Corona

[Googly]

This Aussie has a fairly even take on things. Very interesting that the boss of WhO is not actually a doctor after all and is a Marxist terrorist.
https://www.facebook.com/ACLobby/videos ... 5123/?vh=e
Ok Boomer? That’s an expression used by teenagers

[Googly]

His economy skills are undoubtedly better than Obama's and that above all else is huge.

For a man who has been bankrupt six times, that would be a pretty bold hat to wear

Now this link will probably try and back up a Trump viewpoint, but it certainly debunks your criticism of Obama.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/9-ch ... ?r=US&IR=T

Ok Boomless- He hasn’t been bankrupt 6 times, completely disingenuous statement, he’s had businesses that he owns file for bankruptcy and that’s completely different.

[zimbos_05]

This Aussie has a fairly even take on things. Very interesting that the boss of WhO is not actually a doctor after all and is a Marxist terrorist.
https://www.facebook.com/ACLobby/videos ... 5123/?vh=e
Ok Boomer? That’s an expression used by teenagers

Strong supporter of a convicted pedophile. A misogynist with a history of racism and bigotry....you see where I'm going with this.

His economy skills are undoubtedly better than Obama's and that above all else is huge.

For a man who has been bankrupt six times, that would be a pretty bold hat to wear

Now this link will probably try and back up a Trump viewpoint, but it certainly debunks your criticism of Obama.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/9-ch ... ?r=US&IR=T

Ok Boomless- He hasn’t been bankrupt 6 times, completely disingenuous statement, he’s had businesses that he owns file for bankruptcy and that’s completely different.

The point: He is a great economic manager
My response: He filed for bankruptcy 6 times.
Your counter: He never went bankrupt, the businesses he owned did.

Your takeaway: He is a great manager because he managed all the businesses that went bankrupt.

[Googly]

No I don’t see where you’re going with it? He made some valid points about the boss of WHO and I was bringing that to people’s attention. But you’re also a strong supporter of a paedophile, a mysoginist and a bigot? What’s the difference?

I also never said Trump was a great manager, I’m pointing out that if you run multiple businesses and a couple go South you have the option of propping them up or working out ways of letting them go and bankruptcy is one of them, you do understand the difference between personal and corporate liability I assume?

[ZIMDOGGY]

By convicted paedophile you mean Pell?
He was found innocent on appeal.

For him to have been guilty, he would have had to have been raping during a mass service.

[zimbos_05]

No I don’t see where you’re going with it? He made some valid points about the boss of WHO and I was bringing that to people’s attention. But you’re also a strong supporter of a paedophile, a mysoginist and a bigot? What’s the difference?

I also never said Trump was a great manager, I’m pointing out that if you run multiple businesses and a couple go South you have the option of propping them up or working out ways of letting them go and bankruptcy is one of them, you do understand the difference between personal and corporate liability I assume?

Doggy was able to understand. My English wasn't very difficult. Hahah, why would I support those things. You knew exactly what I meant. Keep playing dumb. Suits you.

I do understand. Still stands, six times is not a good example of good management.

By convicted paedophile you mean Pell?
He was found innocent on appeal.

For him to have been guilty, he would have had to have been raping during a mass service.

You're telling me that man is not guilty? He also got away with a lot. Helps to have friends in high places.

[ZIMDOGGY]

No I don’t see where you’re going with it? He made some valid points about the boss of WHO and I was bringing that to people’s attention. But you’re also a strong supporter of a paedophile, a mysoginist and a bigot? What’s the difference?

I also never said Trump was a great manager, I’m pointing out that if you run multiple businesses and a couple go South you have the option of propping them up or working out ways of letting them go and bankruptcy is one of them, you do understand the difference between personal and corporate liability I assume?

Doggy was able to understand. My English wasn't very difficult. Hahah, why would I support those things. You knew exactly what I meant. Keep playing dumb. Suits you.

I do understand. Still stands, six times is not a good example of good management.

By convicted paedophile you mean Pell?
He was found innocent on appeal.

For him to have been guilty, he would have had to have been raping during a mass service.

You're telling me that man is not guilty? He also got away with a lot. Helps to have friends in high places.

Well I don't know for sure, it's a tricky subject, and I sure as hell don't want to be wrong and backing a pedo, but going on the evidence I've seen is that he's most likely innocent.
It seems he was made a scapegoat for the suns of the church and hung by popular opinion with no evidence.
You've done the same, think about it. You have decided the man is guilty, but what if he's not?

On the balance of probability I can't see him raping a boy immediately following a packed church service. Doesn't make sense to me. People around and your head would still be in mass. And if you are doing that, there would be a lot of others.
Guy feel tells me the accuser wanted the payout and hates religion in his adult years.

[eugene]

Pell is innocent, I have no clue how he was ever convicted.

[zimbos_05]

Well I don't know for sure, it's a tricky subject, and I sure as hell don't want to be wrong and backing a pedo, but going on the evidence I've seen is that he's most likely innocent.
It seems he was made a scapegoat for the suns of the church and hung by popular opinion with no evidence.
You've done the same, think about it. You have decided the man is guilty, but what if he's not?

On the balance of probability I can't see him raping a boy immediately following a packed church service. Doesn't make sense to me. People around and your head would still be in mass. And if you are doing that, there would be a lot of others.
Guy feel tells me the accuser wanted the payout and hates religion in his adult years.

There's pretty strong evidence to show he is guilty. I'm all for innocent til proven guilty and if the evidence shows otherwise, then I will eat my words.

In Pells case, there is a lot of evidence that shows he his guilty and there is a lot of evidence that is glossed over.

I don't buy the idea that being in a religious setting would not make you want to do anything because that has been proven false on many occasions. Also, the fact that many priests have done it when their whole lives are devoted to God debunks that statement too.

I guess he has been let go, but based on my review and understanding of a lot of the facts, I'm more on the guilty side. Happy to be proven wrong.

[Kriterion_BD]

His economy skills are undoubtedly better than Obama's and that above all else is huge. Granted, Obama has to deal with the GFC shitshow, but let's see how Trump handles the Pandemic economy.

By what measure is Trump's economy skills better? Thats a fallacy just because Trump is a billionaire, but it doesn't necessarily make sense. Its like assuming Andrew Symonds is a faster bowler than Lasith Malinga because Australian pacers are faster than Sri Lankan ones.

But here's some data: https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543

Obama's first 4 years was dominated by the recovery of the 2008 Recession - itself a decent achievement. In his last 4 years, the US's real GDP grew by $1.5 trillion (from 16.2 to 17.7).

In Trump's first 3 years, so far the economy has grown from 17.7 to 19.1, ie by 1.4 trillion. Due to COVID (largely not Trump's fault), his 4 year data will probably be something like 1 trillion. In other words, not a huge difference. 9% increase in Obama's last 4 years, and 8% in Trump's first 3. Trump is marginally ahead. You have to remember that with derugaltion and tax cuts, Trump should be crushing Obama if he is really an economic whiz as people think he is. In effect, he's barely beating Obama, despite having the game rigged in his favor.

On top of that, conservative economic policies tend to grow the economy for the top 10% only. Left-wing ones tend to grow it for more people. So even if the GDP grows more under conservatives, more people get richer under liberals.

So in effect Trump is 0-2 on the economy. But most people aren't astute enough to read between the lines.