concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just now, Guccifer said: This means nothing since nobody had disputed that European countries have not yet met the 2% goal. It proves that most are deadbeats ignoring the 2002 guideline. It is certainly MUCH more meaningful than your lame-ass consolidated NATO spending chart when the topic is countries not meeting the guideline. Your intellectual (if it can be accused of being intellectual) dishonesty on display usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guccifer Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, concha said: Actually, that wasn't the argument nor the time frame being debated. Strengthening is present tense. 1 hour ago, concha said: A man who is strengthening our economy, He inherited an economy at full employment and has had slower job growth than the end of Obama's term. concha was screaming that 2% gdp growth was terrible but now? Trump is strengthening our economy with 2% gdp growth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Guccifer said: Why you just leave this debate to the professional liars like concha. You're lost as usual. European spending on NATO has been rising since, shock, 2014 when it was an issue of contention and they renewed their commitment. The shape of the graph is so misleading that it is hilarious. What is US spending - over $500 billion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guccifer Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just now, concha said: It proves that most are deadbeats ignoring the 2002 guideline. And this was addressed in 2014 and collectively their spending has gone up by almost 10% already. You are just incapable of not cupping Trump's balls. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guccifer Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just now, Bormio said: The shape of the graph is so misleading that it is hilarious. What is US spending - over $500 billion? How? You seem so dumb that you don't even understand what you're looking at. We cover 22% of NATO defense spending. The 2% of gdp goal has been in place for years and was renewed in 2014 when Europe started increasing their contributions again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, Guccifer said: It's the story of Trump's entire life. Nothing that Trump has done as President has surprised a single one of his critics. This is exactly who he is. It's the story of Canes-of-the-thousand-names on these boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guccifer Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, concha said: It's the story of Canes-of-the-thousand-names on these boards. Yep, Exposing your lies. Regardless of the name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, Guccifer said: How? You seem so dumb that you don't even understand what you're looking at. We cover 22% of NATO defense spending. The 2% of gdp goal has been in place for years and was renewed in 2014 when Europe started increasing their contributions again. The graph takes 2 very close levels and makes it look like spending has increased 10-fold. The graph is total Defense costs of NATO members - the US is much higher than that. Inflation would have accounted for 10% in 4 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 23 minutes ago, Guccifer said: Strengthening is present tense. He inherited an economy at full employment and has had slower job growth than the end of Obama's term. concha was screaming that 2% gdp growth was terrible but now? Trump is strengthening our economy with 2% gdp growth. Comical. Then how is it that unemployment (both U3 and U6) plummeted after Trump took over after being stagnant for the nearly year-and-a-half prior to Trump's inauguration? Tell the class, Canes. And Canes can't stop lying. Shocker. Average GDP growth under Obama was 1.6%. Obama's last quarter at 3% or better was Q1 of 2015. Trump's last several quarters: 3.1%, 3.2%, 2.9%, 2.0% and forecast for Q2 2018 is 4.1% per the WSJ Economic Forecasting Survey. Canes' dishonesty is beyond shameless. I bet he cheated and plagiarized when he was at Florida Atlantic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Guccifer said: Yep, Exposing your lies. Regardless of the name. Actually, all you've been doing is posting more of your own. I've been exposing them with ease. It's hilarious. 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 Canes' chart of NATO spending is not only designed to make expenditures look like they are skyrocketing (which they aren't), but COMPLETELY AVOIDS SHOWING SPENDING AS A PERCENT OF GDP. Why? Because Canes is a demonstrably dishonest POS. Do you know what NATO's own report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)" shows? NATO Europe and Canada defence spending as a percent of GDP has rocketed 🤣 0.07% since 2014 and is still 0.01% below where it was in 2012. Canes losing. Again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, concha said: Canes' chart of NATO spending is not only designed to make expenditures look like they are skyrocketing (which they aren't), but they COMPLETELY AVOID SHOWING SPENDING AS A PERCENT OF GDP. Why? Because Canes is a demonstrably