Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

45's/Republican's Budget(s)


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 06:47 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

The wealthiest get more of the tax breaks, granted. However, I point to this: https://www.funnyand...-economics.html

Do you really want to get rid of that 10th man, the one that was paying the Lion share of the drinks? Where will your jobs be then? your paycheck? Going to someone else, overseas perhaps?

There are many flaws with your example. First of all, their net worth was determined before they walked into the door, with no discussion on if it was fair how they got to that state in the first place.

Here is an example of why tax cuts for the rich don't "work" at improving the economy. Say the average McDonald's franchise has a net profit of $1 million per year. Say an owner pays the corporate tax rate of 30%, so they paid $300,000 million in corporate income tax. Say it has been reduced to 20% (I think it is at 21% now), so for 2018 they will pay $200,000 in taxes. They have an extra $100,000 in one year. What are they going to do with that money? Are they going to make more burgers and fries? Well, that depends on whether people are ordering more burgers and fries. It depends on demand. Without a reason to buy more burgers and fries the owner is not going to buy more burgers and fries. Same with with hiring more people, why hire people to stand and do nothing when there is not more demand for either goods or services? As for raising wages, phhht. Legally public corporate officials have a responsibility to put the welfare and interest of the corporation and its stockholders first. Which means maximizing profits, which means paying employees as little as you can legally or economically can get away with. There might be the odd actor who does differently, but overall unlikely.

Quote

I'm also not wild about the provision that allows drilling in Alaska. But if having that in the bill means I get some more of my own money back, then so be it.

I am surprised you care enough to mention it, but then I don't really know your position on environmental issues. There are economic reasons it is dumb too. If the drilling were to happen in your backyard would getting a little more of your money be worth it?

Quote

What's the alternative? Not giving tax breaks to the American people? Not letting people, and yes even the wealthy ones, keep some of their own money.

Going back to my example of a McDonald's owner…. What the heck do they do with that money? They can't *create* more demand. The market for McDonald's is pretty much saturated in the U.S., so, no, they won't be opening more stores either. What is the purpose of allowing them to keep that money, other than it is theirs? (Money that they got and were able to grow in our system, a system of which we should all be beneficiaries of…. should they not give back?)?

They will likely sit on or save that money, taking it effectively out of the economy. If the government takes it, it has two basic options for it.
1) Give it directly to poor/middle class people (social assistance, child tax benefit), which will go straight back into the economy as they buy goods and services to take care of their households' needs or improving their quality of life.
2) Spend it on programs and services for citizens (child care, education, health care, community centres & libraries, infrastructure, safety/security), which pumps money back into the economy in the wages for the people working in those fields (and on equipment needed), while improving citizens (that is all of our) quality of life.

Yes, there is some corruption and waste.

Quote

I also love the fact that the individual mandate has been repealed. Government shouldn't be forcing people to buy a consumer product.

Health care is comparable to food. The government doesn't have to force people to buy food, but it doesn't have to force people to buy health care either. They both have pretty inflexible demand, when people need it they will, if at all possible, buy it.

The way people get access to health care is either thru health insurance or by paying up front….
Look, I am Canadian, as a Canadian citizen I have government paid health insurance. I am not going to argue this point with you further… If you don't think that is cruel and inhumane to deny health care to people needing critical or urgent care because they couldn't afford health insurance premiums or can't afford to pay up front, well, I don't know what to tell you. Other than medicare for all. Single payer. Universal health care.

But you can't pay for those - if you let rich people keep tonnes more extra money that they were only able to accumulate in the system we set up / perpetuate.

ETA:

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

What's the alternative? Not giving tax breaks to the American people? Not letting people, and yes even the wealthy ones, keep some of their own money.

I disagree with your premise. Taken to the logical end here, there should be no taxes! Because if you always give tax cuts, and never increase taxes, then eventually there will be no taxes. Taxes serve a purpose, and I talked about how taxes are used by the government above. And, no, neither the invisible free market, or charities, are replacement material.

Edited by sierraleone, 22 December 2017 - 07:43 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#22 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 06:58 PM

LOTS - Can you explain why Trump (or any rich person) needs to save up to $15 million a year under these tax cuts?!
TheGuardian

If he doesn't put that into savings, what is there going to be more demand for in the economy? What could one person spend more money on that would allow "trickle-down" economics to work?
More gold toilets?

Edited by sierraleone, 21 December 2017 - 07:04 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#23 Omega

Omega

    Maktel shcree lotak meta setak Oz!

  • Moderator
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 10:06 PM

Corporate profits are already at record highs. So the argument that jobs aren't being created because corporate profits aren't high enough is blatantly nuts.

#24 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 21 December 2017 - 10:27 PM

^ They are also blatantly nuts (or liars) in thinking that this won't cause the deficit to soar. And/Or they could be duplicitous and being working tearing down entitlements next to reduce the deficit…. So tax cuts for the rich on the backs of the poor and middle class.

Edited by sierraleone, 21 December 2017 - 10:27 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#25 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,901 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 04:08 AM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

Fist things first, there are some things in the tax reform bill I'm not wild about. There are also some things in it I love, but here's my question for those against the tax reform: Why? Yes, it could've been better, but it is still something. The middleclass tax cuts aren't as much as you would like? That's fair, I would've like the middleclass cuts to be more also. But it is still something. You would've like to see the tax cuts for middleclass permanent? So would I, but it is still something.

The wealthiest get more of the tax breaks, granted. However, I point to this: https://www.funnyand...-economics.html

Do you really want to get rid of that 10th man, the one that was paying the Lion share of the drinks? Where will your jobs be then? your paycheck? Going to someone else, overseas perhaps?

I've read that before and it doesn't work. From one who explains it better: https://www.dailykos...8/11/1/649084/-

The closing paragraph:

Quote

Anyway, readers, I think the main response to be made against this email is that the original premise is false: our economic stratification is in no way accurately modeled by ten guys going out to drink together at the same bar, and presumably drinking the same beer in the same amounts. Without that false premise, the whole parable falls apart.

Let me add this thought: There is a mistaken belief by anyone who isn't getting, or has never gotten some kind of government aid, that they don't pay. They pay in ways that you can't even imagine. For one example, when you save your money, does your employer lower your pay? No? When you are getting government aid, it happens. And I'll let you in on a little secret, LotS. Conservatives don't want to, and won't, get rid of government aid. Any of them that make the claim that they will, are lying. To get rid of the aid they will lose voters, people will lose jobs (you think unemployment is bad now?), which will lead to many more people becoming homeless, sick, and dying, which will lead to money spent by the government to clean things up, and where will that money come from? The middle-class, because the rich will loudly whine about the suggestion of being forced to pay their fair share and what will happen as the strain of trying to pay for the mess harms the middle-class? The class that those in government don't care about, their own words.
Basically, they want to have their cake and eat it, too. And they don't care if you go hungry, as long as you vote to keep them in the castle.

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

True, the tax reform bill isn't perfect, but it is still something. The middleclass does get something back, however small you might think it is, it is still something.

I will be interested in hearing your thoughts when it is time to file your taxes in 2018 (o possibly 2019, depending on what is decided).
As a candidate 45 stressed that he would cut taxes for the middle-class, not the rich. He stated that his tax cut would hurt him, and that it would be a bi-partisan plan. I call that a lie.

Where he told the shady truth? Here:

Quote

"I promised the American people a big, beautiful tax cut for Christmas," the president stated.

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

I'm also not wild about the provision that allows drilling in Alaska. But if having that in the bill means I get some more of my own money back, then so be it.

Short term, you may get some break, but long term it is going to cost everyone. Think about it, spills, wildlife that can be affected, destruction of habitat, etc... and every time a creature goes extinct, another has to step in to take it's place in the delicate balance, but some day, too many will be lost. Well, I guess it will produce jobs. Who else is going to pollinate plants?

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

What's the alternative? Not giving tax breaks to the American people? Not letting people, and yes even the wealthy ones, keep some of their own money.

Tax breaks? Did you read it? Did anyone? There were so many (hand-written scribbled) additions/changes in the original, did any Republican actually know what was in the bill before they approved it?

