B-Man Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 38 minutes ago, Roundybout said: What’s wrong with this? Nothing. Its a joke about McCarthy. Trump supported his re-election. Whatever string you are grasping at is all you. 😄 The House Democrats previously elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries as their leader, and after Republican Kevin McCarthy was finally voted in as Speaker, Jeffries immediately demonstrated the kind of thing we might be subjected to for the next couple years. It’s the Democrat ABC’s, or something: Jeffries’ slam on “kangaroo courts” was pretty rich coming from a big fan of the January 6th Commission. But at least Jeffries’ letter “E” word wasn’t a slam on “election deniers,” so maybe that’s a self-awareness baby step. https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2023/01/07/hakeem-jeffries-democrat-alphabet-house-speech-breaks-cringe-meters-everywhere/ 1
JaCrispy Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 29 minutes ago, B-Man said: Nothing. Its a joke about McCarthy. Trump supported his re-election. Whatever string you are grasping at is all you. 😄 The House Democrats previously elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries as their leader, and after Republican Kevin McCarthy was finally voted in as Speaker, Jeffries immediately demonstrated the kind of thing we might be subjected to for the next couple years. It’s the Democrat ABC’s, or something: Jeffries’ slam on “kangaroo courts” was pretty rich coming from a big fan of the January 6th Commission. But at least Jeffries’ letter “E” word wasn’t a slam on “election deniers,” so maybe that’s a self-awareness baby step. https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2023/01/07/hakeem-jeffries-democrat-alphabet-house-speech-breaks-cringe-meters-everywhere/ It’s so comical all of projection in this rap song… Aside from that, his dance moves weren’t bad…😉 Edited January 7, 2023 by JaCrispy 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Taxes are way too high sucking 40, maybe 60 percent of some people's earnings. Huge government spending has sucked the life out of the American middle and working classes. All this is what, progress? But hey, on your way to the poorhouse and living in the streets you can rest at ease that you'll be addressed with your preferred pronouns. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/25/57percent-of-us-households-paid-no-federal-income-tax-in-2021-study.html. Wouldn't the 57% of people that paid no tax include most of the "middle and working classes"? another salient article: https://www.propublica.org/article/when-billionaires-dont-pay-taxes-people-lose-faith-in-democracy Edited January 7, 2023 by redtail hawk
reddogblitz Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 8 hours ago, redtail hawk said: Dang! You support Medicare for all? They were being realistic. Could never pass. Too many wealthy (from money that should have gone to patient care) special interests. It will take massive public pressure to git'r done. Hop on the bandwagon with me! I found it sad and illuminating that so many on the board were concerned at how Damar would pay his medical bills. I jumped on the bandwagon in 2008 and voted for Obama cuz he was going to make significant changes to our health care system and bring down costs for everyone. Instead what we got was a system where if you are poor and can get a subsidy it works for you. Meanwhile the rest of us our prices have continued to rise year over year. Not sure I trust them to give it another go.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: I jumped on the bandwagon in 2008 and voted for Obama cuz he was going to make significant changes to our health care system and bring down costs for everyone. Instead what we got was a system where if you are poor and can get a subsidy it works for you. Meanwhile the rest of us our prices have continued to rise year over year. Not sure I trust them to give it another go. I live in a region where two states (one deep red and one purple, Tenn and Va) supported and continue to support a hospital system monopoly in a geographic area the size of NJ. A great many of the hospital "customers" in this financially poor region are "insured" by gov't programs. So the states are actually promoting noncompetitive practices for gov't health spending while enabling large private profits. I share your pain and skepticism. There's something rotten in Appalachia and Nashville and Richmond. Edited January 7, 2023 by redtail hawk
