How Your Taxes Will Rise Under Trump Tax Plan - Donald Trump Discussion

But dumb hayseeds believe Trump is for them. lol

reply

And the moronic Lefty Loons have their heads so far up their asses, they can't see a damn thing.

BTW, does the stock market SOARING from 18,000 under Dumbo Ears to 24,719.22 under Trump do anything for you?
And for all the mathematically challenged Lefty Loons, that's over 6,700 points!

😎

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

The stock market no longer has any validity. It is artificially inflated. In 2008 the market was up and then crashed. In 1929 it was the same thing. The stock market means shit when it comes to how Americans are doing.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

And how exactly is it "artificially inflated", modica? That's one of the dumbest statements I've heard this year.

😎

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

Go read about the stock market and about the collapse of 2008. I am not here to give you a lesson on how that bullshit works.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

Your knowledge of the Stock market is obviously limited, Mod. Here is Stock Market 101 just for you: The market goes up, the market goes down, every day. It always has, it always is. But the overall trend in the last 100 years has always been a (sometimes slow) incline.

Sometimes there are steep increases, sometimes there are steep declines. When the market collapsed in 2008, guess what? I bought more stock mutual funds! That's how you make money, Mod: do what everyone else is NOT doing.

And you also buy bond funds to protect yourself from the volatility. My current mix is 47.2% stock, and 52.8% bonds. Any time you need investment advice, please feel free to ask me. I would be happy to help.

And you're welcome.

PS The crash in 1987 was much worse, but it was just a blip on the long slow upward climb.
And I survived that one also.

😎

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

The bubble is about to burst. Good luck.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

The bubble always bursts, mod. It's called a "correction". Then I will buy more stock, and move happily into the future watching it rise again. That's how I was able to retire at the tender age of 56.

PS Happy New Year!

😎

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

Happy New Year to you also.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

Thanks, mod!

😎

reply

[–] NostalgiaGoddess (79) 6 years ago

Don't forget graduate students on stipends being expected to pay taxes out the wazoo..

https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/7/16619246/tax-bill-trump-gop-cuts-and-jobs-act-graduate-students-tuition-waiver-reductions

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

I didn't know about that one. Thanks.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

If you think Hilary would have improved the tax status, you don't know much about Democrats.

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

"If you think Hilary would have improved the tax status, you don't know much about Democrats."

If you think she would have given this kind of massive FU to middle class and lower income citizens, you are a drug addled crackhead.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

That defies all previous Democrat administrations actions. They pander to the lower class for votes,but they have never helped the middle class. Hillary is on record as saying she'll say whatever she has to to get the votes. Give me a break.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Hillary's "has given a massive FU" to everyone and anyone who doesn't fill her coffers with money. Her contempt for America IS staggering.

Hard to believe there are still folks dumb enough to worship at the altar of that witch.

reply

[–] [email protected] (690) 6 years ago

"that witch." Clearly you don't have perspective about a person's ability to craft public policy.
She may not be the best, but everything the Wrong wing throws at us is killing Everyday People.
(Irony Alert!) We should all be poor, and be happy we live in the Land of the Free.
I'm very disappointed we've come to where we hire a Game-Show host to run the country. But I guess that's life these days - kinda like Hitler. The rest of us suffer while nationalists Trumpet their Cause.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

I really should not call Hillary "that witch". I have read up on Wicca and I know that most witches practice harmless white magic. Mrs. Clinton, on the other hand....is evil personified. I make no apologizes for loathing that hateful, lying criminal.

The "wrong wing", another pitiful attempt at left wing cleverness!

"She may not be the best"?? Well that's an understatement if I ever heard one!!! You are so correct.

"We should all be poor and be happy to live in the Land of the Free"??? So where the hell do you want to live? Someplace else where you can whine so freely? LOL

Where did you get the notion that you should be happy being poor? You live in the greatest and free-est country in the world. Many folks come here from countries with repressive, Communist regimes and they make their way and become successful.

You are only limited by your own imagination. If you want to be limited by your crying, whiny, snowflake "problem" that Trump is President, well, that's your problem.

Grow up, grow a pair and stop being such a whiny a@@.

reply

[–] [email protected] (690) 6 years ago

Thank you for your thoughtful and polite response -- (facetious alert).
You just verified the blind, spiteful and irrational hatred neo-cons have for people who want to strengthen the middle class. If you think personally belittling people you don't agree with is productive, have at it. Hate's a fun thing to spread around and you're good at it. Congrats.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Facetious alert? LOL As if you left wingers actually HAVE a sense of humor! haha

I seriously have no idea what a "neo-con" is. I first heard it out of the mouth of that political "genius" Rosie O'Donnell. Perhaps you could enlighten me on what that label means to leftie-tards.

Spreading hate? Oh, sorry kiddo, but I beg to differ. Even though I disliked and feared an Obama Presidency I never said I wanted to "blow up the White House" like that leftard cu#$ Madonna said! The hatred comes from YOUR side!

"Belittling people"?? Just who did I belittle in my post? You obviously are a product of government schooling, otherwise how else could you have such a problem with understanding basic English?

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

the problem starts with calling moderate republicans like ms clinton "the left".

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

Amen, PJ.

😎

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

"They pander to the lower class for votes,but they have never helped the middle class."

True enough, mainstream Dems are more about Wall Street than ordinary America.

Nonetheless, you were completely full of BS to suggest taxes would ever possibly be worse under her. She would have vetoed this bill and anything like it. Worst case scenario would be that nothing in the tax code would change, meaning the poor and middle class, by all objective measures, would be better off than they are under this rape of a tax bill.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

It's really all speculation, because she didn't win. Rest assured, I'm not a huge fan of Trump, I just think it's rediculous to think anything would have been much different with Hilary,we would have just gotten there a different way.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Why are you deflecting to Clinton who is irrelevant? What is relevant is Trump and the Republican Party supporting a bill to give a massive tax cut to the super rich while screwing everyone else. Only the Republicans are supporting this bill - no Democrats. So your criticism of Democrats doesn't hold water.

According to Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, all your money should go to the rich, because you're just spending every penny you have on "booze or women or movies.”

reply

[–] TinaKimo (868) 6 years ago

That crazy font always talking abt Hillary. It wakes up thinking of Hillary and goes to sleep thinking of Hillary. Purple is no different from that krypt keeper Kelly ann Conway, always bitching abt Hillary when she is no where near political office!

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Why are you so concerned about Kelly Ann Conway? is she going to raise your taxes?