View PostLord of the Sword, on 21 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

I also love the fact that the individual mandate has been repealed. Government shouldn't be forcing people to buy a consumer product.

You are right, government shouldn't be forcing people to buy health insurance. Instead they should be making sure that we all have equal, government run, guaranteed health insurance. That is what would save you money, LotS.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#26 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 09:41 AM

View Postsierraleone, on 21 December 2017 - 06:47 PM, said:


Here is an example of why tax cuts for the rich don't "work" at improving the economy. Say the average McDonald's franchise has a net profit of $1 million per year. Say an owner pays the corporate tax rate of 30%, so they paid $300,000 million in corporate income tax. Say it has been reduced to 20% (I think it is at 21% now), so for 2018 they will pay $200,000 in taxes. They have an extra $100,000 in one year. What are they going to do with that money? Are they going to make more burgers and fries? Well, that depends on whether people are ordering more burgers and fries. It depends on demand. Without a reason to buy more burgers and fries the owner is not going to buy more burgers and fries. Same with with hiring more people, why hire people to stand and do nothing when there is not more demand for either goods or services? As for raising wages, phhht. Legally public corporate officials have a responsibility to put the welfare and interest of the corporation and its stockholders first. Which means maximizing profits, which means paying employees as little as you can legally or economically can get away with. There might be the odd actor who does differently, but overall unlikely.

Going with your McDonald's example: So the McDonald's store in question, in your example, now has an extra $100K to use as the owner sees fit. He could reinvest, although as you pointed out, unless the demand is there he or she probably won't. Increasing the wages of employees, while morale and smart, probably not likely either. Hell they could donate that extra money to their favorite charity for all we know. The point is it is there's to do with as he or she sees fit. Why punish them for being successful?

Now continuing with your McDonald's example. Say while the owner get's an extra $100K a year, the employees make $15K a year, give or take depending upon state. Now say under this tax plan that employee gets back $500 or $1,000 at end of year. (I have no idea if the math is accurate, it is WAY TOO EARLY in the morning for me to be doing math. LOL). Say the employee gets back that, or even a little less, my point was that it is still something they are getting back. No matter how small, it is still something. Yes, it could be better. But do you really want to tell that employee: "Sorry, that money you were going to get back isn't going to happen, because we don't agree with your boss getting back $100K.

Quote

I am surprised you care enough to mention it, but then I don't really know your position on environmental issues. There are economic reasons it is dumb too. If the drilling were to happen in your backyard would getting a little more of your money be worth it?

I'm aware of some issues, not all. Because let's be honest, in today's society everything is considered an environmental issue.


Quote

Going back to my example of a McDonald's owner…. What the heck do they do with that money? They can't *create* more demand. The market for McDonald's is pretty much saturated in the U.S., so, no, they won't be opening more stores either. What is the purpose of allowing them to keep that money, other than it is theirs? (Money that they got and were able to grow in our system, a system of which we should all be beneficiaries of…. should they not give back?)?

You can't FORCE people to give back though. That's like you, or me, going into a friend's wallet, taking $300 dollars out of their wallet and then saying "Thank you for the $300 dollar Christmas present you just gave me."


Quote

Look, I am Canadian, as a Canadian citizen I have government paid health insurance. I am not going to argue this point with you further… If you don't think that is cruel and inhumane to deny health care to people needing critical or urgent care because they couldn't afford health insurance premiums or can't afford to pay up front, well, I don't know what to tell you. Other than medicare for all. Single payer. Universal health care.

But you can't pay for those - if you let rich people keep tonnes more extra money that they were only able to accumulate in the system we set up / perpetuate.


I'm really not that familiar with Canadian Health Care. I only am familiar with what health care plans cost in my area, and they are downright expensive: even under Obamacare. And removing the individual mandate is NOT, contrary to the mainstream media, taking away people's health care. It only removes the penalty for someone who doesn't have health care. That's all it does. It doesn't come in and take away health care, it only takes out the punishment/penalty of not having health care. Going back to your example of Government doesn't force you to buy food. All removing the mandate does is prevent the Government from penalizing those people who don't eat fruits and vegetables in their diet.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#27 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 09:50 AM

View PostElara, on 22 December 2017 - 04:08 AM, said:

You are right, government shouldn't be forcing people to buy health insurance. Instead they should be making sure that we all have equal, government run, guaranteed health insurance. That is what would save you money, LotS.

Government run enterprises ALWAYS cost more than private ones. Because in the private enterprise they HAVE to make a profit, not so under Government run. As an example: On Long Island, where my Aunt lived, the city was replacing some pipes underground. The city crew showed up, on the street, at 6:45am, removed the pipes from the truck. They made the mistake of placing those pipes on her neighbors lawn. (Her neighbor lived for his lawn. If you stepped on his lawn, he would most likely "hear the grass crying out" LOL). Anyway, they removed the pipes from the truck by 7am. Then sat around having a half hour coffee break. They only had a half hour because her neighbor, the grass lover, came out and tore them a new one for putting the pipes on his lawn.

Now in that above example, if it had been a private company doing the work, do you think the private company would've tolerated employees wasting a half hour, right at the start of the day? Hell no.

That's the difference between Government vs. Private. Government run businesses are extremely costly and wasteful. Just look at the mess Government run health care is with the VA. That's government run health care for you.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#28 Omega

Omega

    Maktel shcree lotak meta setak Oz!

  • Moderator
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 10:39 AM

Private monopolies are wasteful and inefficient all the time. Have you ever dealt with AT&T?

Quote

Government run enterprises ALWAYS cost more than private ones.


You can quote your religious beliefs all you want. I prefer data. Medicare has 2% overhead costs. Private insurers can barely get their overhead down to 20%, and that only because it was required by the ACA.

As for the VA, you don't get to elect people with the express stated purpose of breaking things, let them break things, and then say "look, it's broken, therefore nothing can ever work!" That's not a valid reasoning process.

#29 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 01:56 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 22 December 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Now continuing with your McDonald's example. Say while the owner get's an extra $100K a year, the employees make $15K a year, give or take depending upon state. Now say under this tax plan that employee gets back $500 or $1,000 at end of year. (I have no idea if the math is accurate, it is WAY TOO EARLY in the morning for me to be doing math. LOL). Say the employee gets back that, or even a little less, my point was that it is still something they are getting back. No matter how small, it is still something. Yes, it could be better. But do you really want to tell that employee: "Sorry, that money you were going to get back isn't going to happen, because we don't agree with your boss getting back $100K.

A regular bonus is basically deferred earnings. Employees have increased the profitability of the corporation. Either by working harder/longer (increasing sales/revenue) and/or sticking around long enough (decreasing expenses for recruitment and training newbies).

View PostLord of the Sword, on 22 December 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Quote

I am surprised you care enough to mention it, but then I don't really know your position on environmental issues. There are economic reasons it is dumb too. If the drilling were to happen in your backyard would getting a little more of your money be worth it?

I'm aware of some issues, not all. Because let's be honest, in today's society everything is considered an environmental issue.

It is. The environment is this planet. We currently use ~40% of the land surface for agricultural use. ~33% of the land surface is either too dry or cold (desert and arctic/antarctic) to be of much use to humans. If our populations increased to 10 billion by the end of this century as advertised we are going to be using about 60% of the land surface if we don't get much more efficient with land use. And that would leave some 7% of land surface environments and species that are not part of the desert/tundra environments. And how much of that is mountainous?

Quote

You can't FORCE people to give back though. That's like you, or me, going into a friend's wallet, taking $300 dollars out of their wallet and then saying "Thank you for the $300 dollar Christmas present you just gave me."

It would seem you are either assuming corporations have not exploited the system and the people living in that system (unfair/low wages for one example, which you admitted is unlikely to increase), or you are assuming that the exploitation by corporations is okay.

View PostLord of the Sword, on 22 December 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Quote

Look, I am Canadian, as a Canadian citizen I have government paid health insurance. I am not going to argue this point with you further… If you don't think that is cruel and inhumane to deny health care to people needing critical or urgent care because they couldn't afford health insurance premiums or can't afford to pay up front, well, I don't know what to tell you. Other than medicare for all. Single payer. Universal health care.

But you can't pay for those - if you let rich people keep tonnes more extra money that they were only able to accumulate in the system we set up / perpetuate.


I'm really not that familiar with Canadian Health Care. I only am familiar with what health care plans cost in my area, and they are downright expensive: even under Obamacare. And removing the individual mandate is NOT, contrary to the mainstream media, taking away people's health care. It only removes the penalty for someone who doesn't have health care. That's all it does. It doesn't come in and take away health care, it only takes out the punishment/penalty of not having health care. Going back to your example of Government doesn't force you to buy food. All removing the mandate does is prevent the Government from penalizing those people who don't eat fruits and vegetables in their diet.

I have been lucky with my health in my life, so I don't know the Canadian system inside and out. I know this:
- The government pays Primary/Family Physicians (that would be your particular doctor, that is not a specialist).
This means that if you have a family doctor that you can go see them if you need to without paying a bill.
If you don't have a family doctor there will be a public clinic that is staffed with family doctors that you can see instead.
- The government gives Hospitals funds as well, and you can be seen there without charge in case of an emergency.

This doesn't cover prescriptions, and sometimes other products services (ambulance, crutches), which seems kind of silly.
Therefor there is health insurance available, usually people get it through work, to partly off-set cost of prescriptions and some specialists.


Each province is also different. I am not sure how/if/which specialists are covered here. I know dental and eye doctors cost everyone, unless they are below a certain income. Other specialists I have no idea.

It ain't perfect, nothing ever is.

View PostLord of the Sword, on 22 December 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Going with your McDonald's example: So the McDonald's store in question, in your example, now has an extra $100K to use as the owner sees fit. He could reinvest, although as you pointed out, unless the demand is there he or she probably won't. Increasing the wages of employees, while morale and smart, probably not likely either. Hell they could donate that extra money to their favorite charity for all we know. The point is it is there's to do with as he or she sees fit. Why punish them for being successful?

Why punish the poor for being unsuccessful?

Edited by sierraleone, 22 December 2017 - 03:04 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#30 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,022 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 02:24 PM

Ah, the squealing and grunting of the 1%. Oink, oink.

As for the poor . . . are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#31 Omega

Omega

    Maktel shcree lotak meta setak Oz!

  • Moderator
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 22 December 2017 - 02:30 PM

Quote

Why punish them for being successful?

Blah blah slogans blah blah. Taxes are not punishment. That's an idiotic concept, that you're only parroting because you heard it somewhere and you thought it sounded shiny. If you'd evaluate ideas for a moment instead of just acting as a repeater you'd see that you can't have a functioning society without taxes, and the rich have all the money in our society; therefore, you have to tax the rich to have a functioning society. It's not punishment for being rich, as if they've committed some moral sin. It's literally the only way society can function. Calling it punishment is purposeful obfuscation. Also called lying.

#32 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 18 January 2018 - 07:41 PM

WaPo: House approves bill to keep government open as Senate Democrats threaten to block it

The Republicans manage to convince their re-calitrant members with increased to military spending.

Quote

The short-term spending bill would keep the government open through Feb. 16 while extending the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for six years and rolling back several taxes in the Affordable Care Act. It does not include a solution for “dreamers,” the undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children, as Democrats have demanded.

Reflecting the election-year stakes, aides to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told senior staffers in a meeting that he is intent on muscling the bill through the chamber and putting pressure on Democrats to vote for it, according to a person familiar with the discussion.
….
Republican Sens. Mike Rounds (S.D.), Rand Paul (Ky.) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) also said they would vote no.

The growing opposition led some senators to discuss the possibility of a new approach: passing one- or two-day extensions of government funding to avoid a shutdown while lawmakers continue to negotiate.

Edited by sierraleone, 18 January 2018 - 07:45 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#33 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 10:31 AM

Want to know how to avoid a Government shutdown? Pass a law that all Congressional salaries will stop when the Government is shutdown.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#34 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 10:45 AM

^ And that adds what to the discussion at this time?

You are free to say it, it is just unconstructive (i.e. pointless and useless) to add the conversation. It doesn't inform or even add humour to the discussion.

Republicans are a little busy trying to keep the government open (or so they say).
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#35 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 11:10 AM

The posturing by the GOP is ridiculous. Supposedly the GOP, who controls all three branches of government, want CHIP extended, and DACA. (or at least the leaders and moderates do). Trump wants a border wall. But the GOP are claiming that the Democrats are the ones endangering CHIP, when all the Democrats are asking for is for them to include DACA, which the GOP says they want anyways? Um, obviously the GOP is using DACA as a bargaining chip, and they do not want to give it up yet. That is so gross and vile, to upend hundreds of thousands of lives that you claim you want to protect, so that you can use them as bargaining chips down the road. How are they better than hostage-takers? And claiming the Democrats are immoral for risking CHIP when the GOP has tried to manoeuvre to the Democrats into a quasi-Sophie's choice situation.

Edited by sierraleone, 19 January 2018 - 11:12 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#36 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 11:40 AM

So what, EXACTLY, is in the bill the House passed that funds the Government, that the Democrats oppose? Answer: Nothing that I can see. Democrats claim to be for CHIP, and everything else in the bill. So why are Democrats forcing the Schumer shutdown? Because they want to attach DACA to it, when the DACA deadline isn't until March. They want to attach DACA to avoid having to make a deal with the President. They claim they want "a clean DACA now, then down the line we'll do what you want." Yeah, that worked out SO well the last time. Last time the GOP fell for that, when it came time for Democrats to hold up their end...not so much. So Democrats have already broken faith once on that type of deal.

And how ironic is it that Pelosi, who called the GOP arsonists during the last shutdown, and Schumer who said the GOP was using chaos, now Pelosi and Schumer are doing the exact thing they railed against during last shutdown.

The fact is they weaponized the last shutdown, just like they weaponized the DOJ and FBI...and WHEN that report Congress got on the Fushion GPS document is declassified there will be hell to pay, once the American people see what Obama and Hillary did.

Democrats are also banking on being able to force Trump into doing their bidding...Nobody forces Trump into anything, so let the Schumer Shutdown happen. Trump will be able to explain to the people, since he doesn't have to rely on the fakestream media, exactly who is at fault: Schumer and the Democrats. #SchumerShutdown
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#37 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 12:15 PM

^ Republicans have had over 4 months, since September 6 when Trump rescinded DACA, to address DACA and immigration. However, their priorities are all screwy and they focused on their donor's priority to get a tax-bill that would benefit their donors. Couldn't possibly go another year with taxes the same, despite the economy, by standard and historical measures, was doing fine. But the party in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House…. protect dreamer's DACA status and the lives they built, and/or the health care of children in low-income families? Phht, kick the can, kick the can. Need to get those rich people and corporations their urgent and crucial (but unnecessary) tax breaks!
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#38 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 12:46 PM

Regular working class people are also getting tax breaks. One company is even printing on their paycheck the Trump tax breaks amount, so they can see just how much of their money they're getting back.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#39 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 19 January 2018 - 12:57 PM

^ That wasn't the main impetus for the tax bill, just a temporary sop to the non-rich to try to obfuscate what the GOP was doing for their donors.

And even if one were to take what you said at faith value, a small tax break is still not more important and more of an urgent priority than the lives of the ~9,000,000 million kids depending on CHIP for their lives and health, or the ~800,000 youth depending on DACA to stay thriving in the only lives they know, in their homes, schools, work-places, volunteer-organizations, and communities, with their family, friends, and colleagues. The GOP owns letting CHIP expire, and Trump owns rescinding DACA, when neither of those needed to be done.


Note: I will probably start a new thread in the event of a shut down.

Edited by sierraleone, 19 January 2018 - 09:23 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#40 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,901 posts

Posted 20 January 2018 - 01:31 AM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 19 January 2018 - 12:46 PM, said:

Regular working class people are also getting tax breaks. One company is even printing on their paycheck the Trump tax breaks amount, so they can see just how much of their money they're getting back.

Once again, I want to hear from you the first tax return you file, where this has taken effect and then the second year. Let's just find out how thrilled you are.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users