POLITICAL THREAD

[sambowieshin]

This is now two days in a row of you making reasonable takes.. You have a stroke?

I swear....there are some on here that fight with me when there is no fight to be had. I have gone in circles with a few over the border forever. I am AGAINST illegal border crossings. I want LEGAL immigrants because we need them for our economy. I want the ILLEGAL immigrants that have committed crimes deported. Just because I say the ASYLUM laws need to be changed permanently by Congress (as opposed to EO) some on here go ape sh**. It is NOT ILLEGAL to cross and claim ASYLUM. That needs to be rectified with codified law.
I hate the EOs because they are lazy and aren't worth the paper they are written on as soon as the next guy or woman comes into office.
I am for trans living their lives without getting abused by society but OPPOSED to trans in sports. Their rights end where scholarships are involved. It is an unfair advantage period.
I am against abortion personally but don't like the state telling people what to do with their bodies. Abortion restriction with exceptions is ok by me. HATE the lack of exception for underage girls and rape. That one pisses me off.

I like what Trump is doing with illegal immigrants that have committed crimes.
I like what Trump has done for women in sports vs trans.
I like that Trump is looking to cut costs in the federal government.
I like Trump's hard line stance on Hamas.

I don't like seeing non criminal immigrants that are hard workers with families deported. Would prefer they be given another chance to come clean in the system and start fresh.
I don't like hearing the nasty attacks on ALL trans persons and people like Nancy Mace calling them trannies in a derogatory way. It just isn't how you treat people.
I don't like cutting costs with a bulldozer that mows down the good with the bad.
I don't like Trump saying we will OWN Gaza and kick people out of their homeland. What would the reaction be if Trump said we own Israel and we are going to kick the Jews out and give it back to the Palestinians in order to solve this conflict??? What if he was telling the Jews to just find a new home??

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I swear....there are some on here that fight with me when there is no fight to be had. I have gone in circles with a few over the border forever. I am AGAINST illegal border crossings. I want LEGAL immigrants because we need them for our economy. I want the ILLEGAL immigrants that have committed crimes deported. Just because I say the ASYLUM laws need to be changed permanently by Congress (as opposed to EO) some on here go ape sh**. It is NOT ILLEGAL to cross and claim ASYLUM. That needs to be rectified with codified law.
I hate the EOs because they are lazy and aren't worth the paper they are written on as soon as the next guy or woman comes into office.
I am for trans living their lives without getting abused by society but OPPOSED to trans in sports. Their rights end where scholarships are involved. It is an unfair advantage period.
I am against abortion personally but don't like the state telling people what to do with their bodies. Abortion restriction with exceptions is ok by me. HATE the lack of exception for underage girls and rape. That one pisses me off.

I like what Trump is doing with illegal immigrants that have committed crimes.
I like what Trump has done for women in sports vs trans.
I like that Trump is looking to cut costs in the federal government.
I like Trump's hard line stance on Hamas.

I don't like seeing non criminal immigrants that are hard workers with families deported. Would prefer they be given another chance to come clean in the system and start fresh.
I don't like hearing the nasty attacks on ALL trans persons and people like Nancy Mace calling them trannies in a derogatory way. It just isn't how you treat people.
I don't like cutting costs with a bulldozer that mows down the bad with the good.
I don't like Trump saying we will OWN Gaza and kick people out of their homeland. What would the reaction be if Trump said we own Israel and we are going to kick the Jews out and give it back to the Palestinians in order to solve this conflict??? What if he was telling the Jews to just find a new home??

Listen, it sounds like you want to secretly register as a republican. We can help you here, and you don't have to tell your family and friends.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

All kidding aside, I think most conservatives agree with a lot of what you mentioned.. and some of it comes down to "who is paying for this?"

Like with Abortions, you mentioned yesterday. I am totally fine with abortions being covered if it's a health crisis to either/or the mom or baby. Not fine with it being covered at month 8, because the mom changed her mind. Now, that doesn't mean I think she can't have an abortion in this scenario, it just means that taxpayers shouldn't pay for it.

Same with Trans. Of course most of us think these people should be allowed to live. No one is going around rounding them up. But should they be given jobs for being trans? No. Should the tax payer really be funding dick-chop-off surgeries? Also no. And using these services for minors? Also no.

Edit: I realize I am probably not as much of a staunch republican as many others here, so these are just my views, which are admittedly probably more libertarian. Im sure there are some here who don't agree to the above.

 

[HeismaNole]

Agree with the first parts.. but the last part, there's a lot of evidence that shows these mega corps and large 10,000unit-esque companies really don't make the dent like we think. Some articles out there and opinions believe that's just an excuse. And the real problem is the supply is low, along with the fact that there's just not as much profit these days to build 2b/1ba homes. So many areas the homes are being built to be mcmansions, and there's just not much push to build starter homes.

Another interesting trend, is that since the 40's and 50's.. the US dropped in multi-generational homes. And it stayed low for decades where the US was doing pretty well. But now, those multi-generational homes are on the rise in percentage over the last decade or two. Meaning, more families are choosing to live together due to things like inflation, costs, child-care/elderly-care.. and it does always make me wonder.. is this how it's SUPPOSED to be? Multi-generational living, like we've done for centuries.. and that this 4-5 decade long run of every family unit having it's own house, just isn't sustainable? I don't know the answer, but I find it interesting.

Not every 20-30-something is supposed to be in their dream home when they haven't even hit their peak earning potential.

You bring up a good point because white people are in the minority on this topic as other countries have got houses to all live together especially Indians. Meanwhile, we are all told to leave at 18 and I gladly did, I loved going on my own. But if you want to set someone up financially, it's great to not do that.

 

[sambowieshin]

Listen, it sounds like you want to secretly register as a republican. We can help you here, and you don't have to tell your family and friends.

I am probably more Libertarian than anything but their candidates are always even more nutty than the Dems.
I am also Pro Cop and Pro Military.
That is why I didn't like the pardons for J6th cop beaters and don't like Trump's attacks on the FBI but aso can't stand some of the Dem calls for Defunding the police and the left wing politicians/media narrative that the cops are going around shooting black people for sport.
Wish there was a 3rd Party of Common sense without the nutty extremes and followers that support ANYTHING their candidate says or does.
I have criticized Biden/Harris many times on here. They totally F'd up Afghanistan. Their support for trans in sports is idiotic. Funding LGBTQ promotional stuff via the government is BS. I see that as being as bad as funding RELIGIOUS stuff via the government like Trump is doing with his new Christian bias agency or whatever the hell it is.
Government has no business promoting any of that crap. Only making sure individuals are treated fairly and not discriminated against.

 

[sambowieshin]

All kidding aside, I think most conservatives agree with a lot of what you mentioned.. and some of it comes down to "who is paying for this?"

Like with Abortions, you mentioned yesterday. I am totally fine with abortions being covered if it's a health crisis to either/or the mom or baby. Not fine with it being covered at month 8, because the mom changed her mind. Now, that doesn't mean I think she can't have an abortion in this scenario, it just means that taxpayers shouldn't pay for it.

Same with Trans. Of course most of us think these people should be allowed to live. No one is going around rounding them up. But should they be given jobs for being trans? No. Should the tax payer really be funding dick-chop-off surgeries? Also no. And using these services for minors? Also no.

Edit: I realize I am probably not as much of a staunch republican as many others here, so these are just my views, which are admittedly probably more libertarian. Im sure there are some here who don't agree to the above.

I have a family member that holds a pretty prominent elected position in the state as a Republican. Honestly we agree on about 90 percent of everything we debate on here. There are just a few things we don't see eye to eye on but even on those things we could probably find a middle ground most Americans could be ok with. It is just sad that the majority of our politicians choose to keep us divided and enraged instead of looking for solutions to common problems.
Keep hoping he will run for governor one day. He would be awesome. He is much more Reagan Republican than MAGA but supports Trump policies even though he hates his verbal vomit.

 

[Bigmikeydelight]

How do you handle it if you tax loan proceeds secured by appreciated assets, then the value of those assets drops eliminating any unrealized gain? Do we have to cut a check from the treasury to the person who borrowed against the appreciated assets?

What if the value doesn’t drop, and the loan is just paid back? Do we have to cut them a check from the treasury? Or does the basis just step up, then if it drops subsequent to paying back the loan, can they deduct unrealized losses?


If I own $1 billion of stock, and borrow $100 million against it to buy a yacht, I’ve now injected $100 million into the economy and all the businesses building the yacht. Additionally I’m paying interest (which is taxable income) to whatever bank I borrowed from. When I die, I have $100 million yacht, a billion of stock and a $100 million loan (easy math). I pay estate tax on whatever is in my estate to get the step up, then my heirs either keep servicing that loan or sell off the stock (that was just taxed) to pay off the loan.

Conversely, I could take $100 million loan, pay $25-40 million in tax for the government to launder it through their favorite NGOs back into their pockets, then inject $60-75 million into the local economy.

I’d rather the money flow through the economy than give Uncle Sam the first cut.

Tough luck on the first question, but I guess they could deduct that loss from their taxes similar to the stock market.

Sure, you have benefited the economy, but who is benefitting? A luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy. If the same money was taxed, that money would go to infrastructure and schools. Trickle-down from luxury goods is much weaker than a direct investment in schools.

Banks already benefit greatly from the ultra wealthy. Wealthy individuals get much lower interest rates than average borrowers and banks get to collect fees and profits while minimizing risk. Meanwhile, the tax revenue from that interest is tinycompared to the avoided capital gains tax.

This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company.

Now look at the how the purchasing power of the Dollar has declined since its inception and you will have the answer. A Dollar is worth about jack and crap. The only thing propping it up right now is that the Dollar is the World Reserve Currency.

Inflation is a nation killer. You can't just print a trillion Dollars and expect things to be all good.

Also the housing market is inflated thanks to the mega corps buying up all the houses.

This was actually really helpful. Thank you for this.

How come inflation calculators cannot be applicable in these scenarios, though? Shouldn't this offset and make everything equal for comparison?

 

[bigblueinsanity]

This is now two days in a row of you making reasonable takes.. You have a stroke?

Usaid going down probably ended their central nervous system that organized all the propaganda. If they all have to think for themselves, theyre inevitably going to stumble upon some common sense.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I am probably more Libertarian than anything but their candidates are always even more nutty than the Dems.
I am also Pro Cop and Pro Military.
That is why I didn't like the pardons for J6th cop beaters and don't like Trump's attacks on the FBI but aso can't stand some of the Dem calls for Defunding the police and the left wing politicians/media narrative that the cops are going around shooting black people for sport.
Wish there was a 3rd Party of Common sense without the nutty extremes and followers that support ANYTHING their candidate says or does.
I have criticized Biden/Harris many times on here. They totally F'd up Afghanistan. Their support for trans in sports is idiotic. Funding LGBTQ promotional stuff via the government is BS. I see that as being as bad as funding RELIGIOUS stuff via the government like Trump is doing with his new Christian bias agency or whatever the hell it is.
Government has no business promoting any of that crap. Only making sure individuals are treated fairly and not discriminated against.

I think the J6 stuff has really turned into the worst part of identity politics. I'm firmly on one side.. I think it was kind of embarrasing, but ultimately, aside from a few parts.. it was harmless. I also think there was ample efforts made by Trump to halt it, BUT.. do I think he secretly loved to see it? Probably.

And I also think the right has dug their heels on this topic, because we DID watch protests happen all summer before, and most liberals didn't care. So for a lot of us, it was hard to hear the sanctimonious liberals tells us our riot was bad, but theirs were OK. In reality, it was a group of people who felt disenfranchised and had enough BS, on BOTH sides.

And now, it's turned into basically two sports teams, where you defend your own for most of the time and condemn the other side 100%. I'm a repub, and I am on one side of this.. but I can at least understand where the left is coming from (even if I ultimately don't buy their argument). It's not lost on me that repubs who condemned riots, then had one of their own. I understand the optics of that.

 

[HeismaNole]

Unhinged theater kids. That's all the Democrat Party politicians are.

 

[SDC888]

Tough luck on the first question, but I guess they could deduct that loss from their taxes similar to the stock market.

Sure, you have benefited the economy, but who is benefitting? A luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy. If the same money was taxed, that money would go to infrastructure and schools. Trickle-down from luxury goods is much weaker than a direct investment in schools.

Banks already benefit greatly from the ultra wealthy. Wealthy individuals get much lower interest rates than average borrowers and banks get to collect fees and profits while minimizing risk. Meanwhile, the tax revenue from that interest is tinycompared to the avoided capital gains tax.

This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company.

This was actually really helpful. Thank you for this.

How come inflation calculators cannot be applicable in these scenarios, though? Shouldn't this offset and make everything equal for comparison?

The top 1% are already responsible for well over 50% of the total tax burden. Will your tax increases, i.e. "This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company." increase total revenue or help the common person?

No, and no more than the rest of it already does. which is to say little, if at all. If you want your welfare state, it can only be done by taxing the middle class, like the Europeans do. It's never been done any other way; no amount of taxing yachts or unrealized capital gains will do it. The money is not there.

How come inflation calculators cannot be applicable in these scenarios, though? Shouldn't this offset and make everything equal for comparison?

It does not. Why is it that the average person, in spite of your "calculations," is significantly wealthier today than they were then. Why is it, even with your calculations and understanding of purchaing power, the true cost of housing was not less then than it is today.

Anyone should be able to figure this out on their own. What factors are you completely ignoring to reach your desired conclusion? Why are we so much wealthier now than were then?

 

[SDC888]

Now look at the how the purchasing power of the Dollar has declined since its inception and you will have the answer. A Dollar is worth about jack and crap. The only thing propping it up right now is that the Dollar is the World Reserve Currency.

Inflation is a nation killer. You can't just print a trillion Dollars and expect things to be all good.

Also the housing market is inflated thanks to the mega corps buying up all the houses.

There's another obvious reality which is ignored to make "his" so-called argument.

 

[PopesReignOverCardinals]

I feel bad for gay people who truly want equality/fairness and then just want to be left alone regarding their sexuality. The ones who don't want to make a big deal out of it are often conservative thinkers on many issues.

This new generation is just so overwhelmingly radicalized though that LGBT doesn't stand for what it used to. Reddit is a very concerning place right now. I don't know if it's Let's Go Bring Terror or Let's Go Be Terrorists?

 

[HeismaNole]

I think the J6 stuff has really turned into the worst part of identity politics. I'm firmly on one side.. I think it was kind of embarrasing, but ultimately, aside from a few parts.. it was harmless. I also think there was ample efforts made by Trump to halt it, BUT.. do I think he secretly loved to see it? Probably.

And I also think the right has dug their heels on this topic, because we DID watch protests happen all summer before, and most liberals didn't care. So for a lot of us, it was hard to hear the sanctimonious liberals tells us our riot was bad, but theirs were OK. In reality, it was a group of people who felt disenfranchised and had enough BS, on BOTH sides.

And now, it's turned into basically two sports teams, where you defend your own for most of the time and condemn the other side 100%. I'm a repub, and I am on one side of this.. but I can at least understand where the left is coming from (even if I ultimately don't buy their argument). It's not lost on me that repubs who condemned riots, then had one of their own. I understand the optics of that.

BLM burned, looted and murdered and did it with DNC funding. These people threw molotov cocktails, burned down neighborhoods in honor of a career criminal drug addict who didn't even actually die by cop.

The right just experienced a fradulent election and went to march. Feds and their disguised informants started their shit to stop the challenging of the election. Killed a woman. Then imprisoned people for walking around. Used 40% of their FBI Agents to go after these people. Keep in mind, Democrats had routinely taken over buildings during Kavanaugh, Palestine, etc. NOTHING EVER HAPPENS TO THEM!

They drove Capitol protesters to suicide in the prison.

So no, it's not remotely the same thing. The left are agents of chaos, have Soros funded organization of chaos on a moment's notice. This isn't "my side doing it is okay" type stuff. It's apples to oranges. The left are the party of violence and their fake bullshit show trial was even more disgusting.

 

[Bill - Shy Cat]

Banks already benefit greatly from the ultra wealthy. Wealthy individuals get much lower interest rates than average borrowers and banks get to collect fees and profits while minimizing risk. Meanwhile, the tax revenue from that interest is tinycompared to the avoided capital gains

Just in case this helps. The bank must pay corporate income tax on earnings it derives from interest earned on these loans. Then, when the bank distrbutes its after-tax earnings to its shareholders in the form of dividends, the shareholder must pay income tax again. The bank does not receive a tax deduction for paying dividends. Therefore, these earnings are taxed twice. “Double taxation”.

 

[SDC888]

Just in case this helps. The bank must pay corporate income tax on earnings it derives from interest earned on these loans. Then, when the bank distrbutes its after-tax earnings to its shareholders in the form of dividends, the shareholder must pay income tax again. The bank does not receive a tax deduction for paying dividends. Therefore, these earnings are taxed twice. “Double taxation”.

Which you would have less of to tax if you taxed unrealized gains instead.

 

[HeismaNole]

I feel bad for gay people who truly want equality/fairness and then just want to be left alone regarding their sexuality. The ones who don't want to make a big deal out of it are often conservative thinkers on many issues.

This new generation is just so overwhelmingly radicalized though that LGBT doesn't stand for what it used to. Reddit is a very concerning place right now. I don't know if it's Let's Go Bring Terror or Let's Go Be Terrorists?

For those of us who came up in the 90s, you'd know like a gay person, you'd see a gay character on TV and for the most part no one gave a shit. It was never like the focal point of a show or the entire identity. You had your activists like the authors of 'After the Ball' who said exactly how they would push the gay agenda and did. However, about 15 or so years ago, started the straight cult-like behavior and empowerment of the alphabet mafia.

Their pivoting to trans stuff has been full-on radicalization of mentally ill people to become violent. Man, they have women cheering on losing their accomplishments to dudes wearing dresses. Think about how much brainwashing and cowardice that takes.

 

[Bigmikeydelight]

The top 1% are already responsible for well over 50% of the total tax burden. Will your tax increases, i.e. "This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company." increase total revenue or help the common person?

No, and no more than the rest of it already does. which is to say little, if at all. If you want your welfare state, it can only be done by taxing the middle class, like the Europeans do. It's never been done any other way; no amount of taxing yachts or unrealized capital gains will do it. The money is not there.



It does not. Why is it that the average person, in spite of your "calculations," is significantly wealthier today than they were then. Why is it, even with your calculations and understanding of purchaing power, the true cost of housing was not less then than it is today.

Anyone should be able to figure this out on their own. What factors are you completely ignoring to reach your desired conclusion? Why are we so much wealthier now than were then?

The top 400 is basically who I am targeting. I don't want to see the taxes go up for anyone but the top .001%.


We are wealthier now, but as I have been arguing, what matters is what you can buy with that wealth. Wages have gone up, but essential cost have risen much faster.

 

[Ron Mehico]

The top 400 is basically who I am targeting. I don't want to see the taxes go up for anyone but the top .001%.


We are wealthier now, but as I have been arguing, what matters is what you can buy with that wealth. Wages have gone up, but essential cost have risen much faster.

Ya but that wealth is make believe. Tesla could have an explosion in one of their factories and its stock could plummet 30% and all of a sudden Elon Musk loses 100 billion because their wealth is tied up in stocks which is fake money anyway.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Tough luck on the first question, but I guess they could deduct that loss from their taxes similar to the stock market.

Sure, you have benefited the economy, but who is benefitting? A luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy. If the same money was taxed, that money would go to infrastructure and schools. Trickle-down from luxury goods is much weaker than a direct investment in schools.

Banks already benefit greatly from the ultra wealthy. Wealthy individuals get much lower interest rates than average borrowers and banks get to collect fees and profits while minimizing risk. Meanwhile, the tax revenue from that interest is tinycompared to the avoided capital gains tax.

This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company.

We just have completely different worldviews on the efficient allocation of resources, and whether that best happens in a free market, or as directed from Washington. We’ll never bridge that gap.

Even if we grant you the assumption that the federal government is actually efficiently allocating resources to schools and roads (which is an insane assumption, especially in light of recent disclosures), it still would be better to have a direct infusion of capital into free markets.

Who do you think works in a “luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy?” Rich people?

And all that is beside the point that taxing unrealized income is completely unworkable, and very likely unconstitutional.

I just cannot believe anyone could have seen any reporting over the past couple weeks, all the waste and fraud, and think taking more money out of the private economy to be reallocated, and meddling in the ownership structure of private companies with forced sell offs, is somehow going to be better for America.

 

[SDC888]

The top 400 is basically who I am targeting. I don't want to see the taxes go up for anyone but the top .001%.


We are wealthier now, but as I have been arguing, what matters is what you can buy with that wealth. Wages have gone up, but essential cost have risen much faster.

That is temporary and due to the pandemic.

Trump 1.0 was fixing that before, Trump 2.0 will after. Never would have happened if not for the waste which both parties were responsible. It's supply/demand basics. And nevermind the millions of illegal immigrants you eagerly welcomed to compete for those wages and purchase those essential costs.

But you can still buy more today with those wages than you could then.

Ya but that wealth is make believe. Tesla could have an explosion in one of their factories and its stock could plummet 30% and all of a sudden Elon Musk loses 100 billion because their wealth is tied up in stocks which is fake money anyway.

You can;'t make something real from something that ain't.

He thinks you are going to tax that unrealized gain and turn it into real wealth by giving it the poor and middle class. It couldn't possibly work. The only way you can actually use it to make more wealth is by leveraging it, by risking it.

We just have completely different worldviews on the efficient allocation of resources, and whether that best happens in a free market, or as directed from Washington. We’ll never bridge that gap.

Even if we grant you the assumption that the federal government is actually efficiently allocating resources to schools and roads (which is an insane assumption, especially in light of recent disclosures), it still would be better to have a direct infusion of capital into free markets.

Who do you think works in a “luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy?” Rich people?

And all that is beside the point that taxing unrealized income is completely unworkable, and very likely unconstitutional.

I just cannot believe anyone could have seen any reporting over the past couple weeks, all the waste and fraud, and think taking more money out of the private economy to be reallocated, and meddling in the ownership structure of private companies with forced sell offs, is somehow going to be better for America.

Which is why eliminating waste is the only way to go. Our tax, taken from everyone sufficiently productive not just the top 400, then uselessly spent is itself inflationary. You've decreased productivity by taking it from someone who earned it and could've used it productively.

 

[AustinTXCat]

** Wise Words Department **

"By trying to do too much, you risk not doing enough."

-Peggy Noonan

 

[Ron Mehico]

Tough luck on the first question, but I guess they could deduct that loss from their taxes similar to the stock market.

Sure, you have benefited the economy, but who is benefitting? A luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy. If the same money was taxed, that money would go to infrastructure and schools. Trickle-down from luxury goods is much weaker than a direct investment in schools.

Banks already benefit greatly from the ultra wealthy. Wealthy individuals get much lower interest rates than average borrowers and banks get to collect fees and profits while minimizing risk. Meanwhile, the tax revenue from that interest is tinycompared to the avoided capital gains tax.

This argument downplays how the richest of the rich exploit the system to minimize taxes indefinitely. That tax money on the gains could be used to help the common person instead of just the yacht company.

This was actually really helpful. Thank you for this.

How come inflation calculators cannot be applicable in these scenarios, though? Shouldn't this offset and make everything equal for comparison?

I’m currently reading the book “The Rational Optimist”. It’s a great book. Not a super easy read but incredibly interesting. Basically goes through society from the stone ages to present day and shows what works and what doesn’t. I think you’d really like it.

 

[Bigmikeydelight]

We just have completely different worldviews on the efficient allocation of resources, and whether that best happens in a free market, or as directed from Washington. We’ll never bridge that gap.

Even if we grant you the assumption that the federal government is actually efficiently allocating resources to schools and roads (which is an insane assumption, especially in light of recent disclosures), it still would be better to have a direct infusion of capital into free markets.

Who do you think works in a “luxury industry that serves the ultra-wealthy?” Rich people?

And all that is beside the point that taxing unrealized income is completely unworkable, and very likely unconstitutional.

I just cannot believe anyone could have seen any reporting over the past couple weeks, all the waste and fraud, and think taking more money out of the private economy to be reallocated, and meddling in the ownership structure of private companies with forced sell offs, is somehow going to be better for America.

I'm actually really hopeful. I think if i see the middle class strengthen, I won't really care what is happening at the very top. And I say this not out of jealousy, but rather as someone who wants to see other people succeed. My family is in a great position and I don't deserve the things I have, but being in a public position and seeing families struggle like they do... It just makes you more empathetic to the problems of your community.

 

[IdaCat]

 

[DrH. Lecter]

This is true!!!

 

[hmt5000]

Just a reminder that when people say "nobody has a problem deporting criminals".... Democrats do have a problem deporting criminals. They tell us all the time. They spend tax dollars on making sure murderers can stay here.

 

[HeismaNole]

I’ve said for years that the feds do this shit.




Happened to the Vault 7 leaker
Happened to the brother of the Vegas shooter
Happened to the son of the second Trump shooter

I’m sure there’s more. But it’s also why Tucker Carlson won’t have a computer in his home.

 

[hmt5000]

No one is above the law but activist judges can rule like emperors on high. LOL.

 

[hmt5000]

Wild. Apparently, Jordan and Egypt have come to the table to talk about rebuilding Gaza. It's almost like everyone freaked out for no reason when it was obvious this was the plan.

 

[sambowieshin]

I think the J6 stuff has really turned into the worst part of identity politics. I'm firmly on one side.. I think it was kind of embarrasing, but ultimately, aside from a few parts.. it was harmless. I also think there was ample efforts made by Trump to halt it, BUT.. do I think he secretly loved to see it? Probably.

And I also think the right has dug their heels on this topic, because we DID watch protests happen all summer before, and most liberals didn't care. So for a lot of us, it was hard to hear the sanctimonious liberals tells us our riot was bad, but theirs were OK. In reality, it was a group of people who felt disenfranchised and had enough BS, on BOTH sides.

And now, it's turned into basically two sports teams, where you defend your own for most of the time and condemn the other side 100%. I'm a repub, and I am on one side of this.. but I can at least understand where the left is coming from (even if I ultimately don't buy their argument). It's not lost on me that repubs who condemned riots, then had one of their own. I understand the optics of that.

One of the most intelligent and rational posts I've ever read on here. Thank you for that. Truth spoken.
I only lean that it was more harmful to future elections than it is portrayed. Can't have parties with wins and riots with losses.
Dems can't riot every time a cop does something they don't like either.

 

[BigBlueDave]

My favorite new media crying over USAID story is that since USAID spent $2B per year buying agriculture products from the US, farmers are going to be hurt.

Bur it turns out most of what they buy is from Cargill and ADM. Get the f outta here.

US grain farmers don't sell their grain to Kroger, Publix or the downtown farmers market. The big four, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Bunge, Cargill, and Louis Dreyfus, account for 75% of the grain traded in the world.

Those grain elevators that all of the farmers line their trucks up to at harvest are owned by those four or somebody selling to those four. Near me ADM owns the one in Paducah and Ledbetter. Bunge owns the one in Cairo, IL.

Now will that hurt? Nobody likes losing a sale. I think total us grain production last year was around $150B, so $2B is significant. But, it's also a commodity. It's like the oil shell game they played with Putin. The west said they weren't buying from him. The west has to make up the loss somewhere. The west bought from the next source. To line up the next source, you have to pay more than that next source was receiving from their previous customer. That follows down the line until someone is empty-handed and then buys from Putin.

It just shuffles the deck.

 

[hmt5000]

Gonna need Dore on this because we don't understand how the legal system works.... but shouldn't she recuse herself from a case that she has a financial interest in? Seems like a conflict of interest.

 

[JumperJack]

Unhinged theater kids. That's all the Democrat Party politicians are.

View embedded media

Doing a great job being the adults in the room.

 

[Bill Cosby]

I'm actually really hopeful. I think if i see the middle class strengthen, I won't really care what is happening at the very top. And I say this not out of jealousy, but rather as someone who wants to see other people succeed. My family is in a great position and I don't deserve the things I have, but being in a public position and seeing families struggle like they do... It just makes you more empathetic to the problems of your community.

Well I can assure you if you want to target the top by taxing loan proceeds or “wealth” (including unrealized income), those taxes will be applied to the middle class long before those taxes help to fix any “wealth disparity”.

It’s what always happens. The income tax. Alternative minimum tax. Etc. It starts as a “tax on the rich” and always works its way down.

If you start by taxing Bezos because he wants to buy a yacht without liquidating Amazon, no doubt you’ll move to taxing Joe the plumber because he wants to buy a bass boat without selling his house.

 

[OHIO COLONEL]

I still don't think we fully realize the scam that was Hussein Obama

Saw where his mom had worked for USAID.

 

[hmt5000]

So tax dollars are being used to attack people who try to save tax money from waste..... We don't hate government enough.

 

[hmt5000]

Protect all whistleblowers... you know... unless they are whistleblowing on democrat corruption.

 

[billCgmx]

Illegal migrants busted in Joe Burrow home robbery posed with stolen luxury goods

The alleged perps flashed watches, glasses, Louis Vuitton luggage and wads of cash.

nypost.com

 

[hmt5000]