MARCELL DAREUS POWER

capital only works with labor. lol. in fact, as proven before, labor quickly creates all new capital... thanks for the compliment, now i know your moral scruples are being moved around because of me. thanks!

2 stupid ass wars and a !@#$ing depression? really? wiki- In the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections, Republicans lost Congressional seats but still retained control of the House and, more narrowly, the Senate. After the 2000 election, the Senate was divided evenly between the parties, with Republicans retaining the right to organize the Senate due to the election of Dick Cheney as Vice President and ex officio presiding officer of the Senate. The Senate shifted to control by the Democrats (though they technically were the plurality party as they were one short of a majority) after GOP senator Jim Jeffords changed party registration to "Independent" in June 2001, but later returned to Republican control after the November 2002 elections. In the 2006 elections, Democrats won both the House of Representatives (233 Democrats, 202 Republicans) and the Senate (49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and 2 Independents caucusing with the Democrats) as well as the majority of state governorships (28-22). However, in the 2010 elections, in what was very similar to the 1994 elections, Republicans won back control of the House. The Senate narrowly remained with the Democrats. Republicans also won a majority of state governorships and State Legislatures. for all intensive purposes, repubs/conservatives had control from 00-06, especially with blue dogs. again, youre a joke

top of pg 3....

he went to stanford and has a phd in neuroscience. again, why? please make an argument and improve ppp

Bush hada republican congress from -00-06... and i said obama had a few screw ups. to blame obama after the tea party nut jobs got in, is literally a joke. not to mention the monumental screw ups by bush make obama look like some bertrand russell genius... again, this article is a jonah goldberg !@#$tard critique... bush actually created massive problems, obama hasnt done the greatest job solving those problems. again, a joke...

The answer is obviously no. In fact, using your terminology, our government actually subsidizes these individuals who are earning no income with unemployment insurance, disability, and a host of other social programs depending on the situation. Speaking of insecurity, don't you have some jumping jacks to do? You are trying to hide the nature of non-labor income. when you say net loss, is this compared to last fy? or the original property bought and then sold for less? one could have net loss and still stay in business. what you are trying to say is if a business suffers capital loss, like some of their stores go under for that fy, and they suffer a net loss compared to last fy, those capitalistS should not be taxed, BUT LABOR SHOULD.

Paid for it with labor, in fact. on a bills message board? are you that insecure? better yet, are you that detached from reality? if a person takes a paycut, do they still pay taxes? can you carry losses forward on a paycut over 3gs to the next fy? if this is the case, then im all for capitalists not paying taxes or a reduced tax rate. nevermind subsidies...

i love when people have no argument.... I think Harris is just talking to hear himself speak. And get laid. why?

I think Harris is just talking to hear himself speak. And get laid. why?

obama in a depression, with a mentally ill right wing segment in congress. a few screw ups and slow recovery. ---- = "a withering portrayal of a radical adrift, in over his head, drowning in his own incompetency -- while being weighed down by a small circle of "advisers" who are compounding the problem of the Amateur in the White House." - this has to be a joke... bush takes a solid economy, deregulates, spends 5 trillion, does nothing about the 5 trillion before him, starts a stupid ass war in iraq and afghanistan and does literally nothing about health care. - any rational person would say bush is the worse president outside of nixon this nation has ever seen, maybe worse because of the depression under his watch... the quote in the article is so extreme and beyond any realm of rational discourse based in reality, i am left without words. we would have been back to under 5-6% unemployment if congress would just act.

honestly, i know im not perfect, but jesus christ, ppp is sooo bad. we are not even discussing if atheism as a label is stupid.

i wasnt responding to you. relax, we know you got this big ego. everything will be alright.

so if i make fun of mormonism, im a douche? if i make fun of racists, am i also a douche? :worthy:

it's actually very simple. if you didnt work for something, its not yours.

but if you are a shareholder in a company and that company is worth less, your stock is worth less. it should still be taxed. im not talking about property taxes in the sense that a house just sits there. im taking about business worth less or more, through capital loss or gain, should be taxed regardless. it is property, but in a different sense, ie capital you want to play a trick. you want to compare money in a bank compared to being a shareholder. so say im a shareholder of walmart and that share is 20%. even if my share goes down in value, that doesnt mean i dont have to pay taxes.... this is just another way for rich people to not pay taxes, because they are shareholders instead of labor...

this literally has nothing to do with what i said and makes no sense... good job buddy! because if youre in business, you should be taxed. labor or owner. when a person takes a lesser job, or a paycut, can they write that off? this is like a person making 20 an hr, and goes to 15 an hr, and now pays zero taxes. same for capital. if your capital contracts, or some places go under, you should still be taxed. you shouldnt be able to carry over losses from a present net loss. a capital investment is not the same as money in a savings account. a bar with capital gains should be taxed. a bar with capital losses, relevant to what it was worth last fy or when it was originally bought, should still be taxed.

are you really mad at him for making fun of mormonism? i mean, would you feel this way if i make fun of astrology? or racists? john, isnt that the major problem? they dont stay out of the way? to the point where we cant teach science or people fly planes into buildings or a parent doesnt take her child to a psychiatrist and instead gets an exorcism? e.g. va tech shooting... or something down the rabbit hole of absurdity like cutting heads off because some person drew a cartoon... really? and please dont say extremism. 1- the views are extremely silly, and 2 the religiosity to this extent is not extreme in that it is rare. its a massive problem... its not only about bad ideas dealing with the god question, but dogma in every ideology...

this is not a capital loss. if you suffer a capital loss, because you were dumb, then the capital should still be taxed.

i feel the opposite. give me an example. i mean some religious propositions are pretty nutty...

omg, wtf

this d for michigan state looks crazy good. rush, gholston, white, hoover... that might be the best dline in the bcs... and they go 2 deep, their backups of heath, calhoun, reynolds, and kittredge as really good. i think they have the best lbs in the country, norman, allen and bullough will all play in the nfl, and lawrence thomas is a 6-4 280lbs freak lb from detroit... their secondary in lewis, dennard, and adams are scrappy and solid. i think their o will pound it and not make mistakes and i think their d will be close to alabama last year. jmo... its very possible they go undefeated...

so sorry for your loss. hang in there! RIP

You need to watch the video.