Doc Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 4 hours ago, Westside said: You think they would be progressives? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Well, they did like wearing wigs... 1 hour ago, B-Man said: Nothing. Its a joke about McCarthy. Trump supported his re-election. Whatever string you are grasping at is all you. 😄 The House Democrats previously elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries as their leader, and after Republican Kevin McCarthy was finally voted in as Speaker, Jeffries immediately demonstrated the kind of thing we might be subjected to for the next couple years. It’s the Democrat ABC’s, or something: Jeffries’ slam on “kangaroo courts” was pretty rich coming from a big fan of the January 6th Commission. But at least Jeffries’ letter “E” word wasn’t a slam on “election deniers,” so maybe that’s a self-awareness baby step. https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2023/01/07/hakeem-jeffries-democrat-alphabet-house-speech-breaks-cringe-meters-everywhere/ Hak...is just that. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 58 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/25/57percent-of-us-households-paid-no-federal-income-tax-in-2021-study.html. Wouldn't the 57% of people that paid no tax include most of the "middle and working classes"? another salient article: https://www.propublica.org/article/when-billionaires-dont-pay-taxes-people-lose-faith-in-democracy I won't dispute stats but that number isn't a sign of prosperity and instead a sign lots of people are falling into poverty. And that's my general argument, our standard of living and quality of life is deteriorating. Most people not paying taxes don't earn enough money. That's hardly a positive. How much billionaires pay is governed by how the tax law defines "income" for the tax year. Blame lobbyists for the wealthy, Congress, and the Chief Executive for that one. That's just how crony capitalism works where the politically connected get rich by gaming the system at the expense of the general population. If the voters don't like that then stop voting for establishment Democrats and Republicans. And the biggest tax of all is inflation. You can thank decades of loose Fed monetary policy and massive government borrowing and low-value spending. Unfortunately, I see all these bills coming due and things taking a big turn for the worse in 2023 for most people that aren't prepared or not even aware of things because they're fed constant BS from the media playing up the establishment's fairy tale all is great theme. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 57 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: How much billionaires pay is governed by how the tax law defines "income" for the tax year. Blame lobbyists for the wealthy, Congress, and the Chief Executive for that one. That's just how crony capitalism works where the politically connected get rich by gaming the system at the expense of the general population. If the voters don't like that then stop voting for establishment Democrats and Republicans. Fully agree and yet it's of no concern to some here. I can't understand or rationalize that. The only group I see proposing changing that is the left. Re standard of living, I grew up in a single earner professional household in the 60's and 70's. We had 1 car which until I was in my teens was used, our house was about 1800 sq feet, we went on 1 vacation a year driving to Canada and we ate out occasionally. We ate well. No cell phones but we did have cable and a decent stereo. Most of my friends growing up were in similar situations. And yet we were better off than most. I have peers that went into the same profession and now live much more luxurious lifestyles. I would categorize both instances as upper middle class. I truly believe 2 earner middle class families often have significantly better lifestyles than 1 earner families or even 2 earner families ( women were paid very poorly, in general)) back then. The poor are just as poor now. And the rich are richer. Those are the extremes that need to be adjusted by tax policies imo. Just so happens, that's what Bernie proposes. Edited January 7, 2023 by redtail hawk
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 4 hours ago, B-Man said: LOL. And (of course) he gets his first demand. Zelenskyy congratulates Kevin McCarthy & is counting on ‘further assistance’ https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2023/01/07/zelenskyy-congratulates-kevin-mccarthy-is-counting-on-further-assistance/ Biden and the left in 3….2…..1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 9 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Biden and the left in 3….2…..1 Maybe it's just me but I think he looks a lot more like this guy than Biden.
SoCal Deek Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 1 hour ago, redtail hawk said: Fully agree and yet it's of no concern to some here. I can't understand or rationalize that. The only group I see proposing changing that is the left. Re standard of living, I grew up in a single earner professional household in the 60's and 70's. We had 1 car which until I was in my teens was used, our house was about 1800 sq feet, we went on 1 vacation a year driving to Canada and we ate out occasionally. We ate well. No cell phones but we did have cable and a decent stereo. Most of my friends growing up were in similar situations. And yet we were better off than most. I have peers that went into the same profession and now live much more luxurious lifestyles. I would categorize both instances as upper middle class. I truly believe 2 earner middle class families often have significantly better lifestyles than 1 earner families or even 2 earner families ( women were paid very poorly, in general)) back then. The poor are just as poor now. And the rich are richer. Those are the extremes that need to be adjusted by tax policies imo. Just so happens, that's what Bernie proposes. What the $&@? It is definitely NOT the job of the federal government to ‘adjust’ people’s incomes after they have earned them!
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Maybe it's just me but I think he looks a lot more like this guy than Biden. I think I follow your reference but I suppose I didn’t set that up very well. That’s supposed to be a GIF with Dwight shunning someone on the show. The point was now that Zelensky has said something positive to a Republican, his days as darling of the left are likely over. As for Andrew Clyde and supporting Officer Fanone, I was disgusted by the 1/6 attacks and support prosecution for offenders, and support generally the police officers who stood guard that day. I still wonder why they were overmatched and overrun, how the Capitol was breached that day, and think partisan politics and a willingness to sacrifice a few officers was part of the bigger plan. That said, I’m not sure there could be a bigger bunch of s***bags (Bernie Sanders included) in dem politics than many there now as it relates to supporting law enforcement outside of the ones that protect them personally. It would be awesome to see them (and liberals generally) tone down the rhetoric directed against law enforcement, and give the same benefit of the doubt they have to the officer who dispatched Ashley Babbitt on 1/6. Edited January 8, 2023 by leh-nerd skin-erd 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: What the $&@? It is definitely NOT the job of the federal government to ‘adjust’ people’s incomes after they have earned them! maybe you should run as a libertarian? I'm sure you'd get at least 5% of the vote if you were a really good candidate. Assuming you are 100% against progressive taxation. Edited January 8, 2023 by redtail hawk
SoCal Deek Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: maybe you should run as a libertarian? I'm sure you'd get at least 5% of the vote if you were a really good candidate. Assuming you are 100% against progressive taxation. I am indeed against progressive taxation. It has gotten us into the fiscal mess we now find ourselves in.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I am indeed against progressive taxation. It has gotten us into the fiscal mess we now find ourselves in. a conservative analysis of flat tax. Doesn't even mention the poor who would clearly be adversely affected. This seems purely from an upper middle class and above perspective and the conclusion is still against a flat tax https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/flat-tax-impact-on-saving-and-the-economy/ Edited January 8, 2023 by redtail hawk
SoCal Deek Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: a conservative analysis of flat tax. Doesn't even mention the poor who would clearly be adversely affected. This seems purely from a upper middle class and above perspective and the conclusion is still against a flat tax https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/flat-tax-impact-on-saving-and-the-economy/ Isn’t sales tax a flat tax? Isn’t property tax a flat tax? These type is studies are done to support a pre-drawn conclusion.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Isn’t sales tax a flat tax? Isn’t property tax a flat tax? These type is studies are done to support a pre-drawn conclusion. Yes, this is obviously about federal income and withholding tax. I haven't seen much chatter about making the examples that you cite becoming progressive. This isn't a study but an opinion which while limited in perspective seems pretty logical to me and well considered. I think loopholes that allow billionaires to pay little or no tax could be closed without invoking a flat tax. Edited January 8, 2023 by redtail hawk
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 (edited) 28 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I think I follow your reference but I suppose I didn’t set that up very well. That’s supposed to be a GIF with Dwight shunning someone on the show. The point was now that Zelensky has said something positive to a Republican, his days as darling of the left are likely over. As for Andrew Clyde and supporting Officer Fanone, I was disgusted by the 1/6 attacks and support prosecution for offenders, and support generally the police officers who stood guard that day. I still wonder why they were overmatched and overrun, how the Capitol was breached that day, and think partisan politics and a willingness to sacrifice a few officers was part of the bigger plan. Zelensky is trying to ensure continued US support for his country. Pretty understandable, right? Still, he knows where the most support is and who actually believe a proxy war against Russia is worthwhile to protect against Russian expansion, colonialism, power concentration and honor NATO obligations. Those people, who are mostly Dems (esp in the house) will stick by him and Ukraine. If you call that isolationism versus globalism, you wouldn't be far off. We live in a small, dangerous world. Edited January 8, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
SoCal Deek Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 33 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Yes, this is obviously about federal income and withholding tax. I haven't seen much chatter about making the examples that you cite becoming progressive. This isn't a study but an opinion which while limited in perspective seems pretty logical to me and well considered. I think loopholes that allow billionaires to pay little or no tax could be closed without invoking a flat tax. I’m actually fine with some progression and getting rid of ALL ‘loopholes’ and deductions. You should be able to do your taxes on a 3x5 card. Too many people making too much money off the complexities. 2
reddogblitz Posted January 8, 2023 Posted January 8, 2023 3 hours ago, redtail hawk said: a conservative analysis of flat tax. Doesn't even mention the poor who would clearly be adversely affected. This seems purely from an upper middle class and above perspective and the conclusion is still against a flat tax https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/flat-tax-impact-on-saving-and-the-economy/ There is a way to do national sales tax without being unfair to poor. https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works Quote Get a Tax Refund in Advance on Purchases of Basic Necessities The FairTax provides a progressive program called a prebate. This gives every legal resident household an “advance refund” at the beginning of each month so that purchases made up to the poverty level are tax-free. The prebate prevents an unfair burden on low-income families. Learn more . Quote The current federal income tax system is clearly broken — unfair, overly complex, and almost impossible for most Americans to understand. But there is a reasonable, nonpartisan alternative before Congress that is both fair and easy to understand. A system that allows you to keep your whole paycheck and only pay taxes on what you spend. The FairTax is a national sales tax that treats every person equally and allows American businesses to thrive, while generating the same tax revenue as the current four-million-word-plus tax code. Under the FairTax, every person living in the United States pays a sales tax on purchases of new goods and services, excluding necessities due to the prebate. The FairTax rate after necessities is 23% compared to combining the 15% income tax bracket with the 7.65% of employee payroll taxes under the current system -- both of which will be eliminated! Everyone gets a check to cover taxes up to the poverty line. No taxes under the poverty or some other determined line.
Recommended Posts