dishonest POS. Do you know what NATO's own report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)" shows? NATO Europe and Canada defence spending as percent of GDP has rocketed 0.07% since 2014 and is still 0.01% below where it was in 2012. Canes losing. Again. Is he really an economics guy 😂😂😂😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 9 minutes ago, Bormio said: Is he really an economics guy 😂😂😂😂 He's a clown. He doesn't make substantive arguments. He'll state bullshit and acts like it's gospel, and then accuses others of lying and obfuscation without backing that up either. Look at what he's done here today: He claims some bullshit about economics and employment numbers and then posts data that we never debated. I never made any claims about Obama first 15 months vs Trump first 15 months. Why did the dishonest clown choose that information? Because the real debate we had ended with him getting his tiny nuts kicked up around his ears. Today we debate spending as a percent of GDP by NATO member countries. What does Dumbass do? He posts a chart that scrupulously AVOIDS both spending by GDP and by country data. It's absolutely hilarious. 🤡 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 47 minutes ago, Bormio said: The shape of the graph is so misleading that it is hilarious. What is US spending - over $500 billion? Note how Canesy the Clown avoids posting a chart relevant to the actual debate. Where's the percent of GDP data? Where's the by country data? Why does he show a chart that includes INCREASED US SPENDING? 🤣 This is the quality of honesty and debate you get from Canes. Per NATO's latest report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)", 2018 non-US spending as percent of GDP will be 1.47%. In 2014 that number was 1.40%. In 2012 it was 1.48% That's why Canes shows such intellectually dishonest data. You'll note that he scrupulously avoided touching the detailed real-world information I posted about the military-readiness (or complete lack thereof) of Europe's biggest economy. Which is a direct result of (lack of) spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, concha said: Note how Canesy the Clown avoids posting a chart relevant to the actual debate. Where's the percent of GDP data? Where's the by country data? Why does he show a chart that includes INCREASED US SPENDING? 🤣 This is the quality of honesty and debate you get from Canes. Per NATO's latest report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)", 2018 non-US spending as percent of GDP will be 1.47%. In 2014 that number was 1.40%. In 2012 it was 1.48% That's why Canes shows such intellectually dishonest data. You'll note that he scrupulously avoided touching the detailed real-world information I posted about the military-readiness (or complete lack thereof) of Europe's biggest economy. Which is a direct result of (lack of) spending. Europeans love their social welfare state. Paid for by US defense spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 48 minutes ago, Guccifer said: How? You seem so dumb that you don't even understand what you're looking at. We cover 22% of NATO defense spending. The 2% of gdp goal has been in place for years and was renewed in 2014 when Europe started increasing their contributions again. 22%? Per NATO's report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)" the US in 2018 is expected to spend $623 billion (2010 dollars) while Canada and European NATO nations spend $312 billion. 22%? You need to call Florida Atlantic's math department and get your money back. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, concha said: 22%? Per NATO's report "Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2011-2018)" the US in 2018 is expected to spend $623 billion (2010 dollars) while Canada and European NATO nations spend $312 billion. 22%? You need to call Florida Atlantic's math department and get your money back. I did it in my head without looking it up and knew he was FOS. we probably paid for 22% of the croissants and espresso at NATO HQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 10 minutes ago, Bormio said: Europeans love their social welfare state. Paid for by US defense spending. Indeed. Germany's six submarines are effectively dockside beer halls. Not ONE is seaworthy. They can't put a full squadron of their first-line fighter aircraft in the air and they have just about 100 currently battle-ready main battle tanks. That's it. THAT'S a "military ally"? Meanwhile they hand billions annually to the evil Putin while making themselves energy dependent on evil Russia while running a huge trade surplus at our expense. All this is just grand to the American left. But it's TRUMP - the guy who wants increased NATO spending and cutting Western European energy dependence on Russia - who is Putin's puppet. You can't make this shit up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 hours ago, Bormio said: Russian interference is not really the question - but Trump is defensive about it because too many are ready to take the giant leap without much evidence that Trump conspired with the Russians. They are 2 very different issues. And Trump has few friends in DC - at least Clinton had an adoring press. I honestly believe that Trump does not want Russia to be an enemy - that may or may not be possible. As far as I am concerned, the EU needed a tongue lashing. All Ive gathered from you, is no matter what Trump does you are going to find a way to defend it. Hes right, no matter what he does. Even if its clearly not right. His defense of Putin should be maddening to everyone. I dont understand the loyalty to a MAN (clearly an unstable one), over loyalty to the United States of America. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 hours ago, Guccifer said: This means nothing since nobody had disputed that European countries have not yet met the 2% goal. https://www.ft.com/content/542495ae-4a28-11e8-8ee8-cae73aab7ccb Quote Germany to miss Nato defence spending pledge Target to devote 2% of GDP to military will not be reached... Guy Chazan in Berlin APRIL 27, 2018 Germany will not meet its commitment to spend 2 per cent of gross domestic product on defence in the next four years and the ratio will in fact decline from 2020, according to FT calculations based on government budget plans. ... based on IMF projections of the size of the German economy, the figures translate into annual spending of a little over 1 per cent of GDP. Indeed, with the economy set to continue expanding, the ratio slightly declines between 2020 and 2022. Canes the clown exposed again.🤡 It's so easy. 🤣 Here's how hard the European NATO allies are working to meet the 2%: 2011: 1.55% average 2018 (est): 1.50% average And that includes the few that actually pull their weight. Germany 2011-2018? Down. France? Down. In fact, ALL of the major European NATO allies show REDUCTIONS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, ECHS05 said: All Ive gathered from you, is no matter what Trump does you are going to find a way to defend it. Hes right, no matter what he does. Even if its clearly not right. His defense of Putin should be maddening to everyone. I dont understand the loyalty to a MAN (clearly an unstable one), over loyalty to the United States of America. Trump has been assailed in the most vicious and persistent manner with the press leading the charge since he was elected. The Mueller investigation is horseshit - there was never any real evidence to justify a criminal probe to start. It should have been a counterintelligence operation for which a special prosecutor is totally inappropriate. All it did was give Mueller carte blanche to go on a fishing expedition through people’s lives and set perjury traps. It is a story of Russian espionage, not conspiracy with the Trump campaign. If you did not like his press conference today, I can appreciate that. But he in the big picture is correct about need for better relations with Russia. The Left has tried to delegitimize his Presidency from day 1 - and I am sick of it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsefly Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 24 minutes ago, Bormio said: Trump has been assailed in the most vicious and persistent manner with the press leading the charge since he was elected. The Mueller investigation is horseshit - there was never any real evidence to justify a criminal probe to start. It should have been a counterintelligence operation for which a special prosecutor is totally inappropriate. All it did was give Mueller carte blanche to go on a fishing expedition through people’s lives and set perjury traps. It is a story of Russian espionage, not conspiracy with the Trump campaign. If you did not like his press conference today, I can appreciate that. But he in the big picture is correct about need for better relations with Russia. The Left has tried to delegitimize his Presidency from day 1 - and I am sick of it. Why do you think we need better relations with Russia? Do we need better relations with Iran too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, Horsefly said: Why do you think we need better relations with Russia? Do we need better relations with Iran too? We just went through one Cold War - you want a repeat? Russia will have to decide - Putin says he wants better relations. Russia is involved in several areas where we have interests - especially the Middle East. Maybe we go back where we were - but maybe we should give the relationship a chance first. China is going to be a major economic and military competitor - one that Russia may have an interest in constraining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Horsefly said: Why do you think we need better relations with Russia? Do we need better relations with Iran too? Nuclear superpower. Borders NATO. 3rd largest oil producer in world. Supplies the bulk of Western Europe's gas needs. Not run by religious nutbags... Just off the top of my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted July 17, 2018 Report Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just now, concha said: Nuclear superpower. Borders NATO. 3rd largest oil producer in world. Supplies the bulk of Western Europe's gas needs. Not run by religious nutbags... Just off the top of my head. I like his response better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.