every single socialist dictator ever, has ever said. It means nothing.

They would stifle opportunity for poor and remove educational funding for the handicapped.

Stifle opportunity for the poor could mean anything. In his mind, it probably means less jobs laws or repealing jobs laws or weakening unions or holding back minimum wage raises or lowering public pension plans or some such similar thing. “For the handicapped” is nothing but an emotional appeal to make people think of dying widows and orphans who can only be taken care of by government.

They would eliminate many protections for the environment.

Government is the biggest polluter by far of anything. Waste management is monopolized by government, and they have created landfills. Water is monopolized by government and there are shortages during drought because prices are not adjusted to free market levels in times of scarcity. Forests are managed by government and they are being burned instead of being privately owned. Public parks are owned by governments and they are disgusting and dangerous with garbage all over the place. There is no litter in private parks because clean up is in the budget of admission to the park. The only protection for the environment is private property, because people take care of their private property. Whatever government owns, private people cannot own, so government degrades the environment of anything they touch. D or R, makes no lick of difference.

Woman’s rights would go out the window.

Now what does that mean? All women would go to prison? They will no longer be able to vote? No driving cars? A law passed so they are not allowed to be hired into the workforce? What is he talking about? Abortions maybe? Trump is pro abortion. Maybe maternity leave? That women’s rights somehow means they have a right to other people’s money because some of them don’t work when they’re pregnant? Or equal work equal pay laws which will force businesses to hire women at higher prices than now, which will unemploy many women as employers will have to cut back?

Our founding attempts at universal healthcare would be gone the first week,

Universal healthcare? Forcing everyone to buy insurance by threatening to fine them if they don’t does not magically give everyone universal healthcare. That’s like saying forcing everyone in the world to buy food will end world hunger. Or passing a law that every worker must be paid $1,000 an hour will solve poverty. Or forcing everyone to buy a mansion will solve the housing crisis, and if they don’t buy the mansion or get hired at $1,000 an hour they’re fined $200 by the IRS and if they can’t pay it they go to prison.

It’s absurd. Obama is forcing everyone to buy health insurance or pay him $200 or whatever it is. But do they now have good doctors and better healthcare because of Obama’s threats to fine them if they don’t buy health insurance? And nobody is going to repeal Obamacare anyway. Nobody. Once a program that increases state power is in place, it is never repealed by anyone.

It’s not universal healthcare. It’s universal health insurance. Say if all the doctors in the US suddenly quit and there were no more, but everyone is still covered by the Obamacare insurance mandate, then in that case, by his absolutely meaningless statement, there is “universal healthcare” in America even though there are no doctors. To him it just means forced insurance coverage. That to him is healthcare. No matter how that forced insurance coverage affects the actual medical industry or people’s health or life expectancy.

putting over 20,000,000 people back into a position with no insurance.

He hasn’t been reading up on skyrocketing premiums due to regulations and insurance companies flat out pulling out of the health insurance market and specifically Obamacare exchanges, because it is no longer profitable. But they can all pull out and insurance companies can refuse to cover anyone, but if the law is still on the books they’re still “covered” in his meaningless newspeak, even though there is nothing covering them. The law is on the books! It’s a success! So is Venezuela and its universal coverage laws. Great place, I hear, for some good old fashioned “universal health care”. There’s universal health care laws in North Korea too.

Republicans would rape Social Security that many of our seniors, myself included, paid into for years and depend on for retirement income.

Here comes the harsh part. “Rape Social Security”, as if Social Security is some chaste virgin yet to be deflowered, when in fact every single penny he ever “paid into for years” has already been spent on welfare and warfare and then some. There is no social security. The money comes from the next generation being taxed so he can get his retirement checks and his universal healthcare, which the next generation is also paying for. This sounds like I’m insulting him. It’s just the truth. I can’t be accused of insulting someone for pointing out what is actually happening. He wants money from me for his retirement. That’s what it means. That’s just the truth. He’ll say yes, I am paying for his retirement checks, but since it’s theft by “voting and democracy” then it’s covered by the “social contract” so I have to pay his retirement checks or I’m the immoral one.

