ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Republicans (RINOS) eating their own. Sounds like the Repub Party in Colorado is in name only.
And to think that not that long ago Colorado was solid red.

Even if it costs him his position he took the right stand. Pride month and all it represents IS perversion
 
happy-flag-day.gif




Animated-Happy-Army-Birthday-U.S-Gif_WJ4U_07140620.gif
 
Last edited:
What is he proposing to replace gov’t revenue with? If it is a national sales tax, it would benefit the wealthy who are in the 37% fed tax bracket now. I hope to hear more about this.
The FairTax, the last time i looked into it, had 23% consumption tax after the first 30K (in 2000) spent. It was a win-win. Would easily replace the income tax, would lower prices, and ignite the economy in a good way.
 
The FairTax, the last time i looked into it, had 23% consumption tax after the first 30K (in 2000) spent. It was a win-win. Would easily replace the income tax, would lower prices, and ignite the economy in a good way.
Thanks. Sounds like the first $30k in purchases would be exempt from tax. Guess that married couples would get $60k exemption which would double the current standard deduction for married couples. Hopefully, addional exemptions would be available for dependent children.
 
SCOTUS, penned by Thomas, affirm Fifth Circuit’s rejection of bump stocks being machineguns, as defined by statute.
Local gun dealer, whom I've done business with, filed this particular lawsuit. It went all the way to the SCOTUS.




Personally speaking, I'm unhappy with the outcome, but whatever.
 
What is he proposing to replace gov’t revenue with? If it is a national sales tax, it would benefit the wealthy who are in the 37% fed tax bracket now. I hope to hear more about this.
He is proposing... and "just floating the idea" would be more accurate... he's proposing to offset the loss of revenue with a massive increase in tariffs. He'd darn near bankrupt China if he did that lol.
 
He is proposing... and "just floating the idea" would be more accurate... he's proposing to offset the loss of revenue with a massive increase in tariffs. He'd darn near bankrupt China if he did that lol.
This is grade school level thinking. He'd have to hike tariffs to hundreds of percent across the board on everything from every country, not just China. Further, your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of who pays the tariff. It's not the the Chinese, it's U.S. companies and individuals who buy things from abroad. The U.S. has no authority or power to tax entities in other countries. No country does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RunninRichie
So now all the illegals that "think they are citizens" can vote and avoid any penalities. "I was processed into the country, I thought I was a citizen??? oops!"

In New York, you just need a utility bill, paycheck or government housiing slip to vote.

They aren't going to let him win. It's just not happening. Even if they don't vote, they have millions of names that were processed and they will vote for them.
 
Thanks. Sounds like the first $30k in purchases would be exempt from tax. Guess that married couples would get $60k exemption which would double the current standard deduction for married couples. Hopefully, addional exemptions would be available for dependent children.
IDK if it is the same concept from 2000, but IIRC that plan called for monthly checks for something like $500, for every American. That would've covered all taxes up to $30K per year.

Many other benefits ... one I recall was those who make "non reportable income" (think illegally...) would have to pay taxes on everything they purchase.

Also, if someone wants to improve their life and get a 2nd job, they are not penalized by the fed gov't for doing just that, with a higher income tax bracket.

Edit: just looked up the website and it says each family of 4 would get $7,328 per year in prebate checks. Never file a federal tax return again. Keep 100% of your paycheck (even commies should like workers keeping 100% of their check...)
 
Last edited:
Every time i see some Republican on TV talking about impeachment its always the same talking point. If they get Mulvaney we get Hunter Biden! umm, ok, knock yourself out. How is asking Hunter over and over again if his daddy helped him get a job a defense for Trump? Do you think Hunter is going to shock the world and say, "my daddy did it all, arrest him!" Which witness has the potential to ruin TRump? a guy who has been wading in Trumps shit for 3 years now and already ****ed Trump over in his cushy TV interview or some kid who got a job?
Meanwhile, back in the real world....

GQEu6j8WEAEcOll
 
Thanks. Sounds like the first $30k in purchases would be exempt from tax. Guess that married couples would get $60k exemption which would double the current standard deduction for married couples. Hopefully, addional exemptions would be available for dependent children.
But would that require the feds to track my purchases? How would they know when I reached 30K?
 
Local gun dealer, whom I've done business with, filed this particular lawsuit. It went all the way to the SCOTUS.




Personally speaking, I'm unhappy with the outcome, but whatever.

Read the concurrence. It’s very short and shows that if the court was in the lawmaking business, the decision would be different. Alito informs that he thinks the legislators who passed the machine gun act would have barred bump stocks, but that the language of their statute does not.

OTOH, Sotomayor criticizes the majority because she thinks more people will die because of the decision. The activist side of the court that wants to legislate can be right and scary at the same time. It’s not the Court’s job. It’s Congress’s job. Sotomayor gives you decisions like Roe. Even if you like the outcome of the Roe decision, you must realize it represents an abuse of power.
 
Read the concurrence. It’s very short and shows that if the court was in the lawmaking business, the decision would be different. Alito informs that he thinks the legislators who passed the machine gun act would have barred bump stocks, but that the language of their statute does not.

OTOH, Sotomayor criticizes the majority because she thinks more people will die because of the decision. The activist side of the court that wants to legislate can be right and scary at the same time. It’s not the Court’s job. It’s Congress’s job. Sotomayor gives you decisions like Roe. Even if you like the outcome of the Roe decision, you must realize it represents an abuse of power.
Ah, yes, the language. Understood. In other words, a BS technicality. 58 dead and 500 wounded is no goddam joke. In a related note, Gassy, his wife, myself and another poster in N.O.B. thread caught an Uber in Vegas day or so after he married. Driver graphically recounted complete chaos from the incident. Horrifying how he described attempts at assisting wounded.

Nevertheless, I don't give a shit. Bump-stocks remain dangerous as hell. Congress, D or R. must ban.
 
But would that require the feds to track my purchases? How would they know when I reached 30K?
If this is like the current Ky sales tax, the retailer would be required to collect the tax during sale and remit to the fed gov’t. A millionaire currently paying income taxes at 35% rate might benefit if this sales tax rate is only 23%. I am still researching this.
 
Bump stocks are not difficult to DIY manufacture, so a law that bans them, as usual, will make no difference to someone that wants one for bad intentions. A cheap 3D printer will crank them out.
 
Ah, yes, the language. Understood. In other words, a BS technicality. 58 dead and 500 wounded is no goddam joke. In a related note, Gassy, his wife, myself and another poster in N.O.B. thread caught an Uber in Vegas day or so after he married. Driver graphically recounted complete chaos from the incident. Horrifying how he described attempts at assisting wounded.

Nevertheless, I don't give a shit. Bump-stocks remain dangerous as hell. Congress, D or R. must ban.

Well, if you think the end result should drive the legal analysis, don’t complain about Roe and other super legislative decisions of the court.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT