Real Time with Bill Maher: Overtime - October 30, 2015 (HBO) 

When a comedian loses their composure with laughing too hard.. That cracks me up. When Bill laughs.. to me its always funnier watching him lose it :D

Yea, the military is 54% of the US govts. budget.

+TheHehe1223 Sure- why spend money on those Arabs when the poor at home are suffering? You're a vile cretin that attempts to put the poor-against-the-poor.

+Matthew Singh-Dosanjh I think he was talking about spending money on fighting a war in those countries. What do you think those drones are dropping in war zones, food stamps?

ruisranne I disagree- he/she was clearly trying to play off the two, which is utterly shameful. On drones- no, of course I don't think that, so this is a pathetic straw man argument on your behalf.

Matthew Singh-Dosanjh No, but it is the drone strikes, bombing, troops, tanks, aircraft carriers, bullets, planes, missiles etc. in those countries that are costing trillions of dollars to the U.S. budget. It is not a straw man argument, when it applies to the context of issue. U.S. is not "spending money on Arabs", but on war, so your point of saying he's "clearly" promoting poor vs. poor 's totally off-base. If you fail to recognise the motive of why the US is in those countries, they are not doing amnesty, they are not helping the poor, they are not spending any real money on building infrastructure, then I can see how you can misunderstand the point that person was trying to make. Which was CLEARLY on how the US is spending huge amount of money on fighting pointless wars in the Middle East.

Good observation

+TheHehe1223 Now I regret reading your comment before the end of the video :)

+TheHehe1223 his collar was bothering you??... did it leave a rash?

+TheHehe1223 It's better than the loose collars that ages his face, and makes him look like an 80 year old.

+TheHehe1223 the thing that was bothering me was those gold shackles or wtf are they jiggling and the banging on the table all the time...

And stop believing that a corrupt government is an indictment of government, instead of an indictment of those who corrupted it. So many people argue against taxes because they claim that giving money to the government is stupid, since it's so corrupt. Yes, it's corrupt. So who corrupted it? The answer is the greedy business interest, who are the very ones lobbying for their taxes to be lower. The enemy here is not government. Government is just the middle-man who's been steered down the wrong path. We don't have to get rid of government... we just have to get rid of the corruption. Government, when it's not corrupt, is there for us. It's supposed to represent the people. And as already explained, when it's allowed to tax and spend in an effective way, it helps the people greatly. Any socialist country where the government is taxing and spending as it ought to... the people are happy and comfortable. And sure, we all have issues with certain spending practices that our governments do, but can we at least keep the conversation about WHERE the money should be going, and not about just throw the baby out with the bathwater and claim we shouldn't be spending at all. I think most people think about the economy like it's comparable to personal finance. When it really isn't. The economy is so much more complicated and counter-intuitive than one person's finances. With personal finance, if you're low on income, you can skimp a little to save for the end of month. So you may not eat quite as much, won't buy that new pair of pants, maybe take the bus instead of driving for a few days... these are things that one person can do with little-to-no immediate or long-term impact. It's just one person living a little differently for a month. No big ripple effects or anything. But with a system as big and complicated as an entire country's economy, and by extension, the global economy... "skimping" in the form of cutting spending has HUGE ripple effects. Jobs are lost. Revenue gets shifted from industry to industry, and usually only in an upward trajectory. If you're cutting entitlements like pensions or employment insurance, then the spending power of the lower and middle classes drops, meaning a drop in business for companies, leading to more jobs lost, leading to more people on unemployment and welfare, even though those programs have been cut... it's a vicious cycle. This is the type of thing that doesn't happen in personal finance, but I feel like so many people think about the economy like they do with personal finances: "Saving money" must be good, right? No, because a government is not supposed to "save money". It's supposed to use the money we give it to provide us with services, infrastructure and representation. When you attack taxes, you attack the very system of government, because taxes are simply the money that government is supposed to run on. America is one of the most anti-government countries in the developed world, and it also happens to have the most corrupt government. I don't think it's unrelated. When you stop caring about your government and only start fighting against it or ignoring it... then you're throwing it to the wolves. When you believe that a corrupt government means that government itself is the problem, instead of focusing on the corruption as the problem... then you're only helping the corruption. When you protect the rich because you believe you'll be one of them someday... you're starving the very system that could have otherwise helped you get there (and DID help those you're protecting get there, before they kicked the ladder down behind them). When you try to raise a pyramid by lifting from the top... the top is probably gonna break off under the weight. When you lift from underneath by supporting the bottom... then the whole thing rises comfortably. Top-down economics is unreliable. Bottom-up economics works every time. Redistribute the wealth to the bottom, and it'll be back at the top in no time, but it's helped everybody on the ladder along the way. Keep the cycle flowing, and everything works beautifully, as we've seen in every example of high-taxation on the rich funding services for the poor. The economy booms, inequality goes down, productivity AND happiness go up. But if you cut that cycle, then nothing but problems emerge. Except for the rich... they get to laugh all the way to the off-shore bank, because wealth just gets concentrated at the top and it's recession time. That's what the "free-market" gets you, because the goal of the free-market is nothing but profit, and you can't have nothing but profit. Profit creates an imbalance where the amount of money traded for a commodity is disproportionate to what the actual value of the commodity is. So you essentially invent wealth with every transaction. Well, the person paying for that profit is at a loss now, aren't they? When and where does that loss get made up for? In the free-market, that loss just keeps falling to the bottom and accumulating. Poverty rises. Whereas if you tax the top to bring that invented money back down to the bottom... viola! Things are even again and the cycle can continue. (This is also the problem with interest, which needs to be outlawed. Yes, that's right: Interest needs to be outlawed. Globally. It's the most hollow form of profit there is and always leaves the borrower at a loss, doing NOTHING but creating debt. Like I said, money is not a even a commodity, so making a profit off of money itself? Is there anybody still wondering why inflation is so out of control?) Good economics is not about the accumulation of wealth. It's about the cycle of wealth. Capitalism needs socialism, because capitalism on it's own can only continue for so long. If you play pure, free-market capitalism out to it's logical end... the end is one person with all the money and everybody else with nothing. It's the end of a game of Monopoly. Whereas the goal of socialism is everybody with the same amount of money. It's the start of a game of Monopoly. That's what you have to do to get the game started: Give everybody an equal amount of money first. Well... try playing Monopoly by starting WITHOUT socialism. One player already has most or all of the money. The game probably ain't gonna last very long, is it? And socialism needs capitalism as well. Pure socialism would have major problems too. This is why it's pointless to argue whether capitalism is better or socialism is better... Because neither one is good just on it's own. It's a balance that's needed. And right now, America in particular is WAY out of balance. The scales have tipped way too far towards capitalism. Ever since 1976 when "money is speech" started, and the government started to be bought off by the corporate interest to keep their taxes low... the inequality has been growing. It really shouldn't be such a big secret that low taxes are not good for a country. But everybody just instinctually gravitates towards the idea of low taxes because, "Hey, I'd like to pay less taxes! That sounds great!" Yeah, it SOUNDS great. But it ends up fucking you in the end when your country breaks down around you as a result of lack of funding. And when society breaks down like that, violence goes up, ignorance goes up, division goes up... I think taxes are a small price to pay to keep society together. Especially if you're a billionaire and can fucking afford it.

+seventydreams Too bad most of people who need to learn what the OP is talking about are going "TL;DR" on the posts. Ignorant people tend to protect their ignorance by not allowing it be subjected to new information.

+AWS Vids "Not everybody can get jobs in the tech industry or science or art fields. Manufacturing, service... Certainly any job based on driving. As soon as the autonomous car revolution is in full swing, taxi drivers, bus drivers, delivery drivers... You name the driver, I'll point out a spot at the unemployment office." Absolutely, the cotton gin put so many people out on the streets and made them unemployable...

+Calvin Smith The industrial revolution might have had something to do with employing any- and everyone who just wanted to work. It won't be the case this time. And it's not just drivers who will lose their jobs to automation, the current estimate for job loss to automation within the next decades is 47%. That's... a lot.

+AWS Vids 100s of thousands of companies want to hire more staff, but are afraid due to high regulations, taxes and legal liability. No amount of Government tax & spend programs can create anywhere near the number of jobs needed - but they can certainly destroy jobs. Sanders is wrong on on tax, and so is Bill. There simply isn't any shortage of tax revenue anywhere in the Western world. SPENDING is the problem, and it needs to be cut on all fronts.

+yuubokumin415 Shut up dummy

AhsanY2K America needs to seriously fix the homeless problem. Make the hedge fund people pay to get these homeless off the street!!!

+AhsanY2K got a better idea dummy?