Hillary is "no where near political office". THANK the Lord for small favors. This country dodged a bullet. However she does think very highly of herself and her opinions, re: her latest "boo hoo" book tour.

If she's not in power, why can't she go away graciously or just go away?

keelai- not surprising you pull the old trick of taking a comment out of context. Sen. Grassley did not say "all of your money should go to the rich." WHY on earth would the rich want MY money? I hardly have any!
Are you being disengenious or do you just enjoy sounding foolish?

Why shouldn't the tax plan reward investors who put up money to start businesses? Did you ever get a job from someone who WAS spending all his money foolishly? Why should people who spend a lifetime building businesses and farms have to worry about passing them along to family who are taxed again?

Washington just loves this class warfare that's going on. The top 1% pay forty per cent of Federal income taxes. How much more should the "evil rich" have to cough up to Uncle Sam.
What we really need are spending cuts! But Washington will never do without it's massive appetite for the peoples' money. I can't stand most of what Washington does. When it comes to taxes, Federal, State, local, sales tax, etc. Americans fork over about fifty per cent of their earnings.

I am not about to be sucked into this envy of the rich. It's a waste of energy. A flat tax would be fair. We need smaller government, but do ya think Republicans or Democrats are going to "downsize"?

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

If you want Hilary to go away, maybe stop bring her up in a whataboutism every time trump fucks the people he said he was going help would be a good start. No?

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

"Whataboutism"- oh the newest snowflake offering to the dictionary! If the left would be intellectually honest (fat chance), they would admit that their intense hatred and plans to destroy President Trump come from a deep seated resentment that he beat their candidate like a gong!

"If I want Hillary to go away", well, uh, duh, I DO want that. BUt do you honestly think she'll "go away" if I don't mention her? DID I tell her to write another book of excuses and to go on a "poor me" book tour? Did I tell her to keep doing interviews?
My fervent wish is that someone finally drops a house on her, or failing that, a big bucket of water. But it doesn't seem like she is going to go away any time soon. She thinks she is still politically relevant so if I want to mention her I will, so stuff it! LOl

As for "effing the people", Clinton and her beard. er, hubby, are experts at that game. Seriously ask the people of Haiti!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Blah blah blah. I feel sorry for you.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"If she's not in power, why can't she go away graciously or just go away?"
Because Republicans keep bringing her up.

Sen. Grassley has repeatedly said he wants to prevent small farmers and small business owners from paying the Federal Estate Tax.

But, they are not the ones paying it. An individual must have assets of 5.5 million to pass to heirs, 11 million for a couple.

99.8% don't pay this tax! With estate tax planning, the 0.02% will pay est. 17% because of loopholes like trusts - not 40%.

There is no double tax. The estate tax was created because most inherited wealth was never taxed since most comes from unrealized gain. Example: I buy a painting (stocks, realty, etc) for $200,000 which appreciates in price to $10 million. Even though I made a huge profit, I never paid tax since I didn't sell it. The painting is finally taxed when it's passed to the heirs as a new asset for them.

Spenders buy products/services that allows the business to grow. Capitalism 101.

"top 1% pay forty per cent of Federal income taxes."
Top 1% own 38% of wealth and growing thanks to wealth transfers like this while the middle-class lose ground. It also hurts our economy by increasing borrowing and impoverishing the rest of us.

I didn't take anything out of context. He said 99.8% of us buy booze, womanize and watch movies since this estate tax doesn't apply to us. We shouldn't have the money since we're misspending it. How can you defend that arrogant classist a**?

Original radio interview:
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2017/12/02/tax-reform-iowa-farmers-estate-tax/906946001/

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Well thanks for your post and I am NOT being sarcastic. You've obviously put thought into this. However you DID take his words out of context. You don't want to admit it, that's okay. You heard what you wanted to hear. It's called confirmational bias.

"Wealth transfer"? Another canard offered up by the socialist teaching establishments of our institutions of "higher learning", i.e., socialist professors. Wealth is EARNED, not Transferred!

All I can really offer is a quote I read by Will Rogers, "The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."

If you are surprised by this, well you ARE a brainwashed millennial, just very gullible, or maybe of both. I suggest you pick up an economics book by Dr. Thomas Sowell or Dr. Walter E. Williams or the late Milton Friedman.

If you think you were going to live in an "untaxed" paradise if Hillary Clinton was President (and I suspect you do) you need a strong dose of reality.

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

"Wealth is EARNED, not Transferred!"

Complete BS from a brainwashed buffoon.

There is nobody smart enough, hardworking enough, trained enough and dedicated enough to earn a billion dollars without leveraging corrupt systems and exploiting people.

The poverty threshold in America is $11,490 for one person. If someone has a billion dollars, that is 87,032 times the poverty line.

It’s possible for someone to be twice as smart as another worker. It’s possible for them to be four or five times as hardworking. It’s possible for one person to have ten times the training of another person. So if you have one person that is half as smart, a fifth as hardworking, and a tenth as trained, they should reasonably earn one percent of the other. That’s the very outside figure. But anyone who takes in more than a million dollars per year did not earn that, they stole it. They found a vulnerable system to exploit or they found a group of people to cheat. Maybe they did it legally. Maybe they paid someone to make it legal to do that. It happens. But “earn”? Actually -deserving- that much money because of their merits and efforts? No.

"I suggest you pick up an economics book by Dr. Thomas Sowell or Dr. Walter E. Williams or the late Milton Friedman."

And I suggest you pick up an economics book by Paul Krugman or Joseph Stiglitz. But you probably don't read and get all your information from Fox News.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Typical left argument, the ad hominem, i.e. "You probably don't read and get all your information from Fox News." So clever! ha ha

Yes I do read, how else would know of these men or their books which are on my shelf? How would I know that liberal "economics" comes from the Karl Marx book of "share what others have earned" philosophy.

I seriously don't get your half, tenth, fifth analogy? Where were you headed with that?

"Leveraging corrupt systems"? Ya mean like Hillary? The woman who sold American influence to foreign governments and now is worth 200 million, give or take? A woman whose husband hasn't held a job since he was President? But was able to throw her daughter a multi-million dollar wedding? If you want to piss and moan about "ill gotten gains", please do it across the board or else you sound like a liberal phony.

Sure no one does it totally alone... Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Mrs. Fields and her cookies, George Clooney, Tom Hanks, etc. But are they not entitled to the fruits of their labors?

"Deserving because of their merits and efforts" Who the hell are you and the government to decide who "is deserving"? What a pile of arrogant crap!

Obviously no one becomes a millionaire in a vacuum

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

""Leveraging corrupt systems"? Ya mean like Hillary?"

Yes, absolutely. She and Trump are both products of an insanely corrupt system which idiots like you support even though the chances of you personally benefiting from it are next to zero. And if you did benefit, you'd be as corrupt as they are.

""Deserving because of their merits and efforts" Who the hell are you and the government to decide who "is deserving"? What a pile of arrogant crap!"

Yes, to morally and ethically illiterate dolts like you, having sense of fairness and decency seems like the height of arrogance. I get it.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

So who do "idiots like you" support? Ha!

Yes, it is an insanely corrupt system. No disagreement there. So would you prefer the Hildabeast, who never employed a single person? Or Trump who did? Which one paid a lot of taxes to our greedy government?
So tell me, what am I supposed to do? Have you figured out a brilliant plan? Seriously! Let me know and I will come on board with your idea to get the powerful and wealthy out of power.

"Fairness and decency", oh stop talking like a nitwit! If people work hard, they are entitled to what they earn.

You call me morally and ethically an illiterate "dolt". Well, okay, it's a one syllable word which isn't so hard for you to spell. Good for you. I guess I made the mistake of trying to have an intellectual discussion with someone who I thought has a brain.

Now go read a book on economics and stop using your emotions instead of your intellect.

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

"Let me know and I will come on board with your idea to get the powerful and wealthy out of power.'

I am under no illusions that a garbage human being like you has any interested in real change or justice.

"If people work hard, they are entitled to what they earn."

Under no fair and just system is anyone entitled to be a multimillionaire while some people starve or go broke because they can't afford health care. There is simply no metric under which someone is that much more talented or better than anyone else.

But that's okay, I understand that scum like you just don't recognize any of this.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Gee many "thanks" for your "kind", "mature" and "intelligent" response!! LOLOLOL So you are one less lefty I can cross off my list to try and have an intelligent discussion with! Saves me time! Thanks for showing your true low I.Q. colors.

But just a little P.S. for the hell of it- Are the Kennedys who got their start with old Joe Kennedy the bootlegger entitled to the multi millions that they have?

Is former President Obama, a hero to Marxist everywhere entitled to the multimillions that he has "acquired" (NOT earned, mind you, acquired.)

You think that people who created companies and industries which have made our lives easier are NOT entitled to their wealth? If so, I hope you are reading this by candlelight and ride a bike to work. What hypocrisy.

I really should have my head examined for trying to engage in adult debate with whiny, name calling crybabies. Of course name calling is what passes for intelligent discourse among fools!

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Ya mean like Hillary?"
Once again, YOU bring her up.

Henry Ford paid his workers twice what other employers were paying.

Andrew Carnegie was a philantropist who gave away $350 million to charities and stated that the rich had a moral obligation to give away their fortunes.

Are you supporting socialists?

George Clooney, Tom Hanks? I can't believe you're mentioning "lefties" like them.

"Sure no one does it totally alone"
You're not talking about those nasty "spenders" who spend and watch movies that Sen. Grassley despises?

reply

[–] PresidentAckbar (1289) 6 years ago

maga

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Before 1492.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

I would respond to your post if I knew what the h#ll you were trying to say... but well, I'll give it a shot...

Andrew Carnegie? Yes, a great philanthropist. He stated that the rich have a "moral obligation" to give away their fortunes? Really and truly you are willing to accept preaching from him? Geez, how 'bout that? A left winger who is concerned with morals!

You have decided that people who have earned great wealth somehow "owe" it to society to give back what they earned? If they want to be generous, sure, but they don't "owe" anyone the fruits of their labors.

How much of what someone else earns are YOU entitled to?

If that is true though, I will be the first to stand in line when the Clintons give back the millions they "earned" (ha ha) for the speeches they gave and Hillary's selling out our country for big bucks. Oh sorry, sorry, shouldn't mention HER!! But let's face it. It's what all you lefties have your panties in a twist over, your Queen didn't get her coronation. So

Honestly are you a millennium?Did you attend USC or some other left wing college? You need to learn to think and not rely on feelings so much.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

I'll explain your error since you're confused.

Your quote:
"Sure no one does it totally alone... Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Mrs. Fields and her cookies, George Clooney, Tom Hanks, etc. But are they not entitled to the fruits of their labors?"

You appear to be against people with money giving some of it to the poor and you called it socialism.

Everyone you named (except Mrs. Fields whose stance is unknown) is a socialist according to your definition since they happily want to give money to the poor and believe it's their moral duty to do so. My point being: You should have named different people.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Oh for pete's sake! I am NOT against philanthropy. Where did you get such a silly idea?

And no, you have NO freaking idea what my idea of a socialist is! Take a moment, breathe and think. Socialism is the government forcing people to give away the fruits of their labors. The people I mentioned have given away money of their own free will which is great. Somehow you and other lefties seem to think that it is better for the government to make those decisions for people.

Yeah, the government which creates and produces NOTHING decides how other people's money should be spent. Seriously have you ever read ONE sentence of what our Founding Fathers wrote? Have you read ANYTHING that James Madison , Father of the Constitution said? Government is not supposed to be in the business of charity. Individuals yes, government NO!

I live in a little podunk town, no business , no industry. Most people are working class and scraping by. Yet we have several food banks, local churches have their own food pantries. People donate a lot to them. There's a lot of generosity around here which has nothing to do with the government's boot on people's backs forcing them to "donate". I have given about ten bags of groceries myself to my church's food pantry this fall. It's not much, but it's what I can afford.

I resent holier than thou know-it-alls telling me what is wrong with me. So what are YOU doing for society besides being a candy ass whiner on the internet? LOL

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"I am NOT against philanthropy. Where did you get such a silly idea?"

Your previous words:
""Wealth transfer"? Another canard offered up by the socialist teaching establishments of our institutions of "higher learning", i.e., socialist professors."

Wealth transfer aka: Redistribution of income definition:
transfer of income and of wealth from some individuals to others by means of a social mechanism such as taxation,CHARITY, welfare, public services, land reform, monetary policies, confiscation, divorce or tort law.

"Socialism is the government forcing people to give away the fruits of their labors."

Your previous words:
"Why shouldn't the tax plan reward investors who put up money to start businesses?"

You had argued that middle-class taxes should be given to the rich (which is unpopular because it is being done by force!) What hypocrisy!

"James Madison...,said...Government is not supposed to be in the business of charity..."
Slave owner James Madison who forced humans to work without paying them? He's your source for charity? LOL!

"...the government which creates and produces NOTHING..."
Our government funded and created the Internet. Bravo!

"So what are YOU doing for society besides being a candy a** whiner on the internet?"
I'm pretty sure I'm supporting many of the "working class and scraping by" in your town with my taxes.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Sen. Grassley said something stupid and was criticized for it so he backpedals by saying it was taken out of context. Then you mindlessly repeat after him "It was taken out of context." without explaining HOW it was taken out of context. As a matter of fact, Sen Grassley doesn't explain that either. He just reiterates his past lies which I commented about in my previous post.

I listened to his entire interview, I read the entire original article AND I read his explanation which didn't address nor apologize for his insulting charactization of the 99%.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/rekha-basu/2017/12/05/grassley-women-booze-budgets-tax/919863001/

"Wealth is EARNED, not Transferred!"
An heir doesn't EARN wealth - it's transferred. The TARP program was wealth transfer. Middle-income people losing their 401Ks was another wealth transfer to institutional investors and tells me you don't understand how the stock market works

""untaxed" paradise"
You're changing the subject. The discussion was about estate taxes for the rich. Why are you against rich people paying any tax (see my previous post), but you want middle-class people to pay higher taxes?

"...Hillary Clinton ..."
And once again, YOU bring her up.

reply

[–] [email protected] (690) 6 years ago

So cut the defense budget.
I'm sick of being the defenders of the world, our people getting maimed and killed in this global war the Bush Administration conjured up.
Obviously our defense budget is obscenely higher than any other nation, and we back it up with "support our troops" and "acknowledge our veterans," so we tacitly agree USA should be out there fighting everything, since we have a big military.
Very frustrating.

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

if we at least were "defending" something i woud not even have a problem with said budget. the problem being that we are mostly attacking under false pretenses and even worse that we have little to no results to show in return. we got bin laden, which is great. how much percentenage of the actual budget did that take would be of much interest to me.

reply

[–] footlegger (1462) 6 years ago

"how much percentage of the actual budget did that take would be of much interest to me."
Probably a $50 and a couple of goats for the guy who gave out his location.

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

most likely. ^^

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

"Hillary is on record as saying she'll say whatever she has to to get the votes. Give me a break."

Trump is on record saying he 'loves the uneducated'.

After all, those are the ones who got him into office.

reply

[–] [email protected] (690) 6 years ago

I agree Dems have disappointed about getting things done, but please don't accuse us of having an anti-Middle Class agenda. pubs are screwing us with abandon, at least the Dems support Unions and Teachers, which should be the backbone of our country.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Hilary isn’t president, don’t know why you’re bringing her up. The point is trump lied to you, who gives a crap about what some other criminal would have done, this is what he’s done. Don’t double down because you made a bad choice, get angry because you were lied to. Fuck Hilary, she’s not important. What she would or wouldn’t have done doesn’t matter.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

I disagree. The point is that ALL career politicians are corrupt,and putting a different liar in place wouldn't be an improvement. This is what has happened,is "sides" keep blaming the other,and administrations just keep going back and forth,but no real change happens. Until we admit that none of these assholes are really out for our best interest, nothing will get better for middle and lower class.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

But the original post didn’t mention that Hilary would have been better or worse. The point is only that trump is in fact not what he told everyone he was. I do t give a fuck about how corrupt Hilary is, she lost, she’s of no importance at all to any conversation.

If it makes you feel any better, I agree with you. They are all corrupt. Red or blue makes no difference. But people believe that trump is on their side. He has continuously proved that’s not the case and yet still, they think he’s dogs back bits. It is time we all realise that politicians are corrupt. Why not start at the top? Say it with me, trump is a corrupt piece of shit only out for himself!

reply

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

Stop with the "Whataboutisms"....we're talking about Trump, not Hillary...not Obama....Trump. You remember him, right?

Diversion is just a way of saying you have no counter to the actual point.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

The counter to the point is saying it's better than the alternative,which is completely relevant.

reply

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

No it isn't. Any argument about Hillary is purely hypothetical because (news flash) ....SHE didn't win. So we don't have HER tax plan to complain about. We have his. It's there. You're rationalizing your avoidance of admitting Trump is not the Great Orange Hope you hoped he would be.

Honestly I'd respect Trump supporters more if they just admitted they did not want Hillary (nor did I), but Trump has turned out to be ....problematic.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Well I hope I can garner your respect when I admit I DID NOT WANT HILLARY! I would have voted for Jeb Bush just to keep Hillary away from an office which she did not deserve by merit or brains or her "years in the White House".

Just an aside I saw a funny interview with comedian Jackie Mason. He talked about the idea that Hillary was deserving of the presidency since she spent so many years in the White House. His reply? "So has the pastry chef."

The Great Orange Hope?? Tsk, tsk, you lefties always lecture us about not judging someone on the basis of COLOR! So what is orange about President Trump? And how does his hair color affect his judgment?
Y'all seemed to have trusted the brown clown we had for the past eight years and he was arrogant stupidity personified!! Talk about an empty suit with nothing to his credit except the support of the Chicago mob and Bill Ayres.

reply

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

“Leftie”?

Republican since 1983, son.

Luckily, AMERICAN since 1965, so i’m not an idiot who throws labels around inaccurately (mine are ACCURATE based on how you post) and puts party over country.

Respect ...fail.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

"son", no female since birth, I wasn't "assigned" any other gender.

Been an American my whole life too. YOU don't throw around labels? You throw around insults pretty well though, i.e., "Orange Hope", "idiot", etc.

Party over country, how did I do that? I put my country ahead of voting for anyone in the Party. That's why I voted for Trump.

Pardon me, but you come across as a bit of a phony.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

Previous tax plans by Democrats are not hypothetical. There is a historical bases for my comment.

reply

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

Sorry, no. You did not reference “previous tax plans by Democrats”. You, in a vain attempt to divert from Trump, referenced the tax plans that were never seen of a person who was never President.

I realize denial and self-delusion are your bread and butter, but THAT much of it will give you the body of Trump

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 6 years ago

You are laughably rediculous. You seem to think "you got me",yet you just sound foolish. Denial and self delusion are my bread and butter?! You sound like an 80s soap opera! Who the hell talks like that?

reply

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

Well....I do, obviously. I mean, the proof is right there, Bubba. Or is that more of the “fake news “ Trump and his acolytes cling to so as to avoid reality?

reply

[–] bwbphile (471) 6 years ago

I'll do fine. Get a good CPA and you won't have any problems. Unless you're inept.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

A "good CPA" isn't going to fix anything when normal deductions that middle-income people use to lower taxes will disappear.

BTW, the next step is for the Republicans to gut Medicare and Social Security.

"Bruce Bartlett, former chief economist for Republican economic icons Representatives Jack Kemp (R-NY) and Ron Paul (R-TX) -- for weeks has been shouting from the mountaintop the extreme likelihood of the GOP training its sights on Social Security and Medicare."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2017/12/03/will-gop-cut-social-security-and-medicare-before-or-after-the-2018-election/#6d4336ed35ef

reply

[–] bwbphile (471) 6 years ago

I'm on Social Security and Medicare. I live within my means and pay cash for everything. People need to stop blaming the government for their own problems with life.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

But you just don't understand!! In our current "cradle to grave" mentality, Big Daddy government is supposed to take care of his children! Isn't that what our Founding Fathers intended? A government to take care of our every need while we sit back like toddlers and suck our thumbs??

Kudos to you for not expecting government to take care of you.

reply

[–] bwbphile (471) 6 years ago

Thank you pjpurple.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

So you don’t want your taxes going to the people? You want them going into the pockets of trump and his ilk? Sounds like a plan.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Taxes "going to the people"?? What people? The people who don't work and have multiple babies with multiple baby daddies, the illegal, excuse me, undocumented people? The legal slush fund for Washington lawmakers who are accused of sexual assault?

If taxes are spent on what they are supposed to be spent on, hey, I have no problem! But if you DON'T realize that Washington mismanages, wastes and steals your money...well you deserved to be robbed.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

I realise that just fine, you are the one who seems to have a problem with spending it on things the country actually needs. You piss and moan about about the people you don’t want to have things, but have nothing to say about the the utter corruption and abuse that far outweighs the issues you seem to think are important.

I’d rather 200 million middle class Americans get to spend their own money than give it to rich people to park in a bank account. Hell, I’d rather give money collected from taxes to those few you think aren’t worthy of life than give it the rich to park in a bank account. Call me crazy but just because you have a way of looking at people doesn’t make it fucking so. And to be honest your utter lack of empathy for those who aren’t like you is quiet disgusting. You don’t people’s circumstances, you have no idea how they ended up where they did. You just assume and make judgements on shit you have no fucking clue about and then hide behind it being “an opinon” when ever you get called on your bullshit. Sorry sweetheart, but shit like this is why you get called a bigot. You have pre conceived notion of those that too many children, or don’t have a college degree, or a good job etc. The mental well-being of these people never enters your mind, they’re just scum. It does t matter if they were sexually abused their whole lives? It doesn’t matter that they were poor from the start and learned their toxic behaviour from those that should have taught them better.

Here’s the real issue with your bullshit philosophy. If you don’t help people up, they’ll never be able to get up. All those people you think are scum never get the help they need to lift themselves up, and pass that shot on to a new generation. But I’m sure you love that. Because scum like you can only ever feel good when putting others down.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

I don't think people are "scum", but I do think they are totally foolish to think that the Washington elite give a sh#t about anything other than their votes.

Seriously I am a "bigot" because I expect people to grow the hell up and stop having babies they cannot afford? Call me all the names you want, just shows what a mental midget you are.

Lift yourself up? here is a simple formula which I have heard many times- GRADUATE from high school, get a job and DON'T have babies until you are married. It's a sure fire solution to stay out of poverty.

But politicians are banking on the stupidity of people like you who think that all they have to do is stroke you with false promises and then you hold out your beggar bowls and Washington will fill them, that is as long as you keep voting for them, Seriously, grow up, read an economics book, I recommend Dr. Thomas Sowell, although he uses really big words and you may need a dictionary.

I think I am about finished with talking to touchy feely goofballs!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

See, you’re too much a cunt to even try to understand that other people don’t have your life, they don’t have your advantages or disadvantages. So to judge people you don’t know based on nothing but your own bias tells me all I need to know about you. Calling you names? No, sweetheart, I’m calling you what you are. You e just said that the government elites don’t care about them, so you know where the real problems are. Yet you’d still rather pile on and belittle the poor and disabled than point the finger where it should go. Muppets like you harp on and on about the “scum” who need to stop looking to the government for help, yet have nothing to say about the real scum that take and take and take who don’t even need it.

Maybe if all you people that love to have a go at the poor and disabled put even half as much effort into criticising the rich who continue to rob and rape the tax payer the roads might not be as shit as they are. The bridges wouldn’t be starting to crumble. There would be more money to take care of those that served, the disabled, more money to help get people out of poverty and able to contribute. But no, let’s not use taxes to help the people of the country. Let’s just give it to a minority of “job creators” who ship every job they can over seas, while parking the majority of the money they do earn in off shore accounts to avoid paying taxes at all.

You’re a god damn disgrace. And people like you are the reason the world is as fucked as it is. It’s easy to look at poor people and blame them for where they are. It’s easy to say they obviously just want hand outs. Maybe if you and all the rest actually stood for what America professes to be about, you’d have a lot less crime, poverty and failing infrastructure.

I’ll make it simple for you, if you treat people like scum that’s all they will ever be.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Filthy language from a filthy mind! You are a waste of my time! You know what's a "disgrace"? You and your silly name calling! You know you could probably download a dictionary on-line for free and then you wouldn't come across as someone with a serious head injury.
Hey there, you economic no-nothing, why do you think jobs are shipped overseas? Confiscatory tax rates. I don't own any businesses or industries. But I know what's going on in this world and if you think life would be a paradise under Hillary, you are even more moronic than your posts suggest!! LOL

F.Y.I.- I don't take from the government. But I also never made myself a burden with five babies from five baby daddies! It's somehow MY fault when women choose to live like sluts and men choose to be rutting pigs? Duh, call me all the names you want, but you are truly a few fries short of a Happy Meal!!

There IS a time when people have to accept the responsibility for their OWN lives. Of course a lot of this can be traced to LBJ's Great Society. Yes, let's have a government check be a substitute for husbands and fathers. Screw around all you want and let the taxpayers bail you out.

What IS a real disgrace is that the no nothing, silly fools like you are actually allowed to vote! So how many illegitimate babies do you have or are have you fathered? (I don't know your gender) Or do your parents know you spend all your time in their basement posting nonsense? Don't they ever ask you to do your chores or take out the trash?
You must be one of those whiny snowflakes who sucks his thumb, cuddles with his baby blanket and thinks the "big bad world" owes everybody a living. Do the country a favor and don't vote until you get your head out of your rectum!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

WOW! Do you talk to your family that way? I wouldn't ask if you talk to your "friends" that way because a rude, sad, potty mouth fool like you obviously doesn't have ANY! LOL

You "won't be reading" what I wrote, haha, you responded to my post in record time, so I can only deduce that you HAD to read what I posted! You can't read what I write, but you sure as hell like to respond to it!! Lie to me, okay, but be honest with yourself.

But to review your post which is probably indicative of a government funded education- 1. "Im", no it's "I'm" 2. "Youre", no it's You're.
Familiarize yourself with basic punctuation before you attempt to enter into the world of serious political discourse. And btw, you misspelled HILLARY Clinton's first name too! You really should stay off the internet and pass third grade spelling first.

Oh yeah, I ALWAYS say rape victims shouldn't wear short skirts! Geez, obviously the only thing that can make YOU feel good about yourself is to project your twisted hate on others. Actually short skirts don't really have much to do as a contributing factor to rape, ask Bill Clinton's victims.
I also hate when "black dudes" drive nice cars. I stay awake at night hoping that hard working black men drive old jalopies.
You truly are sad, angry and demented and your vocabulary would make an uneducated nitwit proud!

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

why do you even bother? pj does not even talk about the subject at hand anyway. let him starve and he will go away.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

thereofdotcom- on the contrary, I am a she, not a he. Are you not familiar with good ole Chuck's other "lovely" post where he called me a c@#@! At least he got my gender correct. LOL Just what I'd expect from a leftwinger who espouses "respect" for women.

Oh and sorry to say, I am not going away. Why should I? Do you leftie clowns OWN the internet? Is no one else supposed to disagree with your golden viewpoints? Or is it that you simply can't keep up on an intellectual level, so you must resort to insults and swearing?

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

LOL!!! Funny Chuck!!! First, you "know" how I feel about rape victims, then you "know" how I feel about black men driving nice cars. Now you "know" that "I'd love to use (my) being a woman against you". Mea culpa, didn't know I was talking to a psychic.
You a "sexist"? Hardly, you come across as an equal opportunity offender! LOL Whoever disagrees with you gets a sample of your sixth grade, adolescent vocabulary.

Using gender, you mean like Hillary's supporters who said that women who didn't vote for her were disloyal to their gender? The lefties use gender (and race and ethnicity) every time it suits them. And, btw, I wasn't even addressing YOU in my last post! Pay attention.

You really are curious about what's between my legs, now I'm getting curious about what's between yours. From your nasty, overcompensating bully tone, I'm guessing it's something relatively small which doesn't function too well.

Men who respect all women wouldn't use that type of language. But you are hardly what I'd call a gentleman. And you still didn't answer my question, do you talk like such a pig with people face to face or do you save your "bravery" for your cowardly anonymous posts? What a child.

This is getting TOO funny. I said I wouldn't talk to you, you said you wouldn't talk to me. Yet we go back and forth. I am trying hard to stop, but an enraged lefty with his (tiny) jock strap in a twist is too funny to pass up!!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Morbid curiosity made me come here to read your latest reply! LOL I had a sneaking suspicion it would be childish name calling and totally devoid of any intellectual value. Thanks! And true to form, you did exactly what I thought you'd do. I know it's hard to actually THINK.

"whataboutism"- again, no doubt the biggest "word" in your limited vocabulary! LOL

Seems the word sh#t is what passes for deep thought in your world! You need to be led away from the computer, given a glass of warm milk and a blanket, and sent for a nap. Ya know, just like all those snowflakes at Berkley who peed their pants after the election!

You really have become a source of amusement to me.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Blah blah blah

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Good grief , you DO have a way with words!! LOL

Was it oxygen deprivation at birth? Or are you just a jerk?

I've dealt with posters like you before. When they have been bested by someone with a higher I.Q., evidently not too hard to come by in your case, they resort to "blah, blah, blah".

Such brilliant comebacks from a know-it-all who has to resort to swearing and insults.

I don't really think you are as dumb as you come across. You just need to learn now to THINK! Happy Holidays! Hope Santa brings you a brain.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Blah. Blah. Blah.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

You really are a fount of knowledge! LOL So doggone clever, I bow to your cleverness! No wonder the Democrat party is going down the toilet. If people like you represent it's base, adios!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Blah.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Thanks for reaffirming my opinion of the "brilliance" of the Democrat party!

Can't come up with an interesting response without swearing? Your "blah , blah" is so fitting!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Blah, blah..............wait for it.............................................................blah.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

"Wait for it"?? nah! I EXPECT it from someone who only knows talking points, swearing and insults! ....and still, no intelligent response? LOL

How far are you willing to go to sound like such a total fool?

Why do you keep replying to my posts when you are clearly drowning in thoughts which are too deep for you?

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

blah, blah, blah. More bullshit trying to get the last word like the sad little loser that you are. Its a perfect example of how weak you are as person. Desperate to be "right" in a conflict of opinions. Desperate to be "more intelligent" than your opposition. It falls right in to place with your pathetic world view and attacks on those who cant defened themselves. Youve said Im not worth your time yet you keep coming back even though I havent read a fucking word youve said. As I said, youre pathetic.

But what about when hilary does it, blah, blah blah.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

LOL How in the world could I possibly be LESS intelligent that you?? HA!

In your last three posts you haven't expressed ONE intelligent thought! To quote you, it's been literally "blah, blah, blah."
Sheet! You must've been an English major. ha ha !!!

Of course if you attended some libbytard, socialist school like Berkley, the nonsense you type out would pass for brilliance.

STILL waiting for you to post an intelligent comment devoid of insults and swearing. Can ya do it? Can you express your beliefs without sounding like a fifth grader?

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

I thought you fell into the toilet or something. You sure do love dragging this shit out. A week had passed, it was over. Nope, just have to get the last word.

You have fun trying to convince yourself youre better than everyone else. Ill be over here knowing Im not any better than anyone else. And safe in the knowledge that you are so utterly devoid of empathy for your fellow man that you wont have a clue what Im talking about and will just attack me again.

Take care.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Thanks for not reading "an effing word that I post"!! You sure do think you are doing some great service to society by trying to be rude and insulting to me.
And by the way, "a WEEK had passed"? Duh, you posted a response three days ago. I know you lefties can't think, but can't you folks COUNT either?

"Fell in the toilet" Woo hoo. What a clever guy you are! You need your own talk show.

Lucky for you that you can hide your ignorance behind the anonymity of the internet. I think it was made for the socially inept like you.

What a phony baloney you are!! But have a happy holiday and I hope some day you grow up!

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

I told you I dont read your shit anymore. And thats all I saw of that post. So once again, take care. dont waste your time, I wont read anything else. I wont even look. Its time to move on.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Okay, but if you think I believe you aren't reading what I write. HAHA

You cannot HELP looking. Why on earth would you reply so fast? If you were truly indifferent, you wouldn't even respond.

But you respond with lightning speed, not as though you can THINK lightning fast, but you keep trying.

And so I get the last word!

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

"I told you I dont read your shit anymore. And thats all I saw of that post. So once again, take care. dont waste your time, I wont read anything else. I wont even look. Its time to move on."

Very smart of you - that's what we all did to her on the IMDB forum, and she did everything possible to grab our attention. It never worked - even the conservatives were tired of her babble.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Oh Doggie doo! I know you are a clueless leftard. But a liar too? You rival your idol Hillary in the lying department!

"Grab attention?" How on earth did I force you to respond to my posts? You could have ignored me but you responded every single time.
I suppose you won't tell Chuck about the posters who said that they got a great laugh out of the way I dissed you and your nonsense comments.
I guess I should not be surprised. Your idols are Hillary and Barack, two people who have only a nodding relationship with the truth.

I don't mind mixing it up with you. Expressing your beliefs is one thing. But do you have to be such a phony and a liar?

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

don't bother, let him "starve". woked well bith "bubba".

reply

[–] [email protected] (690) 6 years ago

Thank you CF.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

I don’t think you understand what’s actually going on. You seem to be under the impression that you’re the only one living within your means. Don’t you think the super rich should live with in their means instead of getting tax breaks for everything? Seems you think only the poor shouldn’t be getting help with taxes but the when the rich get help it’s not a problem.

reply

[–] Xenopharb (617) 6 years ago

Quick answer ... we're screwed.

We are looking at paying in $3,000 - $5,000 more.

For those of you using Hillary Clinton as a straw man, the Democrats all voted against this. Clinton and Obama did some crappy things in favor of banks, but they never tried this tax swindle.

Well, the Koch brother really do own America.

reply

[–] TinaKimo (868) 6 years ago

And don't forget, Eddie Munster wants to cut medicare and SS. The top agenda for him next year. This tax scam has to be voted by the house and then back to senate if I'm correct. Hopefully it doesn't pass. I think of folks in nursing homes, folks who were able to afford health ins. for first time, folks on disability. Totally screwed! I tried to tell folks to vote democrat b/c the repubs want to destroy everything FDR and LBJ implemented!! Told folks not to vote 3rd party. Well, most of Cheetos supporters will suffer under this!!

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

Maybe one day we can get to a point where everyone pays the same percentage of tax with no deductions at all. Keep it fair for everyone and there should be nothing to complain about.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

No, flat tax isn't fair at all. You have to consider disposable income. If you compare:

household A earns $25,000
household B earns $350,000

The lower income household is in survival mode struggling to pay rent and buy food. You would take what little money they have for taxes.

The higher income family has much more disposable income and paying extra in taxes wouldn't impoverish them.

BTW, I hate to be so cynical but there is a sinister reason why the progressive tax will remain. Rich people can lower their own taxes and place the burden on the middle class. It happened under Reagan, Bush and now Trump. Tax policy is one reason why the rich continue to get richer and everyone else is becoming poorer.

Riddle: Can you name the 8 men who own half the world's wealth?
Answer:
[spoiler]1 Bill Gates: America founder of Microsoft (net worth $75 billion)
2 Amancio Ortega: Spanish founder of Inditex which owns the Zara fashion chain (net worth $67 billion)
3 Warren Buffett: American CEO and largest shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (net worth $60.8 billion)
4 Carlos Slim Helu: Mexican owner of Grupo Carso (net worth: $50 billion)
5 Jeff Bezos: American founder, chairman and chief executive of Amazon (net worth: $45.2 billion)
6 Mark Zuckerberg: American chairman, chief executive officer, and co-founder of Facebook (net worth $44.6 billion)
7 Larry Ellison: American co-founder and CEO of Oracle (net worth $43.6 billion)
8 Michael Bloomberg: American founder, owner and CEO of Bloomberg LP (net worth: $40 billion)[/spoiler]

based on Jan. 2017 figures

reply

[–] PresidentAckbar (1289) 6 years ago

Its also funny that the majority of those people are also liberals.

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

It does not matter how much disposable income someone has. I am talking about what is technically fair. Everyone paying the exact same tax percentage is fair. No matter what you make you are paying your fair share, just because someone making less has a harder go of it does not mean it’s fair to tax a more successful person more. You can do it and call it many things but one thing it should not be labeled is fair.

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

i am undecided on that, but if what you say is true, then we would have to get rid of most, if not all tax deductibles, close all loop holes, dry out all tax havens and enforce that every company has to pay taxes in the country that their HQ sits. maybe even change import and export tax laws as well.

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

Anything you do with taxes is always difficult. But as long as we do things under these tiers and have all these loopholes and deductions. You will always have this issue of someone getting or think they are getting screwed whenever you change the tax code. I don’t know if a flat tax would really work, it would require a government that works within that budget and populace ok with everyone paying their fair share.

reply

[–] therefdotcom (964) 6 years ago

it is. as for loopholes and deductions, there are some things that obviously have to go. it can't be that rich people, no matter if deserved or not, can deduct 5th or 6th homes that they don't live in, just as a tax write off while poor and middle class people can't deduct crap anymore for example. we gotta get back to equal chances, while also considering relations. imagine a small business owner would have the same tax opportunities like a multi billion dollar corporation. just imagine you could write off 75%-100% of your companies rent. should't that be equally the supposed republican and democratic dream? the country would flourish.

"it would require a government that works within that budget and populace ok with everyone paying their fair share"

but therein lies one of the main problems. i would even stop the sentence at "a government that works". on the other hand you can't leave anything to the "free market" nowadays.

reply

[–] MagneticMonopole (286) 6 years ago

". . .just because someone making less has a harder go of it does not mean it’s fair to tax a more successful person more. "

Actually, it is very, very fair as most nations in the Western world have recognized for the better part of a century.

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

Other nations do it does not make it fair. It is what is acceptable there is a difference.

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

So you think it should be a flat rate of tax? The guy who makes ten grand a year should pay the same as the guy who makes ten million? So the guy who uses the roads to get to work should pay the same amount for those roads as the guy who uses them to transport his materials to building sites? Or Exports across cities?

Hows about this, you give everybody the same start in life and then everybody pays the same tax? Hows that sound? Everybody gets the same level of education, everybody gets the same rate of pay? You want shit to be equal? Theres a lot better places to start than making sure rich cunts get to keep more of their money in offshore bank accounts.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

You really need to increase your vocabulary Chuckie boy!

So, the "guy who uses the roads to go to work" is somehow morally superior to "the guy who uses them to transport his materials"?

Did you ever think that the guy using them to transport materials likely EMPLOYS a fleet of truck which are heavily taxed for using said roads. And he employs people and pays a ton of payroll taxes.

Everybody "gets the same start in life". Everybody "gets the same level of education"?? Spoken like a true Marxist. Okay, then I want to be adopted by a Kennedy. I want to go to Harvard Law School like Caroline Kennedy and her late brother and have my trust fund (supplied by old Joe Kennedy the bootlegger) to pay for it.

Get your head out of your butt! Not everyone comes from the same circumstances, not everyone is equally intelligent, ambitious or hardworking. You and others like you think that the government can create an equal playing field by decree or signing it into law. It will never happen.
Now stop buying into the Washington crap which fires up class envy and anger towards those eeee-vil rich people.

The guy who makes ten grand and the guy who makes ten million, yes, it's fair that they pay the SAME percentage. You're not considering sales tax or property tax.

The ten grand guy most likely drives a used Chevy or some other inexpensive car. The rich guy drives a Mercedes. Who do ya think paid MORE in sales tax to the almighty government? The ten grand guy might live in an apartment or a rental. He might not be a property owner at all. The rich guy most likely has a huge house, maybe on several acres. Who do you think gets a whopping property tax bill every year from the city?

You need to take a moment and start to think, read up on economics and stop assuming the solution is "sharing" other peoples wealth. You are so consumed with class envy and hatred. Must be sad to be you. isn't your parents basement warm enough?

reply

[–] ChuckFindlay (392) 6 years ago

Don’t you ever get tired of talking shit?

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Don't YOU ever get tired of ACTING like a dumb sh#t and talking like a moron? From your posts, I'm guessing you are the recipient of a government "education", so your ignorance can't be ALL your fault!! But after a certain time, you need to get yourself a real education.

Sorry if what I say goes over your pointy little leftard head. I try to explain things to you using the smallest words possible, but apparently you are just unable to comprehend. Can you have an intelligent discussion without swearing and name calling?

Is it fun at USC or whatever leftie, silly school you attend? Did someone take away your blanket and hot chocolate? LOL

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"...it does not mean it’s fair to tax a more successful person more...."

You're assuming that the rich worked for their money instead of inherited it. Most people are born and die within their economic class. Successful = hit the birth jackpot.

"Everyone paying the exact same tax percentage is fair."
Not when the result is unfair.

Just for the record, my state pays more in taxes and gets much less back. How is that fair?

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

And you are assuming every successful person in this country just had money fall into their laps? Tell that to Bill Gates. The degree of class envy you display is really amazing!!
Inherited it from WHO? Someone who WORKED for it. I know you think the Trump kids are evil for inheriting a lot of their wealth. Hope you feel the same way about Chelsea Clinton and the Kennedy offspring.

"Most people are born and die within their economic class" Where did you read that canard? Where are your statistics?

Once again you treat citizens like the powerless dupes of the government. Big Daddy government has to spread the wealth because Americans are so helpless. It is NOT true that "most people" are born and die in a certain class.

There are great opportunities in this country for anyone who wants to work. Now granted, it is waaay tougher to run a business and make a go of it these days due to confiscatory taxes and the huge number of rules and regulations placed on businesses by the "do nothings" in Washington.
Yeah, they DO exactly crap, but they make themselves rich by taking advantage of insider trading and using their influence to get away with things the ordinary citizen can't do.

Have you ever researched how big mouths like Maxine Waters became wealthy while being a "public servant"? Same goes for her highness Hillary who gave an interview where she cried about herself and Bill being "broke" when they left the White House.

If it wasn't so nauseating, it would be funny. My parents were broke at times. But they were never able to afford to throw me a multi-million dollar wedding like the Clintons did for their kid.

But yeah, let's attack those who have made their money legitimately.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Bill Gates parents were rich. He attended an exclusive prep school while growing up, and then he attended Harvard. When he wanted to start a company with some of his old school fellows, Gates turned to his parents, who provided support for him. The fact that Gates had wealthy parents to fall back on helped immensely as he built one of the most successful companies in the world."

http://www.investinganswers.com/education/famous-investors/so-how-did-bill-gates-really-start-build-his-fortune-6254

Have you ever researched how big mouths like Maxine Waters became wealthy while being a "public servant"?
Maxine Walters isn't wealthy and has a networth -59% less than the average Congress member. BTW, she is an exception and has moved up financially from a poor background. She began working in a factory at 13 years old, went to college. Her husband is a former Ambassador. It appears she and her husband do rental real estate investments like Robert Kiyosaki recommended. See below.

"It is NOT true that "most people" are born and die in a certain class."
Your denial doesn't change the facts. How many people in your area have become rich? For people who do move, it's usually by just one social class, ex. working class to middle or poor to working class.

"There are great opportunities in this country for anyone who wants to work."
Many people work hard and never become middle class or rich because they're not doing the right type of work which would lead to wealth. They also don't know how to become rich nor have the opportunites.

I highly recommend this book because it's the best book to learn how to become rich. Best seller and classic:
Rich Dad Poor Dad: What the Rich Teach Their Kids About Money That the Poor and Middle Class Do Not by Robert T. Kiyosaki

BTW, Doug Jones just won in a super red state. Mark my words, 2018 is going to be a bad year for Republicans and Trump when most Americans vote extremism out. Glad to see that hatred lost tonight.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Maxine Watters isn't wealthy?? LOL You are either a comedian, a phony or living in California.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Wealthy" is relative.

"A recent survey of over 1,000 Americans shows the bar has shifted higher. Now you need an an average of $2.4 million to be considered a wealthy person in America, according to the survey by Charles Schwab, which surveyed Americans aged 21 to 75."

Her net worth is lower than this amount.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

Maxine Waters lives in a $4.5 million dollar gated mansion, and owns two other houses worth another million. And a time-share in Palm Springs.
Her mansion is located far outside of the congressional district she represents, but she keeps a house there so she can lie about living in her district. All this on her $174,000 House of Representatives salary.
So stop the bullshit about her not being wealthy. If you survey Americans aged 21 to 75, 100% of them would say you're wealthy if you're living in a $4.5 million mansion.

https://truepundit.com/video-busted-poverty-warrior-maxine-waters-plush-4-5-million-la-mansion-indoor-swimming-pool-outdoor-gates-walls/

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"All this on her $174,000 House of Representatives salary."

I guess you forgot that she's married. How many millions do professional football players, bankers and car dealership owners make? