Trump just got murdered IMO.

[GeneralVeers]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Originally you had to be a property owner to vote. The Founders rightly surmised that allowing people to vote who have nothing at stake would be destructive. Unfortunately there is no turning back the clock. With a majority of Americans either not paying net taxes, or getting government handouts, they have every incentive to vote Democrat. Of course enhanced benefits, paid family leave, increased minimum wage, and free college sound like wonderful ideas as long as the "rich" are paying for it.

 

[xaelia]

With a majority of Americans either not paying net taxes, or getting government handouts, they have every incentive to vote Democrat.

~17% of Americans tax units pay neither income or payroll tax.

This is the sort of glib soundbite that is not exactly wrong and repeatedly perpetuated to drive a particular narrative, yet is a – let's say – HRC-style incomplete representation of the truth.

As for "government handouts", there are plenty of those carved out for farms, corporate interests, and other loopholes benefiting the wealthy. As for the ~$trillion worth of "welfare" given out, the largest component is Medicaid, and the rest is scattered among things like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, an Earned Income Tax Credit, food stamps, etc. I'm not sure these are programs that incentivize people to be comfortable and lazy consumers of government assistance.

That said, I'm all for taking a scalpel to the wasteful and ineffective portions of these programs – and I agree that won't happen without regime change.

Paul Ryan 2020?

 

[TooMuchResearch]

I'm starting to think that Americans should pass a basic political knowledge test before being allowed to register to vote or take part in primaries. Simple stuff. The role of the presidency, branches of government, formal positions of candidates/parties. Maybe even some other stuff like basic breakdown of federal budget, candidates past experience, etc.

Pardon the elitism...but there is a good portion of stupid, ill informed people in this country that seem to dictate the discussion and agenda. On both sides of the spectrum.

I think certain rights dictate certain responsibilities.

Thoughts?

That's not how the republic works.

 

[AlmostAnMD]

Can't wait for the vice presidential debate

two guys I've never heard of and don't care about will race to bore me to sleep

 

[Arcan57]

Can't wait for the vice presidential debate

two guys I've never heard of and don't care about will race to bore me to sleep

On the other hand if Trump wins, the day to day management of the government will be being done by Pence.

 

[evilbooyaa]

Originally you had to be a property owner to vote. The Founders rightly surmised that allowing people to vote who have nothing at stake would be destructive. Unfortunately there is no turning back the clock. With a majority of Americans either not paying net taxes, or getting government handouts, they have every incentive to vote Democrat. Of course enhanced benefits, paid family leave, increased minimum wage, and free college sound like wonderful ideas as long as the "rich" are paying for it.

Yeah! Americans like Donald Trump not paying taxes and the Banks that crashed our entire economic system then got government handouts!

I'm not saying it's better, but there's a ton of ultra-rich folks/companies that we are actively subsidizing ONLY because lobbyists have been able to convince politicians that it is necessary.

We have to cut government spending everywhere, and I'd argue to cut subsidies from the ultra-rich first (top 0.001%) so they can't buy their 3rd porsche rather than the bottom 5% who wouldn't be able to eat without it. Not saying that the welfare system is free of abuse, either.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Yeah! Americans like Donald Trump not paying taxes and the Banks that crashed our entire economic system then got government handouts!

I'm not saying it's better, but there's a ton of ultra-rich folks/companies that we are actively subsidizing ONLY because lobbyists have been able to convince politicians that it is necessary.

We have to cut government spending everywhere, and I'd argue to cut subsidies from the ultra-rich first (top 0.001%) so they can't buy their 3rd porsche rather than the bottom 5% who wouldn't be able to eat without it. Not saying that the welfare system is free of abuse, either.

I agree with not paying taxes. If you can do it using the law and loopholes, then good for you!

 

[Boatswain2PA]

I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable amount of taxes, but it pisses me off when the government spends 30% of what I make on so much stupid stuff.

We used to send men to the moon, now we are too busy paying for great grandma's ICU stay.

 

[wonderbread12]

I'm starting to think that Americans should pass a basic political knowledge test before being allowed to register to vote or take part in primaries. Simple stuff. The role of the presidency, branches of government, formal positions of candidates/parties. Maybe even some other stuff like basic breakdown of federal budget, candidates past experience, etc.

Pardon the elitism...but there is a good portion of stupid, ill informed people in this country that seem to dictate the discussion and agenda. On both sides of the spectrum.

I think certain rights dictate certain responsibilities.

Thoughts?

I've said this on here for years.

If this ever happened, looks like like Trump would lose a large portion of his fan base: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...by_an_educational_gap_among_white_voters.html

I agree with not paying taxes. If you can do it using the law and loopholes, then good for you!

Classic, so who should pay for the roads, parks, bridges, etc that I'm sure you use? Let's let the poor and middle class foot the bill and then be shocked when they are in need of social welfare and resources such as planned parenthood. But sure don't pay any taxes and be totally cool with a rich billionaire gloating about not paying taxes while somehow trying to convince the America that he would do anything to help anyone but himself get richer.

bringing up the Clinton Foundation

He passed because he's done way shadier things with his own foundation and he'd get clobbered if he brought it up. Go watch John Oliver's segment on it if you're too lazy to read up on it yourself

 

[Siggy]

What social policies of Trump don't you like? As far as I can tell he's generally supportive of gays, and LEGAL minorities in the U.S. On the subject of abortion he's probably more to the left on the issue than any Republican candidate in recent memory. I like his economic policy. If we hire Donald Trump it's for one thing only: to fix the economy. It's about time we have someone who understands business actually run the country. I thought his simple statement of "I'm Smart" for not paying taxes is poignant. My goal is to to pay the fewest taxes possible. If I could use legal measures and loopholes to get it down to zero, so much the better.

I'm sorry what is Trump for again? Almost everything he says he contradicts... almost immediately. His stated economic policies will lead to trade wars (LULZ, we import things, so we should start tariffs. Free trade is bad!), terrorism (we should murder the family members of terrorists. Terrorists shouldn't have lawyers, even if they are an American Citizen (from his speech after the Rahami pressure cooker bombs). Because the best way to fight terrorism is to create martyrs.

His campaign at one time stated that even US citizens who are Muslim shouldn't be allowed back.

He doesn't understand the difference between a defensive treaty and an economic treaty. Yes, Donald, we pay a lot into NATO. What do we get back? Fighting our enemies in the backyard of other countries. That makes it a pretty good deal.

So, what again, does Trump support? That is neither bat **** crazy, illegal (stop and frisk still stands as unconstitutional, regardless of whether the judge was pulled), or immediately contradicted?


Yes, Clinton may be as corrupt as they come, but at least I know what she stands for... and it's not what will make the crowd cheer at that specific time either.

 

[Siggy]

As for "government handouts", there are plenty of those carved out for farms, corporate interests, and other loopholes benefiting the wealthy.

Don't forget the F-35 project.

 

[RustedFox]

Pssst. Guys, guys.... not only did he trot out the taxes = roads argument, but he is using a John Oliver sketch to argue a point?!

Are we sure this didn't get moved to SPF?

 

[wonderbread12]

Pssst. Guys, guys.... not only did he trot out the taxes = roads argument, but he is using a John Oliver sketch to argue a point?!

Are we sure this didn't get moved to SPF?

Hey now...i did also link a slate article 😉

to be fair, I did say ..IF you're too lazy to read up on it...I thought an amusing video would hold one's attention span

 

[Daiphon]

Here's an interesting viewpoint, and one I've been pondering since DT entered the GOP primary:

http://theantimedia.org/trump-trying-lose-election/

Thoughts? Explains a *lot* dontcha think?

Semper Brunneis Pallium

 

[GeneralVeers]

I never said that Trump was perfect, that he didn't lie, and didn't do shady things. I never said he didn't contradict himself regularly or that some of his ideas aren't downright wacky. What I do know is that Hillary will make my life appreciably worse in almost every possible respect. Therefore I'd rather take a risk with him, than vote for her.

 

[deleted109597]

It wouldn't have taken anything more than that to beat HRC this cycle. Or, perhaps not – a worthy president Trump might not be, but he certainly is a better pitchman in his own way than most alternative candidates would be.

I appreciate what some of the folks cheering for Trump represent. Unfortunately, in some ways, they have been deliberately misled by conspiracy-based right-wing media. A characterization of "liberal bias" in the "left-wing media" as a method of discounting facts and reality is an impressive and durable accomplishment – all of which came back to bite them in the ass during the GOP primary.

Some of HRC's flaws are real, and some are the product of years worth of anti-Clinton smear and planning just to defeat her this election.

Back on topic (since it's apparently sticking around here), she did clearly "win" the debate by most accounts. Whether she won the debate in the eyes of the truly undecided is another matter entirely, as is whether a debate win serves as a reliable surrogate for an improvement in her electoral college performance.

I would probably guess this debate was most successful at solidifying her base for turnout (e.g., attacks on Trump's statements regarding women) and for voicing progressive policies to try and get back the Sanders democrats and other democrats defecting to third parties in protest. Regardless of your opinion of his debate performance, I don't see this as expanding Trump's appeal beyond those already committed to him.

Well, when HuffPo again tells me the only reason I don't like her is because I don't like women, just like the only reason I don't like Obama is because I don't like blacks, and I didn't like Bill because, uh, I also didn't like blacks or something.

It's all identity politics now. Neither will appreciably change much, but somehow the most open, transparent administration managed to do neither of those, while increasing discord amongst groups. Way to unify.

 

[evilbooyaa]

I agree with not paying taxes. If you can do it using the law and loopholes, then good for you!

Then I assume you are OK with the poor not paying taxes, as they are doing it using the law and loopholes.

 

[Angry Birds]

Pssst. Guys, guys.... not only did he trot out the taxes = roads argument, but he is using a John Oliver sketch to argue a point?!

Are we sure this didn't get moved to SPF?

Jon Oliver is a genius.

But you're right. He's no game show host or reality tv show guy. Just a political satirist who will go down in history like Jon Stewart and Colbert.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Then I assume you are OK with the poor not paying taxes, as they are doing it using the law and loopholes.

The law is the law. If they are following it, then so be it. If we really want "everyone to pay their fair share" then the law should be changed so that EVERYONE, rich or poor pays something, even if it's $1.

Edit: I'm actually on record as being against Federal income taxes. The government should not come in and steal your money through the threat of force. If Individual States want to have income taxes then fine, let them do it. That way I'll just move to the state with the lowest, or no income tax.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Here is the breakdown for how life under Hillary will be worse for us:

1. Income Taxes - I'm assuming a 5% income tax increase if she gets her way. That is $20-$30K in NET loss to each of us depending on salary.
2. Capital Gains - Democrats want them taxed at regular income rates. I doubt she will do that, but a 5% increase is likely. $5K net per year loss on average
3. Healthcare - My premiums are already going to go up $1000 for the year under Obamacare. She will double down on this failing program, so I expect continued increases. Net $1k increase per year.
4. Global Warming - Whether or not your believe in it, these programs cost money. Gas, electricity and other taxes will hurt us. I'm conservatively figuring $1K per year in extra costs for us.

So my estimate is that if she gets even some of what she wants passed, it will cost me $35K per year in after-tax income. That's a tremendous amount!

In terms of non-monetary issues she will make my life worse in the following ways:

1. Gun control - harder to get guns and more expensive ammo (ammo always goes up when Democrats elected). In Nevada this is a huge issue as everyone here is carrying.
2. Syrian refugees - Let's take 100K people into the country with no job skills, who don't speak English, and culturally might as well be from Mars.
3. More CMS/Health regulations that will make our jobs, and nurse's jobs more difficult at work.
4. Increased CAFE standards on cars, leading to worse cars with crappier engines and/or increased cost.
5. Entrenching culture of political correctness that drowns freedom of speech and thought. Please watch last year's season of South Park as they explain it better than I can.

(Bracing for ridicule from Progressives for above comments on guns, global warming, Syrians and cars)

 

[deleted245139]

With a virtual 50/50 split and a deep divide politically left v right, the interm elections will likely go in the complete opposite direction. We will likely see a stagnant 4 years with complete opposition to sweeping policy, be it trump or HRC in office. I know you're ball parking a worst case scenario, but do you REALLY think any of that will happen? Not a chance.

All things equal, assuming things stay stagnant on a policy front, trump, by virtue of being himself, will do irreparable damage to foreign policy and global political dynamics. The things that man says don't require a congressional approval. He proves time and time again that he cannot censor himself and he actually avoids tact. Add his volatile nature and I think he's a set up for disaster.

Ah well. All I know is I watched the debate thinking "dear god, I'm actually watching Donald Trump in a presidential debate". It's not real life lol. I'm just enjoying the process

 

[xaelia]

Edit: I'm actually on record as being against Federal income taxes.

Are you against income taxes, specifically? You would prefer, perhaps, a VAT? Something else? Just curious. After all, there are a lot of services provided by the Federal government that cannot realistically be provided by the states.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Are you against income taxes, specifically? You would prefer, perhaps, a VAT? Something else? Just curious. After all, there are a lot of services provided by the Federal government that cannot realistically be provided by the states.

I'm against income taxes, because it represents theft of property. I'm all for tariffs, and taxes on goods/services as a way of generating revenue. We survived for over a hundred years as a nation without income taxes.

Healthcare and retirement, our two biggest budget items should not be the purview of the Federal government. The people in each state should decide how generous their governments will be in regards to benefits and a social safety net. They should also pay taxes according to how generous they want to be.

The Feds should be responsible for interstate highway system, national defense, foreign policy, and making sure many States play nicely with each other.

 

[xaelia]

I'm against income taxes, because it represents theft of property. I'm all for tariffs, and taxes on goods/services as a way of generating revenue. We survived for over a hundred years as a nation without income taxes.

The people in each state should decide how generous their governments will be in regards to benefits and a social safety net. They should also pay taxes according to how generous they want to be.

Fair enough.

I'm not sure I have the socioeconomic chops to work out all the ramifications of such a setup. It would seem the unequal distribution of natural resources and hazards, location desirability, and practical barriers to free movement of persons between states would limit the effective execution of such a "free market" competition between states.

As bad as things are now, under this sort of system where the federal spigot were eliminated, states like Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama would be like something out of Mad Max.

 

[Perrotfish]

I'm against income taxes, because it represents theft of property. I'm all for tariffs, and taxes on goods/services as a way of generating revenue. We survived for over a hundred years as a nation without income taxes.

Healthcare and retirement, our two biggest budget items should not be the purview of the Federal government. The people in each state should decide how generous their governments will be in regards to benefits and a social safety net. They should also pay taxes according to how generous they want to be.

The Feds should be responsible for interstate highway system, national defense, foreign policy, and making sure many States play nicely with each other.

This would require a really radical reimagining of the American experiment, actually much more than if you eliminated governement funded retirement entirely. You can't have services that people pay into over a lifetime so that they can benefit in their old age controlled at the state level without restricting free immigration between states. It would honestly be easier for states to have different foreign policies than for them to have different retirement systems

 

[GeneralVeers]

This would require a really radical reimagining of the American experiment, actually much more than if you eliminated governement funded retirement entirely. You can't have services that people pay into over a lifetime so that they can benefit in their old age controlled at the state level without restricting free immigration between states. It would honestly be easier for states to have different foreign policies than for them to have different retirement systems

Who says the states would elect to have a retirement plan? Some might, some might not. The fact is that Social Security is a huge lie. We should admit to our old people that the government has lied to them for the past 50 years and we will not be able to fund their retirement. Everyone should be given an account with the exact dollar amount paid into it. If an individual state wants to set up retirement accounts, let them do so. People can contribute and see exactly what is in it. They should only get benefits, plus any interest or appreciation that has occurred. That account balance would still exist and belong to the person even if the person moves to another state.

Medicare is in the same boat. We pay into Medicare for our working lives, then consume much, much more than we ever paid into it once we retire. Again, health savings accounts would be a much better use of resources.

 

[RustedFox]

1.) I'm happy to see Perrotfish back. He's (she?) is not EM (peds, if I remember correctly) - but homeboy/girl makes some damn good and meaty contributions here.

2.) Veers for prez in 2020.

3.) THIS is why this thread BELONGS here. Do NOT move this'n, mods. MAKE THIS FORUM GREAT AGAIN. If you move it to SPF, then its eleventeen posts from high-schoolers linking to the daily show or MTV to.... unsure.

4.) Hooray for drunk posting. Took senior citizen cat to vet today. Needs dental work; no joke. Wife's anxiety level is *OVER 9000*. Her Day-to-Day Anxiety Level (DDAL) is 2k-3k, just for reference. My daily anxiety level = 200-300. Maybe reaches 1K in case of hangover or agitating shift. "Am I a bad cat mother !?" RustedFox proceeds to rum and coke it up. God BLESS APPLEBEES. Fcking wings for the win. I say we rename "Florida". Let's call it like it is: "OldRumJimmyBuffetState". *****ing place squeaks when it walks. YoungBlood please come to Florida.

5.) Whatev. Tenk is a monster. He says he has been lifting since I last saw him. He wasn't scrawny back then, so now he's a SuperSaiyan. I slapped him once when he was an MS-4. He was on-shift at the time, and suggested that the 43 year old with chest pain should go home. The only reason he didn't slap me back (and a lot harder) is because he didn't want to hurt either me, or his chances at matching at the program. Nevermind. I never slapped Tenk (all gags aside, for real, I never slapped him). I wouldn't do that. He's such a nice guy.

6.) Last night. Chest pain, 50-something. Known CAD, "just had a negative nuke stress last week". Guy isn't lying, even if he is French. Documentation squares it. Negative nuke stress last week. Chest pain. Totally normal EKG x2. Trop negative. "I wanna go home." --- "Dude, no way." --- "Fine, doc. You know what's best." Midnight. Admitted. Go to sleep. Wake up. 11 AM. Log on. Frenchie had a v-fib arrest two hours after admit. Cath'd. 100% lesion somewhere, who cares. THIS IS WHY YOU DON'T SEND CHEST PAIN HOME, NOOBS. Best part: The guy LOOKS like Popeye the Sailor Man. I wish I could copy/pasta my HPI for educational purposes here. It reads like this (no joke): This gentleman *chest pain...blah-blah-blah, shoulder, chest, shoulder, whatever* appears to be in extraordinary shape. He states clearly that he isn't sure whether his chest pain indicates CAD, or the simple musculoskeletal exertion of (being awesome). Might as well have said: "I am 35. This guy could easily kick my ass."

 

[enalli]

Progressive checking in like Veers requested.

Here is the breakdown for how life under Hillary will be worse for us:

1. Income Taxes - I'm assuming a 5% income tax increase if she gets her way. That is $20-$30K in NET loss to each of us depending on salary.
2. Capital Gains - Democrats want them taxed at regular income rates. I doubt she will do that, but a 5% increase is likely. $5K net per year loss on average
3. Healthcare - My premiums are already going to go up $1000 for the year under Obamacare. She will double down on this failing program, so I expect continued increases. Net $1k increase per year.
4. Global Warming - Whether or not your believe in it, these programs cost money. Gas, electricity and other taxes will hurt us. I'm conservatively figuring $1K per year in extra costs for us.

So my estimate is that if she gets even some of what she wants passed, it will cost me $35K per year in after-tax income. That's a tremendous amount!

1. I'm not sure where you're pulling this 5% estimate from-- are you referring to the 4% surcharge for people earning over $5 million? In any case, even if she did want to increase your tax rate by 5%, it can't happen without congress going along with it, and it most likely won't.
2. See above.
3. Ok, so Trump gets elected, he magically repeals Obamacare, and your health insurance says "neat" and decreases your premiums. Is that what you think will happen?
4. Yeah, part of the social contract is trying to keep the world somewhat livable for the next generation. You can argue whether a certain approach is effective or not, but arguing against these efforts solely because they cost money seems a bit myopic.

In terms of non-monetary issues she will make my life worse in the following ways:

1. Gun control - harder to get guns and more expensive ammo (ammo always goes up when Democrats elected). In Nevada this is a huge issue as everyone here is carrying.
2. Syrian refugees - Let's take 100K people into the country with no job skills, who don't speak English, and culturally might as well be from Mars.
3. More CMS/Health regulations that will make our jobs, and nurse's jobs more difficult at work.
4. Increased CAFE standards on cars, leading to worse cars with crappier engines and/or increased cost.
5. Entrenching culture of political correctness that drowns freedom of speech and thought. Please watch last year's season of South Park as they explain it better than I can.

(Bracing for ridicule from Progressives for above comments on guns, global warming, Syrians and cars)

1. How many guns were you unable to buy because of Obama?
2. I actually don't have a problem with this point.
3. I'm not convinced Trump will swoop in and fix this.
4. See the Global Warming point above.
5. Do you think if McCain had become president millenials today wouldn't also be complaining about safe spaces or whatnot?

 

[Promethean]

I thought he got murdered too. I thought all he had to do to "win" was to act gentlemanly/presidential and let her continue to lie using that shrill voice. Instead he showed his buffoonery.

But apparently I was wrong. Most of the online reader polls I've seen, including CNBC & Time, show he stomped her.

Online polls were punked by trolls. There was a concerted effort to declare him the winner via bogus poll stuffing, for lulz.

See, sometimes, the lolcatz come to you.

 

[WilcoWorld]

Last night. Chest pain, 50-something. Known CAD, "just had a negative nuke stress last week". Guy isn't lying, even if he is French. Documentation squares it. Negative nuke stress last week. Chest pain. Totally normal EKG x2. Trop negative. "I wanna go home." --- "Dude, no way." --- "Fine, doc. You know what's best." Midnight. Admitted. Go to sleep. Wake up. 11 AM. Log on. Frenchie had a v-fib arrest two hours after admit. Cath'd. 100% lesion somewhere, who cares. THIS IS WHY YOU DON'T SEND CHEST PAIN HOME, NOOBS. Best part: The guy LOOKS like Popeye the Sailor Man. I wish I could copy/pasta my HPI for educational purposes here. It reads like this (no joke): This gentleman *chest pain...blah-blah-blah, shoulder, chest, shoulder, whatever* appears to be in extraordinary shape. He states clearly that he isn't sure whether his chest pain indicates CAD, or the simple musculoskeletal exertion of (being awesome). Might as well have said: "I am 35. This guy could easily kick my ass."

Jeebus Corpus Christi

 

[WilcoWorld]

Rusted Fox gets drunk and Florida is polling blue...correlation or causation?

Either way, with posts like that, drinks are on me.

 

[xaelia]

Either way, with posts like that, drinks are on me.

See you at ACEP.

God BLESS APPLEBEES.

 

[GeneralVeers]

I'm not saying that Trump will fix anything for me. In fact I don't think he will.

What I am stating is that Hillary will TRY to make things worse. Obama did a lot of damage to me in the two years that he a Democratic Congress.

 

[ldiot]

I'll vote for Trump but neither of them are conservative. There was a time not long ago when socialists actually didn't get votes, apparently that has changed. People enthusiastically support higher taxes and centralization of power which always leads to tyranny.

 

[GeneralVeers]

I'll vote for Trump but neither of them are conservative. There was a time not long ago when socialists actually didn't get votes, apparently that has changed. People enthusiastically support higher taxes and centralization of power which always leads to tyranny.

You are wrong. The higher taxes represents "paying a fair share" and the centralization is an "investment". Listen to Hillary. Every time she says "invest" or "investment" it means taking other people's money to start or increase a government program.

 

[Angry Birds]

Progressive checking in like Veers requested.



1. I'm not sure where you're pulling this 5% estimate from-- are you referring to the 4% surcharge for people earning over $5 million? In any case, even if she did want to increase your tax rate by 5%, it can't happen without congress going along with it, and it most likely won't.
2. See above.
3. Ok, so Trump gets elected, he magically repeals Obamacare, and your health insurance says "neat" and decreases your premiums. Is that what you think will happen?
4. Yeah, part of the social contract is trying to keep the world somewhat livable for the next generation. You can argue whether a certain approach is effective or not, but arguing against these efforts solely because they cost money seems a bit myopic.



1. How many guns were you unable to buy because of Obama?
2. I actually don't have a problem with this point.
3. I'm not convinced Trump will swoop in and fix this.
4. See the Global Warming point above.
5. Do you think if McCain had become president millenials today wouldn't also be complaining about safe spaces or whatnot?

Fact checking Veers is like fact checking Trump. Conservatives play loose with facts. They speak only in Truthiness.

I liked your post except that you said you had no problem with his xenophobic and ignorant statement.

 

[Angry Birds]

Conservative logic: a poor person cheating to get welfare or disability is a roach; a supposed billionaire cheating on taxes is just being smart.

 

[Tenk]

5.) Whatev. Tenk is a monster. He says he has been lifting since I last saw him. He wasn't scrawny back then, so now he's a SuperSaiyan. I slapped him once when he was an MS-4. He was on-shift at the time, and suggested that the 43 year old with chest pain should go home. The only reason he didn't slap me back (and a lot harder) is because he didn't want to hurt either me, or his chances at matching at the program. Nevermind. I never slapped Tenk (all gags aside, for real, I never slapped him). I wouldn't do that. He's such a nice guy.

Definitely over 9000 now.

 

[Tenk]

1. How many guns were you unable to buy because of Obama?

For him? Probably none. For other Americans, probably a bunch. Right now an AR-15 can go from anywhere on a base model price of $600ish to over $1000 ALL because of politics and price gouging. This is even more so true for ammo. Last year I was buying high grain 5.56 for around 30 cents a round or less. Now they are almost up to 40 cents a round for high grain.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Angry Birds, can you point out where my post was factually wrong? I'm assuming a 5% increase in my income taxes, which is about what it was under Obama. The left wing of the Democrats would certainly want more than that. Can you affirmatively tell me she isn't going to raise taxes on high earners?

 

[GeneralVeers]

For him? Probably none. For other Americans, probably a bunch. Right now an AR-15 can go from anywhere on a base model price of $600ish to over $1000 ALL because of politics and price gouging. This is even more so true for ammo. Last year I was buying high grain 5.56 for around 30 cents a round or less. Now they are almost up to 40 cents a round for high grain.

Notice I said it would make them more expensive. The last two elections saw 40 SW ammunition scarce to non-existent for about 6 months afterward.

 

[Tenk]

Notice I said it would make them more expensive. The last two elections saw 40 SW ammunition scarce to non-existent for about 6 months afterward.

Yeah it's dumb.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Conservative logic: a poor person cheating to get welfare or disability is a roach; a supposed billionaire cheating on taxes is just being smart.

If you are following the law it's not cheating. It's cheating if you fake disability (a crime). I think most Welfare recipients are lawful. The problem is that we make it too easy, lawfully to get benefits and avoid work.

 

[bravotwozero]

Umm, panama papers anybody? All kinds of cheating there...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wonderbread12]

If you are following the law it's not cheating. It's cheating if you fake disability (a crime). I think most Welfare recipients are lawful. The problem is that we make it too easy, lawfully to get benefits and avoid work.

The problem is that rich folk can afford rich lawyers who can find ways to "break" laws without breaking laws. See Trump and his 916 million dollar write off.

If you are defending this ***** still or think he is "smart" for avoiding taxes you are part of the problem that is feeding off the broken system. I hope it gets totally reformed and we all pay our fair share. Stop your whining about your wallet, you are way better off than others who are paying their fair share (read: the poor and the middle class)

 

[GeneralVeers]

The problem is that rich folk can afford rich lawyers who can find ways to "break" laws without breaking laws. See Trump and his 916 million dollar write off.

If you are defending this ***** still or think he is "smart" for avoiding taxes you are part of the problem that is feeding off the broken system. I hope it gets totally reformed and we all pay our fair share. Stop your whining about your wallet, you are way better off than others who are paying their fair share (read: the poor and the middle class)

I can't disagree with you. If I was in Trump's financial position I would do exactly what he does and pay as little as possible. I think we should have across the board tax reductions including personal and corporate. At the same time I would close off almost every loophole and credit. The rates would be lower, but more people would be paying them.

 

[ldiot]

The problem is that rich folk can afford rich lawyers who can find ways to "break" laws without breaking laws. See Trump and his 916 million dollar write off.

If you are defending this ***** still or think he is "smart" for avoiding taxes you are part of the problem that is feeding off the broken system. I hope it gets totally reformed and we all pay our fair share. Stop your whining about your wallet, you are way better off than others who are paying their fair share (read: the poor and the middle class)

This is why people like Cruz and Fiorina want to simplify the tax code, lower taxes, and eliminate deductions and loopholes to keep revenue. Close to half the population pays an effective tax rate of zero... so it's kind of ironic when these same people whine and moan about the rich not "paying their fair share". Everyone should have skin in the game in my opinion. The bottom pays nothing and the rich get away with murder, the people who get screwed are the upper middle class making 100k to a few million as you stated. I think we are in complete agreement as to what the problem is. Conservatives have offered a solution while Clinton continues to demonize success and calls for higher taxes across the board.

For being single and without kids I get absolutely slaughtered in taxes. I don't think it's the government's job to reward and/or penalize certain behaviours, and this is just the most basic example.

 

[Arch Guillotti]

Doesn't matter. She wants to raise my taxes. The End.

That's pretty narrow-minded.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

The problem is that rich folk can afford rich lawyers who can find ways to "break" laws without breaking laws.

For a much better example of this, look at Clinton's >2000 emails with classified information, including TS/SCI. If ANYONE else had done this they would have been convicted.

Laws are for the little people. The political elite class can get away with anything. And since she is the single most corrupt politician EVER to run for the presidency, the things she will be able to get away with in that office will be astounding.

Trump's usage off the tax laws to reduce his tax burden is better or worse than the Clinton's usage of their foundation to pay for their billionaire lifestyle.

Of course, Trump made his money in business. The Clinton's made their money by peddling political influence.

 

[tymont12]

For a much better example of this, look at Clinton's >2000 emails with classified information, including TS/SCI. If ANYONE else had done this they would have been convicted.

Laws are for the little people. The political elite class can get away with anything. And since she is the single most corrupt politician EVER to run for the presidency, the things she will be able to get away with in that office will be astounding.

Trump's usage off the tax laws to reduce his tax burden is better or worse than the Clinton's usage of their foundation to pay for their billionaire lifestyle.

Of course, Trump made his money in business. The Clinton's made their money by peddling political influence.

Seriously? Most corrupt...EVER? Honestly, I think a lot of the flak she gets comes with the territory. Being in public office for over 20 straight years in high-powered positions put you at risk for pushing the boundaries at times. She's the product of someone who has excelled in the political game known as Washington.