Yes to Athiest How much do you think Hedge funds make? A Hedge fund manager's job is to make money for their clients. That includes people's 401K, Pension funds etc on top of making money for other corporation. The underwriters for hedge funds may trade ungodly sums of money but they sure don't make that much

+yuubokumin415 not all hedge funds are worth billions of dollars

+mrpapparappa 1:03 An evil Kent Brockman.

He does. Acts like one too.

@@redlightmax Given how things turned out, more of a Waylon Smithers.

+Tripleexel Like that blimp that escaped last week. It's part of a $2 billion "zombie" program that even the Pentagon has tried to kill, but Congress keeps funnelling money into it, presumably because the contractor has put facilities in different districts so, you know, jobs.

It's "defense". And yes.

+Heroic Love It's a British spelling lol. Someone hasn't left America before.

+Tripleexel Blank cheques.

+Tripleexel Imagine how efficient the military would be if they were forced to budget like NASA does.

2020 came back to say "suck it, my sentence was commuted". The benefits of having friends on high places...

So am I

The Great Milandoon I do understand and liked your comment. But I want NASA's budget up I want the linear collider finished I want the worlds greatest infrastructure while maintaining a green standard. This would have to hit me and my family of 7 bring home about 50k. But we survive and smile every day, I just can't give them the opportunities I would like Bernie would increase my standard of living dramatically and in a couple of generations we could become the greatest nation.

+James Huey Spoken like a true woman.

Calvin Smith You obviously put a lot of thought into that. Ill give you a gold star... minus.

+James Huey The spending Bernie Sanders purposes is impossible to bring about. The spending he proposes is $18 trillion in spending over this decade alone. He would have to go much higher than 60% on the top 10% and go further down the bracket in the 60% percentile of incomes.

+ImperiousViking Between that and Ms Water's bracelets jingling like wind chimes...it was a struggle to watch this lol

Did you catch her eyelash glue leaking everywhere?

***** You can think that but you're wrong; I'm not a progressive and I'm not a millennial. "A publisher wouldn't print the book without checking the facts." Really? So I suppose the fact that David Icke (he of the Reptoid conspiracy theory) has published books means there must be something to his ideas. I hate when idiots like you put me in the position of defending a thoroughly repulsive career politician like Hillary Clinton. You could attack her and the whole Clinton Dynasty and the whole Democratic party for shit they've actually done, or you could throw retarded conspiracy theories like chimps throwing feces. Your assumptions about me were wrong but I've got a couple about you that I suspect are a little more on the mark.

***** " I wouldn't call myself an idiot, perhaps a young functioning alcoholic, who believes commenting on the internet doesn't effect political change in congress nor would influence anyone who is willing to google a bush or clintons past." Well now I just think you are awesome, since I empathize with all of that although I would not call myself young. Look I'm not defending any Clinton, it's just that I realize that sex scandals are a massive and fucking retarded scandal from the the real scandal which is corruption. OMG so and so did something with a private part, call the press! Dude I don't even dislike Berlusconi, if he was my country's leader and he did his job well I would be like fucking fine, whatever. It is so infuriating that people like the Bushes and Clintons commit real crimes, on a massive scale, and then people like this idiot are trying to throw some tabloid shit at them. As for this whole gray area on rape thing, it's a subject I don't even want to talk about, because it's been made so toxic by sjw's on the one hand and religious fundamentalists who don't believe rape can occur within marriage on the other.

***** Now I'm sure we agree almost completely. I don't actually know about how good of a job Berlusconi did I just used him as an example of how people need to care about politicians' jobs not personal lives. I'm surprised to hear you complain about "Islamophobia" with regards to Maher though; Maher despises all religions, Islam most of all, and is himself constantly accused of being an "Islamophobe" by progressives. Putting -phobe on the end of something does not automatically make it irrational or some kind of mental condition to fear it; many aspects of Islam are worth fearing, and no one knows that better than Muslim dissidents, - who Maher supports while progressive douchebags condemn them and him, and instead support Islamic theocrats (except the ones allied with the U.S., cause you know the U. S. is evil). I fucking hate Hillary Clinton and I would rather see Donald Trump win than her, because he couldn't be any more evil than her, and at least he would be hilarious. To call her a wolf in sheep's clothing, is an exponential understatement. She's like Obama, except Obama was new/unknown enough to pretend to be sincere for a few months. I agree, her true face should be clear to all yet somehow people still consider voting for her. Also fuck the House of Saud, and the government of Saudi Arabia.

+Colonel Hart He should have said "well if trump is so great, then why did you quit?"

True

***** Some even defend Islam and call people Islamophobes.