He’s saying he wants the money that the government spent already on killing people, to come from me, because there is no one else to take it from. Can’t tax yourself to pay yourself. You can only tax others to pay you. If I refuse, he accuses me of supporting rape, implicitly. Social security is broke. At some point the checks will run dry, no matter who is president. At $20 trillion in debt, there is nothing there. Whether you want to rape SS or not, it’s gone. He’ll have to find something else to live on soon, or take so much money from the next generation that they will have nothing in the end, like the Greeks trying to tax themselves to death to pay the insane public pension system there. Many are starving. It will be that way in the US too, but worse.

And none of that speaks to the question of what kind of person Trump is.

True, none of that speaks to anything. It’s all sentences that could mean anything and everything.

Trump is right about one thing. We need to make America great again, but certainly not by his definition. America is still great, but it’s based largely on opportunity. A more liberal agenda provides help and opportunity for a much greater number of its citizens.

Code for he wants government to take more from some people and give to other people.

Lastly, no Republican administration since the 1950s has finished with economic growth.

This one is especially void of meaning. “Finished” with “economic growth”? Economic growth has nothing to do with who the president is. It has to do with how much the Federal Reserve inflates the money supply. When they print a lot, it looks like growth but it’s just a boom in a boom bust cycle that will eventually impoverish many. And then either party will bail out the banks who benefited from the boom so they don’t have to suffer the crash like everyone else. When they stop printing everything crashes. It’s just a question of the money supply. So essentially, he’s saying that no republican president ever finished his term while the federal reserve was in a heavy printing phase.

Who cares what the timing was? He knows nothing about economics but he cites this meaningless timing coincidence as if it shows something important, like “democratic policies” lead to economic growth.

They are still trying to pound us with the trickle down theory that over 50 years has proven will not work.

What do you mean “work”? What does “work” mean? That the Republican style of wealth redistribution doesn’t increase GDP numbers to his liking? That if money is stolen away and given to other people in a more democratic style, then GDP numbers will be higher? Nobody has any right to take and give by force just for the purpose of increasing an arbitrary number calculated by bureaucrats with political agendas in some room in Washington DC. Both R’s and D’s take from some groups to give to other groups. They one-up each other on spending schemes while the economy follows the Fed. Republican or democrat tax schemes have nothing to do with it.

Their politicking is based on lies and BS,

Yes, that’s true. There’s some meaning.

that the Democrats are going to take away their guns… Wouldn’t they have done it yet?

They already did. Chicago has the toughest gun regulations in the country introduced by Democrats, and the highest shooting rate in the country by far. 468 deaths last year. The result of making it impossible to legally carry guns. But republicans aren’t any better.

They say the Democrats are going to tax the rich into poverty. Why not yet?

They’re not going to tax the rich into poverty. They’re going to tax everyone into poverty. By direct taxes or hyperinflation, the end nobody has any wealth left. But the republicans are no different. They spent more than the Democrats. Because each administration has spent more than the one before it regardless of the party. They spend his money. My money. That makes us poorer. The more they spend the more we are impoverished. It is yet. It is already. And when interest rates edge up to 5% and the US finally defaults on its debt, the poverty level throughout the United States for everyone who gets most of his income from redistributed taxes, will skyrocket. Regardless of who is president.

The fact is, the highest taxes this country ever had were put in place by Republicans, as high as 90% on the richest of the rich during the Eisenhower administration.

Yes, Eisenhower was an evil man who murdered many Korean men women and children. And set very high tax rates. If he thinks anyone ever actually paid 90% of his income to Eisenhower though, I have a bridge for sale.

There’s no way we can elect a Republican in November and in any good conscience claim to be the land of opportunity. It will be the land of opportunity lost.

So anyone who votes for a Republican has no good conscience? Jeez and he thinks I’m insulting. What about all the people who vote Republican because they’re trying to protect some of their wealth, however misguided because it doesn’t make a difference anyway? It doesn’t matter who wins the 8 year throne. Whoever is president in the next 8 years will oversee the worst economic catastrophe ever. Neither Trump nor Hillary will stop it. When interest rates and price inflation hit 5% and the Fed gets caught chasing its tail but unable to save the dollar, most Americans will be destitute. This is why I suggested he leave the country now, and call on anyone who wishes to preserve whatever is left of their wealth to move it out of US jurisdiction. It is all going to be confiscated, either through taxation or most likely hyperinflation.

The last chance for the US was 2012 with Ron Paul. It’s over now. Nothing can be done.