1915 Buffalo Bill Cody fan Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 @3rdnlng your cult leader TrumpOLINI apologist Rrrruussshhah dingy Crazy GREEDY LIMPboss just said 2 hours ago Chinese people are sick or dead by Coronavirus just to get TrumpOLINI to lose his job in November calling Centers for Disease Control a Democrat conspiracy to exaggerate this virus as "the common cold" and "less deadly than the flu @2%" hurts you fat ass fascists when your hero lies again to inflame MAGA hat wearers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1915 Buffalo Bill Cody fan Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 @LSHMEAB telling the truth to @Deranged Rhino is pointless....facts don't matter to such ilk.... McCarthyism and red-baiting is 200 years old repressing labor unions and healthcare for injured workers harmed on the job.... gawdless Atheism is also a 200 year old insult since the French Revolution seized church wealth to feed the hungry 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Gary Busey said: Koko is trying to graduate preschool but can't get past the ice cream stage. Is that the one where you have to decide between 1 scoop or 2 scoops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 If Bernie is the nominee then Trump will win and Congress will be a majority of republicans both houses , Katy bar the door. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, ALF said: If Bernie is the nominee then Trump will win and Congress will be a majority of republicans both houses , Katy bar the door. Many people on here have been telling you that's how it was going to go down for a number of months now It won't be the end of the republic, it'll be the salvation of it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Many people on here have been telling you that's how it was going to go down for a number of months now It won't be the end of the republic, it'll be the salvation of it. I'm thinking no matter who wins it will result in a split. HoR one party and Senate the other. Neither candidate is super popular. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: I'm thinking no matter who wins it will result in a split. HoR one party and Senate the other. Neither candidate is super popular. It could end up that way, there's no guarantee they'll retake the House. I doubt they lose the Senate, so a split is certainly possible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Doc Brown said: I'm not being facetious. If recent history is any indicator the less experience in politics the better your chances are (thinking about Hillary being the most qualified candidate ever). It's a popularity contest and about who inspires people the most to get people to turn out and vote. Sad but true. I'm with Doc on this one. In my lifetime the Ds have only won with young charismatic candidates with the possible exceptions LBJ, but that was a special circumstance. Kennedy LBJ Carter Clinton Obama Too bad none of their young inexperienced people are charismatic. Pete should be the guy, but he's just not charismatic. Neither is Amy. Shoulda gone with Yang Gang. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 hours ago, Rob's House said: The real question is WHY is it a problem. It seems the underlying implication is that those who are struggling would have more if those at the top made less. I'm curious if that's your reasoning? Yeah. And I've read P.J O'Rourke's book regarding pizza, slices, and such. Solid counterarguments that I don't personally buy. Did you know that America, yes, the United States of America, once taxed the top 1 percent roughly 90 PERCENT of their earnings? This was in the 50's and 60's to pay for GI Bills and such. We needed to make America great again; is THIS the time period in which we needed to return or is it ONLY the 1980's laissez faire approach, which of course lead to a huge deficit crisis, just as the roaring 20's lead to 1929. Is Bernie Sanders proposing anything CLOSE to a 90 percent marginal rate? The answer is of course not. You can disagree with his policies, but the notion that these proposals are DRASTIC alterations from anything we've seen before just doesn't mesh with history. The reason I ask the question regarding CEO/worker ratio is because I believe capitalism is great, but requires a proverbial reset button on occasion. It's entirely possible that Sanders is TOO extreme. Maybe. I don't know. But the reason I posed the question is that I believe unchecked capitalism WOULD lead to soaring CEO/worker rates. Like I said, does it become a problem if it's 10,000 to 1? I would say yes. That's a problem. Once again Rob; I don't want to see any policies that preclude folks from getting extremely wealthy through innovation and creativity. That would lead to disastrous consequences. But I have zero problem with taxing those at the top a slightly higher rate for things like healthcare and higher minimum wage standards. Free tuition? That's a bit far for my taste. I think there should be MORE assistance for kids who did well in high school but come from poor backgrounds. Free for everyone? Meh. Little too far. Last thing I'll say on this is that if the minimum wage were adjusted for inflation from it's inception, we'd be talking about raising it to 19 and change an hour. Sanders is proposing 15/hr. So historically speaking, the minimum wage would STILL not top where it's been right here in America. Ok. I lied. Democrats have lost all their credibility regarding Trump with nonsensical investigations and accusations. It's a little different because of the time lapse, but R's lost a lot of cred with their proclamations regarding an Obama Presidency. Remember when he was a socialist and the country would be destroyed? I don't think people feel that way about 2009-2017. Now Sanders is much more progressive than Obama, but those fear tactics are fresh in my mind; not so sure people have long enough memories for that to matter electorally. 4 hours ago, GG said: How much of the USA's healthcare rankings affected by lifestyle choices and addictions vs healthcare delivery? LOL. Probably quite a bit if we're being honest. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 9 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said: Yeah. And I've read P.J O'Rourke's book regarding pizza, slices, and such. Solid counterarguments that I don't personally buy. Did you know that America, yes, the United States of America, once taxed the top 1 percent roughly 90 PERCENT of their earnings? This was in the 50's and 60's to pay for GI Bills and such. We needed to make America great again; is THIS the time period in which we needed to return or is it ONLY the 1980's laissez faire approach, which of course lead to a huge deficit crisis, just as the roaring 20's lead to 1929. Is Bernie Sanders proposing anything CLOSE to a 90 percent marginal rate? The answer is of course not. You can disagree with his policies, but the notion that these proposals are DRASTIC alterations from anything we've seen before just doesn't mesh with history. The reason I ask the question regarding CEO/worker ratio is because I believe capitalism is great, but requires a proverbial reset button on occasion. It's entirely possible that Sanders is TOO extreme. Maybe. I don't know. But the reason I posed the question is that I believe unchecked capitalism WOULD lead to soaring CEO/worker rates. Like I said, does it become a problem if it's 10,000 to 1? I would say yes. That's a problem. Once again Rob; I don't want to see any policies that preclude folks from getting extremely wealthy through innovation and creativity. That would lead to disastrous consequences. But I have zero problem with taxing those at the top a slightly higher rate for things like healthcare and higher minimum wage standards. Free tuition? That's a bit far for my taste. I think there should be MORE assistance for kids who did well in high school but come from poor backgrounds. Free for everyone? Meh. Little too far. Last thing I'll say on this is that if the minimum wage were adjusted for inflation from it's inception, we'd be talking about raising it to 19 and change an hour. Sanders is proposing 15/hr. So historically speaking, the minimum wage would STILL not top where it's been right here in America. Ok. I lied. Democrats have lost all their credibility regarding Trump with nonsensical investigations and accusations. It's a little different because of the time lapse, but R's lost a lot of cred with their proclamations regarding an Obama Presidency. Remember when he was a socialist and the country would be destroyed? I don't think people feel that way about 2009-2017. Now Sanders is much more progressive than Obama, but those fear tactics are fresh in my mind; not so sure people have long enough memories for that to matter electorally. LOL. Probably quite a bit if we're being honest. You are correct that the top tax rates were once up to 90%. What you don't say though is that at that time there were so many loopholes that nobody paid anywhere near that rate. Nobody. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: You are correct that the top tax rates were once up to 90%. What you don't say though is that at that time there were so many loopholes that nobody paid anywhere near that rate. Nobody. That was my question. how many people actually paid that? They had lawyers, accountants, and loop holes back then too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: You are correct that the top tax rates were once up to 90%. What you don't say though is that at that time there were so many loopholes that nobody paid anywhere near that rate. Nobody. I would have to check into that, and I'm sure this is correct. Still....That's pretty high. TOO HIGH. Just want to reiterate that my views are not anti-rich. If somebody like Bill Gates creates something that alters the world, he deserves to become wealthy. That's where I think we (progressives) need to be careful. You never want to stymie innovation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) 20 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said: ... Ok. I lied. Democrats have lost all their credibility regarding Trump with nonsensical investigations and accusations. It's a little different because of the time lapse, but R's lost a lot of cred with their proclamations regarding an Obama Presidency. Remember when he was a socialist and the country would be destroyed? I don't think people feel that way about 2009-2017. Now Sanders is much more progressive than Obama, but those fear tactics are fresh in my mind; not so sure people have long enough memories for that to matter electorally. ... i don't think the comparisons of what the Dems and their lackeys the main stream propagandists have done and are doing to Trump and what the Repubs did to Obama are even close. was Obama impeached because of a made up nonexistent fiction? not. even. close. Edited February 25, 2020 by Foxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: That was my question. how many people actually paid that? They had lawyers, accountants, and loop holes back then too. There were a ton more loopholes back then. Every doctor had some sort of real estate investment that lost money on paper only but made for an excellent deduction or credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 hours ago, 1915 Buffalo Bill Cody fan said: @LSHMEAB telling the truth to @Deranged Rhino is pointless.. Appreciate the sentiment, but DR has "schooled" me many times. I think you can have constructive dialogue about the economy without getting into catfights. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 46 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: You are correct that the top tax rates were once up to 90%. What you don't say though is that at that time there were so many loopholes that nobody paid anywhere near that rate. Nobody. On top of that, there are far more places to hide your money now than there was back then, when the world was still rebuilding after WW2. If any of these Democrat candidates actually did raise the income tax rate to 90%, or institute some kind of idiotic "wealth tax" (forgetting that most wealth isn't fungible), the rich will simply dump their US assets, relocate to Europe, and renounce their US citizenship. The government will never collect from the rich to pay for this 'free everything' populist nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 10 minutes ago, Koko78 said: On top of that, there are far more places to hide your money now than there was back then, when the world was still rebuilding after WW2. If any of these Democrat candidates actually did raise the income tax rate to 90%, or institute some kind of idiotic "wealth tax" (forgetting that most wealth isn't fungible), the rich will simply dump their US assets, relocate to Europe, and renounce their US citizenship. The government will never collect from the rich to pay for this 'free everything' populist nonsense. Neil Cavuto explained this to a student activist a couple years back. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 12 minutes ago, LBSeeBallLBGetBall said: Neil Cavuto explained this to a student activist a couple years back. Wow, what a dipshit. Talk about just believing in rainbow-farting unicorns. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said: There were a ton more loopholes back then. Every doctor had some sort of real estate investment that lost money on paper only but made for an excellent deduction or credit. Lots of money was dumped into farming back during the 1950's-1990's as a tax loss type operation. WNY was no different than any other area in the US in this respect. Then the Feds clamped down on that. No coincidence in my mind that is when a lot of agribusinesses tanked when the tax write off money stopped coming in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts