Trump, Doctors and Taxes.

[pgg]

Did he really try to "come back like Jordan, wearin' the 4 - 5" and think we wouldn't notice?

I don’t think he was trying to avoid notice.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dhb]

And fatal opioid overdose now exceeds traffic accidents as a leading cause of death in young people. What is wrong with us!!?? I think this country is becoming trash.

Wow where did you get that stat?
Civilizations fall, is all i can say.

 

[nimbus]

Wow where did you get that stat?
Civilizations fall, is all i can say.

Sadly it was all over the news a few months ago.

Drug Deaths in America Are Rising Faster Than Ever

 

[nimbus]

Republicans Consider Sharp Cut in 401(k) Contribution Limits

Corporate interests supersede this of responsible savers. W2 groups will have to transition to 1099 to take advantage of the new corporate tax rate.

 

[GhostTree]

The house plan is released but I can't find the details on whether the corporate rate reduction will help me as an individual s corp. as a resident of California it's the only upside I see.

 

[facted]

The house plan is released but I can't find the details on whether the corporate rate reduction will help me as an individual s corp. as a resident of California it's the only upside I see.

Sorry to burst your bubble. Unless you paid a lobbyist, there is no upside for you

 

[caligas]

The house plan is released but I can't find the details on whether the corporate rate reduction will help me as an individual s corp. as a resident of California it's the only upside I see.

From CNN (fake news?)

“The corporate tax rate would be lowered from 35 percent to 20 percent. The bill would also lower the top rate for noncorporate "pass-through" businesses from 39.6 percent to 25 percent”

S Corp is a pass through.

So if you divert 100k thru s Corp like we do, this would save you 15k, barring AMT effects. They plan to phase out AMT in 6 years.

 

[WisNeuro]

Have yet to see the actual plan itself, but from several news outlets, looks like my family is in for a net increase in taxes. Going private practice looks more appealing now, though.

 

[leviathan]

Yes and no? Long before Obamacare the government mandated that you buy schools, roads, parks, airports, trains, a military, a police force, a fire department, health insurance for your old age, and a (very low paying) annuity for your old age. With the possible exception of the military all of these services could be delivered privately, but they're delivered by a public program instead, and you have to pay for it whether you like/use it or not.

You're right, though, that the government model has always been to take your money, and then have the government provide the service or, failing that, pay a single contractor to provide the service for you. The government is usually too power hungry, and too condescending, to simply tell people that they need to buy something with their own money +/- a government subsidy. Why do that when you can have a bloated government program deliver the same service at 10 times the price? Its almost unheard of for the government to give you any real control over your tax dollars.

Traditionally it has been conservatives who have suggested that things don't need to be this way. The idea of swapping social security out for an Australian style mandatory retirement fund, or of swapping out the universal public schooling for cheaper/better private schools paid for with vouchers, has traditionally been a republican platform that is strongly opposed by big government democrats. Republicans are normally the ones pointing out that the best and cheapest solution for a problem is usually to give people subsidies and let them buy what they need on the free market.

That's why is so asinine that Republicans are in lockstep opposition to Obamacare. Obamacare is almost a carbon copy of a state level program created by a Republican Governor. Its just a school voucher program, but for healthcare. It preserves private, free market competition between insurance companies. It gives the middle class just enough money to buy the product they need on the free market without otherwise involving the government. It had the potential to be a permanent alternative to socializing medicine.

In most first world countries medicine is already socialized. There is no question that the US is now moving in that direction. If republicans had worked to save Obamacare, and make private, government subsidized insurance work for Americans, they might have stopped that from happening here. Instead they have done everything they could to strip the Obamacare insurance markets of the subsidies and regulations that it requires to work, and because of their mindless political rhetoric I think we are going to have truly socialized healthcare within 10 years.

Enjoy waiting in a slate grey lobby for your GS-11 doctor to see you. He was called away for an emergency powerpoint presentation about the new font mandated for interoffice memos, but your appointment shouldn't be delayed by more than 4 hours.

Interesting points, but the rest of the developed world that have single-payer or two-tiered systems with mandatory insurance are all significantly more cost-effective and have better health care outcomes. It's hard to reconcile that with the idea that having hundreds of insurance providers is a better system, when it's one of the very reasons that health care is more expensive in the US due to so many middlemen getting between your money and care. I think the other big reason for the higher costs is that all the uninsured people in the US still end up being covered, except it's in the emergency departments and ICUs after they come in with complications of easily preventable diseases, if they had primary care.

 

[med2010]

So in its present form, would s-corp physicians see any of the pass-through benefit of this plan? Or are we considered professional service firms and all earnings will be considered income?

 

[aneftp]

Interesting points, but the rest of the developed world that have single-payer or two-tiered systems with mandatory insurance are all significantly more cost-effective and have better health care outcomes. It's hard to reconcile that with the idea that having hundreds of insurance providers is a better system, when it's one of the very reasons that health care is more expensive in the US due to so many middlemen getting between your money and care. I think the other big reason for the higher costs is that all the uninsured people in the US still end up being covered, except it's in the emergency departments and ICUs after they come in with complications of easily preventable diseases, if they had primary care.

Health care outcome are metrics that can be manipulated. No one talks about the pain and suffering with waiting for elective joint replacements in other countries

No one talks how other counties count “live births” and trust me. It’s not the same as the USA.

I can go on and on his metrics are just made up numbers to look like anything u want it to.

As for single payer. I’m not against it. But the USA has become so divided. Obamacare is a mess because an uneven distribution of people are paying for it and not benefiting it and the democrats spin it around and saying those making more than 400% of poverty and paying 2-3x the Premiums than pre Aca are benefiting?? Plus paying the Obamacare taxes??? Seriously. If Obamacare taxes everyone 0.5%. Everyone. To pay for it. I don’t think we would have an issue. Just like everyone has to pay for social security. Everyone. That’s the key. Don’t make those making 200/250k pay more and not benefit and force them to pay more also.

 

[leviathan]

Health care outcome are metrics that can be manipulated. No one talks about the pain and suffering with waiting for elective joint replacements in other countries

No one talks how other counties count “live births” and trust me. It’s not the same as the USA.

I can go on and on his metrics are just made up numbers to look like anything u want it to.

As for single payer. I’m not against it. But the USA has become so divided. Obamacare is a mess because an uneven distribution of people are paying for it and not benefiting it and the democrats spin it around and saying those making more than 400% of poverty and paying 2-3x the Premiums than pre Aca are benefiting?? Plus paying the Obamacare taxes??? Seriously. If Obamacare taxes everyone 0.5%. Everyone. To pay for it. I don’t think we would have an issue. Just like everyone has to pay for social security. Everyone. That’s the key. Don’t make those making 200/250k pay more and not benefit and force them to pay more also.

I've heard lots of good counterarguments to what you're saying about the metrics being flawed, but let's just throw that aside and assume that outcomes are equal (not worse). Even then, it does seem that you are already paying a ton of money through taxes, and if we simply found a way to more efficiently utilize healthcare spending, everyone could be covered without spending an extra dime.

We can all agree that there is no perfect system out there, because ultimately there is a huge imbalance between what it costs to insure everybody, and what we're able to spend. To counter my own side, just because you have universal health care does not mean you have access to healthcare. As you rightly said, someone might have to wait a long time for an elective joint replacement, or not be able to even find a family doctor to look after their chronic disease management.

I think you guys are at a perfect point in time to look at what works in your system, what works in Canada and western Europe and Australia, but conversely what things don't work. You could then try to incorporate all of that into a new system. I think that would probably involve some mandatory single-payer system but a hybrid of having 'premium' insurance for those who want to pay more to get elective procedures quicker.

 

[PainDrain]

So apparently this bills will limit mortgage interest to loans of 500K or less, which screws me. It will also limit the amount of local taxes can be taken as deductions, which screws me. It limits student loans interest deductions, which screws me. Lastly, it may actually put me in a higher bracket by 1-2% points; but they have yet to actually show the new brackets.

How is this anything but a gift to the multimillionaire and billionaire class? This is wealth redistribution to the upper echelon.

 

[ambiturner]

If it makes you feel any better, I think the mortgage interest limit will only be for new loans. It will definitely be an issue if you move and will probably throw a big wrench into the housing market, and certainly doesn't change the fact that this plan does nothing for the middle class.

 

[Man o War]

So apparently this bills will limit mortgage interest to loans of 500K or less, which screws me. It will also limit the amount of local taxes can be taken as deductions, which screws me. It limits student loans interest deductions, which screws me. Lastly, it may actually put me in a higher bracket by 1-2% points; but they have yet to actually show the new brackets.

How is this anything but a gift to the multimillionaire and billionaire class? This is wealth redistribution to the upper echelon.

If you have a mortgage that large I'm guessing you make more than 160k, which means you're subject to AMT. So your student loan interest is already basically disallowed and other deductions are reduced.
What I hear them talking about is eliminating AMT. AMT hoses doctor income level big time.
So really you may be better off. Totally depends on how many tax brackets there are, what income levels are assigned to each bracket, and what ends up happening with AMT.
Also the current version of the bill excludes current mortgages, so you wouldn't lose any deduction for mortgage interest.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I'm reading that S cops of Physicians and lawyers may be excluded from the 25% tax bracket that other small businesses will be able to enjoy. So, don't go counting those chickens yet.

• To partially control that, the law would assume that 100 percent of earnings from professional services firms, like law firms and accounting firms, is wages, not pass-through income. For other businesses, people actively involved in the business as more than passive investors would see 70 percent of their income classified as wages and taxed normally, and 30 percent taxed at the pass-through rate.

The House Republican tax bill, explained

 

[PainDrain]

I'm reading that S cops of Physicians and lawyers may be excluded from the 25% tax bracket that other small businesses will be able to enjoy. So, don't go counting those chickens yet.

• To partially control that, the law would assume that 100 percent of earnings from professional services firms, like law firms and accounting firms, is wages, not pass-through income. For other businesses, people actively involved in the business as more than passive investors would see 70 percent of their income classified as wages and taxed normally, and 30 percent taxed at the pass-through rate.

The House Republican tax bill, explained

Again, another example of screwing over the hardworking well off for the sake of the super rich.

 

[deleted171991]

Eliminating AMT has nothing to do with the middle class (I'd rather pay an extra few thousands if it makes the millionaire class pay real taxes). I think eliminating AMT was one of the main purposes of the bill all along. Let's not forget that Trump never campaigns for something that goes significantly against his own financial interests. Just remember the estate tax "reform".

 

[Man o War]

Eliminating AMT has nothing to do with the middle class (I'd rather pay an extra few thousands if it makes the millionaire class pay real taxes). I think eliminating AMT was one of the main purposes of the bill all along. Let's not forget that Trump never campaigns for something that goes significantly against his own financial interests. Just remember the estate tax "reform".

We could still have AMT that doesn't hit at 160k. It shouldn't even hit at 500k.

 

[chessknt]

I don't understand why the upper echelon of wealth cares so much about taxes. They are all financially independent and have to be motivated by some other purpose--what the hell do they even need to do with the extra money? If Starbucks dropped my coffee price by $1 I'd think that was neat but wouldn't have paid lobbyists to advocate for that change.

Youd think that raping the national deficit would be less palatable to the ruling party but that would require politicians to not be paid shills trying to get rich.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

I don't understand why the upper echelon of wealth cares so much about taxes. They are all financially independent and have to be motivated by some other purpose--what the hell do they even need to do with the extra money? If Starbucks dropped my coffee price by $1 I'd think that was neat but wouldn't have paid lobbyists to advocate for that change.

Youd think that raping the national deficit would be less palatable to the ruling party but that would require politicians to not be paid shills trying to get rich.

It’s all about saving billions. These guys would kill themselves if they only made 500k a year. Too bad the wolves are in the position to eat.

 

[Man o War]

I wouldn't assume it's all greed. Plenty of wealthy people are extraordinarily charitable people. They just don't want to hand more money over to a corrupt government so Tom Price and company can charter private jets anytime they want. I understand that sentiment.

 

[Perrotfish]

I wouldn't assume it's all greed. Plenty of wealthy people are extraordinarily charitable people. They just don't want to hand more money over to a corrupt government so Tom Price and company can charter private jets anytime they want. I understand that sentiment.

The wealthiest Americans are actually the least charitable Americans, donating an average of 1.3% of their total income to Charity.

There are some wealthy people that are extraordinarily charitable, just like there are some good lawyers, some natural pro bodybuilders, and some likable Patriots fans. Its a rare exception to a common rule.

 

[Brahnold Bloodaxe]

So apparently this bills will limit mortgage interest to loans of 500K or less, which screws me. It will also limit the amount of local taxes can be taken as deductions, which screws me. It limits student loans interest deductions, which screws me. Lastly, it may actually put me in a higher bracket by 1-2% points; but they have yet to actually show the new brackets.

How is this anything but a gift to the multimillionaire and billionaire class? This is wealth redistribution to the upper echelon.

The new tax brackets have already been delineated: the new 35% bracket kicks in at 200k for individuals and 260k for couples. So yes, doctors definitely get shafted with this rearrangement, unless they're two subspecialist surgeons married to each other: the top 39.6% rate stays the same but now kicks in at $1m for couples rather than the existing $460k. In other words, if you make more than 260k but less than ~600k you just received a not so insignificant tax hike, but if you make more than 600k you will pay less than before. LOL!

To be fair to Trump, this isn't his bill. This has Paul Ryan's greasy establishment GOP fingerprints all over it.

 

[PainDrain]

My feeling about the super wealthy in this country is that the majority are likely good people who are simply consumed by greed. When you have everything, you just need a little more. I also think there is a small vocal minority like the Koch brothers who truly want to control the game and have their way with America. They view the citizens of this country as peons who are a means to an end. They, like Trump, can’t figure out why more people in this country can’t “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” like they did (with hundreds of millions inherited of course).

I have said this multiple times on here before but we are entering a period similar to France circa 1780s; we all know how that turned out.

 

[GA8314]

My feeling about the super wealthy in this country is that the majority are likely good people who are simply consumed by greed. When you have everything, you just need a little more. I also think there is a small vocal minority like the Koch brothers who truly want to control the game and have their way with America. They view the citizens of this country as peons who are a means to an end. They, like Trump, can’t figure out why more people in this country can’t “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” like they did (with hundreds of millions inherited of course).

I have said this multiple times on here before but we are entering a period similar to France circa 1780s; we all know how that turned out.

But, Soros doesn't want to control things? Doesn't want to impact societies at all? No agenda there?

 

[GA8314]

The new tax brackets have already been delineated: the new 35% bracket kicks in at 200k for individuals and 260k for couples. So yes, doctors definitely get shafted with this rearrangement, unless they're two subspecialist surgeons married to each other: the top 39.6% rate stays the same but now kicks in at $1m for couples rather than the existing $460k. In other words, if you make more than 260k but less than ~600k you just received a not so insignificant tax hike, but if you make more than 600k you will pay less than before. LOL!

To be fair to Trump, this isn't his bill. This has Paul Ryan's greasy establishment GOP fingerprints all over it.

Yes. Trump is not GOP establishment. I agree that the GOP establishment are greasy (as is the Democrat establishment). Many of us have been arguing this point for a long time now.

 

[GA8314]

My feeling about the super wealthy in this country is that the majority are likely good people who are simply consumed by greed. When you have everything, you just need a little more. I also think there is a small vocal minority like the Koch brothers who truly want to control the game and have their way with America. They view the citizens of this country as peons who are a means to an end. They, like Trump, can’t figure out why more people in this country can’t “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” like they did (with hundreds of millions inherited of course).

I have said this multiple times on here before but we are entering a period similar to France circa 1780s; we all know how that turned out.

So, do you think you'd get a pass as a "hot shot" doctor then? A "rich guy" in the eyes of the public? You gonna go buy a gun?

 

[deleted171991]

But, Soros doesn't want to control things? Doesn't want to impact societies at all? No agenda there?

One of the reasons there is a decent degree of democracy and freedom in Eastern Europe is Soros. He is much more of a philanthropist than politician, and his Open Society Foundation has sponsored the Western education of many thousands of (young) people (especially after the fall of the Iron Curtain, when those countries were poorer). The OSF has been present in those countries for almost 30 years. I am not saying he's Mother Theresa, but one cannot put him in the same group with most political sponsors. His contributions to making the world a better place (by spreading freedom and democracy ,in his case) are comparable to giants of charity such as the Gates foundation. I honestly don't see what he has gained from the many billions he's poured into Eastern Europe for the last decades.

The Russians (and the authoritarians) hate Soros (who was born in Hungary), because his open society dream goes against Russian totalitarianism and imperialism, so obsessing about Soros is a sign of Russian fake news brainwash, no offense. It also goes well with narrow minds and their antisemitism (how stupid can one be to hate millions of unmet strangers, as a group, based on pure brainwashing?), not infrequent among Trump supporters (present company excluded), and their European equivalents.

 

[PainDrain]

So, do you think you'd get a pass as a "hot shot" doctor then? A "rich guy" in the eyes of the public? You gonna go buy a gun?

Come back and talk about Soros when he starts complaining about unions, expanding healthcare, expanding environmental regulations and all the other pets causes of the Koch’s. You do know their history right? They were caught stealing from the US government and got a slap on the wrist. They also had such poor maintenance of their gas lines it literally incinerated a girl in Texas.

 

[GA8314]

Come back and talk about Soros when he starts complaining about unions, expanding healthcare, expanding environmental regulations and all the other pets causes of the Koch’s. You do know their history right? They were caught stealing from the US government and got a slap on the wrist. They also had such poor maintenance of their gas lines it literally incinerated a girl in Texas.

I don't know much about the Koch's, nor do I recall defending them......

 

[GA8314]

One of the reasons there is a decent degree of democracy and freedom in Eastern Europe is Soros. He is much more of a philanthropist than politician, and his Open Society Foundation has sponsored the Western education of many thousands of (young) people (especially after the fall of the Iron Curtain, when those countries were poorer). The OSF has been present in those countries for almost 30 years. I am not saying he's Mother Theresa, but one cannot put him in the same group with most political sponsors. His contributions to making the world a better place (by spreading freedom and democracy ,in his case) are comparable to giants of charity such as the Gates foundation. I honestly don't see what he has gained from the many billions he's poured into Eastern Europe for the last decades.

The Russians (and the authoritarians) hate Soros (who was born in Hungary), because his open society dream goes against Russian totalitarianism and imperialism, so obsessing about Soros is a sign of Russian fake news brainwash, no offense. It also goes well with narrow minds and their antisemitism (how stupid can one be to hate millions of unmet strangers, as a group, based on pure brainwashing?), not infrequent among Trump supporters (present company excluded), and their European equivalents.

His OSF has been pressuring the mass migration of muslim immigrants into Christian Eastern European lands. The majority indigenous people of countries such as Poland and Hungary do not feel this is compatible with their culture, religion, and values, and have voted accordingly. Sweden and other "Western" European countries are seeing the ramifications of uncontrolled mass migration of people with a very different set of values and norms, and Eastern Europe has been watching. Soros has been pushing this migration agenda and this has caused strong resentment.

Speaking of anti-Semitism. Do you know the country who realizes the ramifications of unmitigated migration of highly disparate people into their land? Israel. The Israeli's know full well what can happen to their country (values, religion, norms, social cohesion) if they were to simply allow several hundred thousand, or a million immigrants from muslim lands into their country. You may disagree, but most Israeli's feel that this would not be a net positive for them. And their actions, and policies speak for itself.

And so too do the Eastern Europeans, for now, but under immense pressure from "external sources", such as OSF.

Do you think that George Soros believes that Poland allowing 500 thousand, or a million migrants from North Africa and the Middle East would be a net positive, stabilizing influence, culturally enriching, fiscally responsible endeavor for Poland? If so, I think that is highly naive. Just my opinion.

 

[GhostTree]

I'm reading that S cops of Physicians and lawyers may be excluded from the 25% tax bracket that other small businesses will be able to enjoy. So, don't go counting those chickens yet.

• To partially control that, the law would assume that 100 percent of earnings from professional services firms, like law firms and accounting firms, is wages, not pass-through income. For other businesses, people actively involved in the business as more than passive investors would see 70 percent of their income classified as wages and taxed normally, and 30 percent taxed at the pass-through rate.

The House Republican tax bill, explained

Thanks Blade. So im paying more taxes if it passes in this form.

F#€k Trump and F#€k the GOP

 

[GravelRider]

I wouldn't assume it's all greed. Plenty of wealthy people are extraordinarily charitable people. They just don't want to hand more money over to a corrupt government so Tom Price and company can charter private jets anytime they want. I understand that sentiment.

So they hand over money to PACs and campaigns instead of the corrupt government?

 

[GravelRider]

The new tax brackets have already been delineated: the new 35% bracket kicks in at 200k for individuals and 260k for couples. So yes, doctors definitely get shafted with this rearrangement, unless they're two subspecialist surgeons married to each other: the top 39.6% rate stays the same but now kicks in at $1m for couples rather than the existing $460k. In other words, if you make more than 260k but less than ~600k you just received a not so insignificant tax hike, but if you make more than 600k you will pay less than before. LOL!

To be fair to Trump, this isn't his bill. This has Paul Ryan's greasy establishment GOP fingerprints all over it.

Does this narrative that Trump is not part of the GOP establishment still exist? If anything, Trump is the embodiment of the direction the GOP has been going in for decades. Let's not call him anti-establishment because he tweets, uses bad grammar, and "says it like it is."

 

[Man o War]

So they hand over money to PACs and campaigns instead of the corrupt government?

Maybe. I'd much rather give my extra money to the ASA than the government if those are my 2 choices.

 

[mostwanted]

Do you know the country who realizes the ramifications of unmitigated migration of highly disparate people into their land? Israel. The Israeli's know full well what can happen to their country (values, religion, norms, social cohesion) if they were to simply allow several hundred thousand, or a million immigrants from muslim lands into their country. You may disagree, but most Israeli's feel that this would not be a net positive for them. And their actions, and policies speak for itself.

I think Palestinians also don't think it was positive for them to experience the effect of mass immigration, ethnic cleansing, and humiliating apartheid system they are subjected too.

Israel is directly responsible for most of the turmoil in middle east and US is just used as a proxy. We enjoy one of the most parasitic relationships with Israel than any two countries in the world.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[d9sccr]

Thanks Blade. So im paying more taxes if it passes in this form.

F#€k Trump and F#€k the GOP

Your taxes were going up regardless of whether it was Trump or Hillary. Be mad that the government continues to tax it’s citizens so much and do so little with it

 

[Man o War]

Thanks Blade. So im paying more taxes if it passes in this form.

F#€k Trump and F#€k the GOP

You're going to fare much worse with democrats if taxes are your concern.

 

[GravelRider]

Maybe. I'd much rather give my extra money to the ASA than the government if those are my 2 choices.

Either way it ends up in Washington. Let's just not pretend that the super rich want tax cuts so they can be more charitable.

 

[Hamhock]

Speaking of anti-Semitism. Do you know the country who realizes the ramifications of unmitigated migration of highly disparate people into their land? Israel.

Hold on. Full stop.
"their land"? Whose land? Please define the 'population' of people your are talking about.
'Israel' (a country fabricated in 1947/1967) is an insufficient and very distracting answer; that is either uneducated or disingenuous. I hope your statement is just based on a lack of education .
HH

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Even though I disagree with it, I understand the GOP’s “pro-life” stance. But why then eliminate the adoption tax credit? I would gladly pay whatever pittance it would cost me in support of families willing to adopt.

 

[bigeyedfish]

Even though I disagree with it, I understand the GOP’s “pro-life” stance. But why then eliminate the adoption tax credit? I would gladly pay whatever pittance it would cost me in support of families willing to adopt.

What's stoping you?

 

[GA8314]

Hold on. Full stop.
"their land"? Whose land? Please define the 'population' of people your are talking about.
'Israel' (a country fabricated in 1947/1967) is an insufficient and very distracting answer; that is either uneducated or disingenuous. I hope your statement is just based on a lack of education .
HH

I am fully aware of all of these issues. I am not here to argue for or against the Jewish State. I'm merely pointing out that an homogeneously ethnic/religious/cultural entity has the right to maintain those things. In fact, Victor Orban of Hungary has advocated what we should all be advocating which is creating (and when able, helping fund) safe zones by which migrants can have the benefit of safe harbor in countries which share their religion (not withstanding the Shia/Sunni divide), language, and culture more so than those people do with Europeans.

But, therein lies the rub. Most migrants are not fleeing war zones. Most are economic migrants. But, the people of Europe have the right to maintaining their culture, institutions, language, and even homogeneity if they so choose. That is all I am saying.

It took the Spaniards SEVEN HUNDRED years to defeat the Moors. So, those people are not going to just leave some day. The changes may be irreversible if integration is not successful, and this requires some semblance of rationality as pertains to shear numbers let in.

Indeed, it is ANTI humanitarian to allow what is occurring in Germany and elsewhere to occur, and those advocating such open borders may face war crimes for the future bloodshed that this failed policy is likely to produce in the form of increasingly extreme rhetoric on both the native European as well as the migrant side. We will see.

 

[Twiggidy]

Me reading this thread now that the "Israel vs Palestine" argument has arrived.....

 

[deleted162650]

Me reading this thread now that the "Israel vs Palestine" argument has arrived.....

Your .gif game is impressive.

 

[Twiggidy]

Your .gif game is impressive.

10,000 hours......which says a lot about my life

 

[mostwanted]

@GA8314, there is hypocrisy in your argument, why don't you afford the same rights to Palestinians or do only Europeans/Immigrant Israelis deserve those rights?

Majority of these immigrants ARE escaping war zones created by us and European nations (e.g Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen etc) And this is exactly the same reason hundreds and thousands of Palestinians have been forced out of their homeland.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[GA8314]

@GA8314, there is hypocrisy in your argument, why don't you afford the same rights to Palestinians or do only Europeans/Immigrant Israelis deserve those rights?

Majority of these immigrants ARE escaping war zones created by us and European nations (e.g Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen etc) And this is exactly the same reason hundreds and thousands of Palestinians have been forced out of their homeland.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I use the hypocrisy that many Jewish diaspora are staunchly pro-immigrant. However, the real hypocrisy is that most (not all) Israeli's seem to be vehemently anti-immigration as pertains to Israel. I feel that I know why this is the case and I've gotten into it before, but choose not to at this time.

Like I've stated. I am fully aware of the "issues" of the creation of the Jewish State.

One can get banned or account put on hold for being too critical of Israel. If you doubt me, keep it up. You'll see.

As for the mess in the Middle East, the U.S. has a seriously flawed foreign policy with strange bedfellows to say the least.

 

[PainDrain]

This is a perfect example of the type of wealthy GOP benefactor we are going to be indentured to. Look no further than Joe Ricketts.

Opinion | A Billionaire Destroyed His Newsrooms Out of Spite