Radiorum

What is obvious is that they are made up numbers. Provided with no citing of his source.

The "open-border" myth persists, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Deportation of illegal immigrants was much higher under Biden than they were under Trump. the Biden administration’s nearly 4.4 million repatriations are already more than any single presidential term since the George W. Bush administration The arrest of criminal illegal arrests under the Biden administration actually increased from the Trump years. For the fiscal years 1017 - 2024: Arrest Type FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 to Jan U.S. Border Patrol Criminal Alien Arrests 8,531 6,698 4,269 2,438 10,763 12,028 15,267 17,048 3,864 Looking at the statistics from the ICE website shows they were very active during the previous administration. https://www.ice.gov/spotlight/statistics No-one wants criminals in the US. And now that Trump has fired a whole bunch of immigration judges, we can expect the number of criminals in the US to increase.

Trump continues to push to make Canada the 51st state using glaringly false economic claims. In the video, he says, “Canada has been bad to us on trade … (they) have to start paying up … $200 billion in subsidies … we don’t need their product … who the hell made these deals, they’re so bad.” Let’s look at his words and find out how they are false. First, he needs to learn the difference between a subsidy and a trade deficit. Trump claims that the bilateral U.S. deficit in merchandise trade with Canada amounts to the U.S. “subsidizing” Canada. This claim has no economic merit whatsoever… Trump’s claim Canada is subsidized by the U.S. through this bilateral deficit is laughable – and Trump’s economic team surely understand that. They are many things (aggressive, corrupt, and untruthful), but they are not ignorant. Rather, they are trying to drown out rational discussion of this issue in a barrage of threats and bluster. Second, the $200 B figure it completely made up. Trump’s claim the bilateral deficit is $200 billion is an utter fabrication. The bilateral deficit was $40 billion (U.S.) in 2023 according to U.S. data, down 29% from 2022. It fell another 9% during the first 9 months of 2024. Compared to a two-way trade flow of almost $1 trillion (U.S.) per year, this imbalance is puny. Third, they do need our product. Just consider the energy sector: Canadian energy (including oil, gas, coal, and electricity) made up 60% of the total bilateral merchandise trade deficit over the last decade. Having access to a secure and lower-cost energy source is a major benefit for U.S. businesses and consumers. (The US enjoys a strong surplus in services trade and investment income flowing out of Canada, but Trump never mentions this.) Fourth – he’s really relying on the short memories of his MAGA base when he comments that “Who the hell made these deals, they’re so bad." It was him! In 2018, and at the time he called it “the best trade deal ever made.” How do you negotiate with a country that so clearly operates in bad faith? Canada Subsidizes the U.S., not the Other Way Around

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. What does he mean when he says “maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security.”

That Trump called Putin before Zelensky - a snub that clearly indicates he favours Putin. (not to mention breaking diplomatic convention) - does not bode well for Trump to recognize Putin as the aggressor.

I did

No-one has claimed this. But that is not what Trump and Musk are targeting. The previous administration had 17 inspector-generals to investigate fraud. Trump fired them all. This case was brought under Biden, not Trump Their guiding principle is "Flood the zone with sh*t."

When I add up those numbers I get 215,161,884 So the annual expenditure would be 215,161,884 X $1976/month X 12 months/year = $5,101,918,593,408

I would say this is a valid concern. And that disclosure should be mandatory. In Canada, it would be a provincial matter.

They use the word "association" - which implies correlation - but not cause and effect. it is more likely that underlying mental health issues lead to violence, as well as the prescription of mood-altering drugs In fact, in their results, they state: The reported association between SSRIs and violent crime in young people cannot be interpreted causally

SSRIs do not cause people to get violent. maybe some shooters are on them, but it would be the underlying mental issues that predated the prescription of the medicine that would more likely contribute to the shooting

I provided a link

No, because ignorant opinions without any basis in science have no business directing what science should do You're really showing your naivete with this one. Trump policy will have enormous effects on US science. First of all, the federal government funds about 20% of all science research and development. And scientists work together. Collaboration will be disrupted at all levels. Make up your mind. is it a backlash against things like DEI, or is it to save money? And what will the saved money be used for? And how does not allowing American scientists to collaborate with Canadian scientists save money? No, it something I read. Scientists across the country are in turmoil as President Donald Trump wages an assault on U.S. research. They’re worried about their funding and job security. They’re censoring their language around topics like climate change and diversity. And they’re wondering what kinds of science they’ll be allowed to conduct in a rapidly shifting U.S. research landscape. The Trump administration has frozen billions of dollars in funding, paused grant reviews, cut critical support for institutional science https://www.eenews.net/articles/trump-takes-giant-wrecking-ball-to-us-research/ The federal government has outlawed them in official research. This does not concern you??? If you cannot see how this is going to harm US science, you are being blind. Science is never wasteful. The NOAA has no value? WTF are you talking about? The US is entering a dark ages, and now with Trump wanting to summit with Putin and Xi (Trump says he wants to half the defense budget) to enter into some sort of defense deal, well, we'll see where this goes. What do you make of these quotes of Trump's? “When we straighten it all out, then I want one of the first meetings I have [to be] with President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia. And I want to say, let’s cut our military budget in half,” Trump said ahead of a summit meeting with Indian President Narendra Modi. “We’re going to have them spend a lot less money,” Trump added. “We’re going to spend a lot less money. And I know they’re going to do it.” https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/14/trump-floats-summit-with-xi-putin-to-discuss-halving-of-military-budgets

It's almost surreal how dishonest MAGA is

Oh wow, you guys just keep on supporting my point. This is not true, I made many sound points.

Look, I am quite satisfied I make my points soundly. If you have trouble with them, read more carefully. I'm done with this.

RFK Jr. spouts nonsense about the “threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors,” or SSRIs. SSRIs are anti-depressants, and their use has saved thousands of lives. But Kennedy calls people who take them “addicts.” His buddy, Elon Musk, falsely claimed that there is “tremendous circumstantial evidence” that individuals who take SSRIs are more likely to become school shooters. When questioned about it, RFK Jr. would not deny it: No, there is no causal link between school shooters and SSRIs. Medicaid pays hundreds of millions of dollars on SSRIs and I guess they want to cut that out.

Okay, your last accusation leveled at me was that I did not provide evidence that science was being hurled into chaos by Trump policy, but I had quoted and linked THREE separate articles saying just that. https://blog.ucsusa.org/pallavi-phartiyal/the-trump-administration-playbook-likely-to-target-science-and-scientists-were-ready-to-fight-back/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-trumps-first-days-say-about-science-in-the-new-administration/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-trumps-executive-orders-mean-for-science/ I don't know what your problem is, but it isn't me.

All of my assertions have been well-supported. Thanks for stepping up and being my exemplar.

Quit sniffing yourself. It's gross.

I have never expressed an opinion about the Democrats in these forums.

You can’t win with MAGA because they don’t care whether they are wrong or right. They have abandoned truth in favour of the fight. All that matters to them is “getting” the other side. (I’ve seen this attitude in these forums.) That’s why they respond so favourably when Trump posts something hate-inciting like this: Jul 20th 2024 - 10:12:25 PM EST Consider Musk’s recent post below Musk’s claim that these people are collecting social security is so obviously untrue (to anyone with a grain of intelligence, which I assume Musk has) and easily disproved. Simple math with these figures shows that if these payments in the table were being made, Social Security would cost about $1 trillion dollars more a year than it actually does. The numbers just don’t work. So why is Musk lying? And not caring if he does? Because he knows MAGA will respond, without regard to whether it’s true or not. Musk baits MAGA, who will use this as ammunition in their manufactured “fight.” They don’t care if the numbers are wrong - just like they don’t care if Trump is a dictator. The outrage of the “other side” is the goal. (As one MAGA member here said – it’s about freaking them out.) Like Trump, Musk manipulates with lies, and it causes me great concern for the country that many are susceptible to this manipulation.

No, lol, I think that was your best effort.

I know, it's tough, because they are listening to a bunch of liars.

That's it? That's all you got? How am I supposed to take you seriously?