• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged USAID: is it really a bunch of crazy leftists? / Trump Was Absolutely Right to Shut Down USAID

Ziggurat said:
You know that people can see the effects themselves, right?
Click to expand...
You can't see something like that for yourself. Its a large, multinational, multidiscipline event that has ripples well beyond some brown guy you don't know walking down your street. That's why we have data collection, analysis, peer reviewed research, generation after generation of follow up, etc.

This is stuff you can't sum up on a bumper sticker or your grandma's homespun sayings.
 
Ziggurat said:
That's not how deportations are going to work. We aren't going to round them all up, house them all, and then slowly ship them out. You don't need to house 11 million people in order to deport 11 million people. It doesn't happen all at once.
Click to expand...

Ok, so what amounts are you going to do at a time? Are they all going to be sent to gitmo? Now you're looking at them coming in waves which means it'll take significantly longer to deport them, which means the process (and the cost) will be drawn out. How do you determine who goes first?

If you want to address this then lets actually do it. You fancy yourself to be oh so smart. How much does illegal immigration cost us? How much is a single deportation?
Ziggurat said:
If they are here illegally, you pretty much can.
Click to expand...

No, you ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ can't. That's not, as you say, "how it works" and the fact you keep avoiding the sheer cost impact it'll have to deport illegal immigrants is telling. As Donal already pointed out, included in my cost was the cost of things like loss of tax revenue, loss of contribution to the GDP, loss of those immigrants renting properties, paying taxes, and working jobs that no one else wants to do. Loss in grocery sales for fruits and vegetables.

Not only will you lose all of that income to the US, but it'll be a complete flip. Instead of having that revenue with the minuscule cost of illegal immigration, we will then have to pay to maintain those people. To feed them, house them, provide them healthcare, transportation, etc. no matter in what ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ amounts you deport them in.

Face it, this whole thing is literally retarded. I mean that in the strictest definition of the term. The fact you blindly support is...spot on actually.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
Ok, so what amounts are you going to do at a time?
Click to expand...
By the planeload.
plague311 said:
Are they all going to be sent to gitmo?
Click to expand...
For most, we can send them directly back to their country of origin.
plague311 said:
Now you're looking at them coming in waves which means it'll take significantly longer to deport them
Click to expand...
We've already been deporting them. It didn't take very long.
plague311 said:
No, you ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ can't.
Click to expand...
And yet, we already did.
 
Ziggurat said:
By the planeload.

For most, we can send them directly back to their country of origin.

We've already been deporting them. It didn't take very long.

And yet, we already did.
Click to expand...

Evidence? How many have been deported? When did the deportation process for those people begin? How long did it take?

I'll wait.
 
Just as a note:

The American Immigration Council estimated that it could cost $88 billion annually to deport one million people a year
Click to expand...

So by my math, let me carry the one, multiply by this, move that...well look at that, I was pretty ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ close. Also, that would require absolutely no ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ immigrants to come back into the US illegally. Which, I'm sure, Trump will lock down tightly :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
arthwollipot said:
By my back-of-the-envelope calculation (feel free to check my maths) that is a total of 0.001% of his total net worth.
Edited by Agatha: 
Edited for rule 9
Click to expand...
"But of course none of this matters to you. Anything less than giving away most of his wealth wouldn't be enough for you." - I said, and I was right! The actual amount he gave away doesn't matter to you, only the proportion.

Musk's current net worth is US$378.8 billion. 0.001% of that is $3.78 million. So you are only out by a factor of 60. Honest mistake, or deliberate lie? I'll be charitable and assume the former - this time.

But am I more charitable than Musk? Last year I gave around NZ$100 to charity (if you include the $50 lottery ticket with prize of a Ford Mach-E that I knew I wouldn't win). I'm just a pensioner who spent the last 35 years earning close to minimum wage, yet I now have a net worth of over NZ$600,000. So I gave 0.017% of my 'wealth' to charity. Musk gave 0.06% of his 'wealth'. That makes Musk 3.5 times more charitable than me.

"But he could afford to give a lot more!", you exhort. Well I could too. I could give $5000 a year without impacting my net worth, or $10,000 a year for the next 10 years and still have cash in the bank. But I won't because there are things I want to do with that money (like install solar power, and buy a new EV when the Leaf gives out - which might make the world a tiny bit better for everyone). Does this make me a bad person? According to Musk haters yes - 3.5 times worse than him.

It's actually quite liberating knowing that I can only be good in your eyes if I give everything to charity and live in poverty - and of course decry everything Musk has done. I'm happy being that bad guy.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
Evidence? How many have been deported? When did the deportation process for those people begin? How long did it take?

I'll wait.
Click to expand...
ICE enforcement and removal statistics for Q2, Q3 of FY 2024 reflect nearly 70% increase over Q3 of FY 2023
In the third quarter, ICE removed nearly 68,000 individual noncitizens — almost 1,000 more than in the second quarter. This reflects a 69% increase over removals during the third quarter in fiscal year 2023, and is more than 140% of ICE removals for all fiscal year 2023.

The data demonstrates the agency’s dedication to optimizing its resources to enforce U.S. immigration laws in the U.S. interior and remove individuals and families who have no legal basis to stay in the country. The data in the dashboard is independent from and does not include removals and returns by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or expulsions under the Title 42 public health order, which ended in May 2023.
Click to expand...
The President must answer for this abomination! Oh wait...
 
This is a 5 minute video about tuberculosis medication and the consequences of stopping treatment in the middle.


Bottom line is, you can't just pause it and pick up again later where you left off. You'll create more drug resistance and ultimately a lot more new infections and deaths.
 
Puppycow,
Thanks for this video, which is in agreement with what I know about the disease. In one thread someone here said words to the effect: If you went to a doctor for a second and they said, "Stop all treatments for ninety days, and I will read your casefile," you would not take such a course of action seriously. I thought it was a good analogy, However, medication for TB being paused makes it applicable on a literal level as well.
 
AmyStrange said:
Really? So how many guys (or gals) has she bonked (or sexually assaulted) while married to the fat clown? How many EOs has she signed? How many lies has she told? How many businesses has she bankrupted? How many people has she called names or insulted or fired or asked to attack the capital or pardoned?

You may think she's as bad as the fat clown, and you may actually believe it, but I'm not falling for that hogwash.


-
Click to expand...
She thinks the way he does, she hates the same people, she commits the same frauds, she has the same gutter morality he has. Just because she doesn't have the same overt power as Trampy, it doesn't follow that she's less evil than him.
 
Last edited:
A former speech writer at USAID wrote, "Ultimately, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) manhandled its way into USAID’s information systems. In a matter of hours DOGE shut down our websites, took over email handles, and summarily removed the system access of hundreds of gainfully employed public servants. We did not know it then, but the building would never again open its doors as the U.S. Agency for International Development...It is one of the most heavily earmarked agencies in the government, meaning that Congress has to approve more than 90 percent of its funding for very specific projects — often years ahead of time. "

The actions of the 2020 Congress and 2022 Congress represent the will of the people as much as the presidential election in 2024.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
A former speech writer at USAID wrote, "Ultimately, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) manhandled its way into USAID’s information systems. In a matter of hours DOGE shut down our websites, took over email handles, and summarily removed the system access of hundreds of gainfully employed public servants. We did not know it then, but the building would never again open its doors as the U.S. Agency for International Development...It is one of the most heavily earmarked agencies in the government, meaning that Congress has to approve more than 90 percent of its funding for very specific projects — often years ahead of time. "

The actions of the 2020 Congress and 2022 Congress represent the will of the people as much as the presidential election in 2024.
Click to expand...
Then we will see what the 2024 and 2026 Congresses understand to be the will of the people. Maybe they will reinstate the slush fund, open hearings on Musk and DOGE, and impeach their boss. Or maybe they will simply stand back and let the dumpster fire burn itself out.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
It is one of the most heavily earmarked agencies in the government
Click to expand...
Which also suggests it's one of the most pork-laden agencies in the government as well. You do know that earmarks are often essentially political payoffs to supporters, right?
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
She thinks the way he does, she hates the same people, she commits the same frauds, she has the same gutter morality he has. Just because she doesn't have the same overt power as Trampy, it doesn't follow that she's less evil than him.
Click to expand...


Don't just say you know how she "thinks," prove it.


-
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
Which also suggests it's one of the most pork-laden agencies in the government as well. You do know that earmarks are often essentially political payoffs to supporters, right?
Click to expand...
No, your conclusion does not follow. If you want to claim that there is pork, show your evidence. Much of what was claimed/amplified on X by Musk and others has been debunked by a Forbes reporter in a story from which I previously quoted. See my next comment for the link to his story.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Then we will see what the 2024 and 2026 Congresses understand to be the will of the people. Maybe they will reinstate the slush fund, open hearings on Musk and DOGE, and impeach their boss. Or maybe they will simply stand back and let the dumpster fire burn itself out.
Click to expand...
You did not substantiate your claim of something's being a slush fund. Reporter Conor Murray at Forbes examined some of the claims and found them false or misleading. Mr. Murray wrote in part, "There’s no evidence to suggest USAID has engaged in money laundering. On Saturday afternoon, Musk reposteda claim on X that suggested USAID was a “form of money laundering tax payers money into far-left organizations,” adding: “Absolutely,” though neither poster offered sources or factual information. Although Republicans have criticized the organization for alleged wasteful spending, there’s no evidence that USAID was engaging in criminal behavior to support left-wing organizations." You can also find an article at The Economist newsmagazine, which gives some indication of what USAID does, and from which I quoted (without the search function here, I realize that one has to do some scrolling to find this link).

If one is serious about rooting out fraud and waste, one hires forensic accountants. One does not bandy unsubstantiated allegations about on X. Mr. Musk does the latter, and I see no evidence that he has done the former. Make of that what you will.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom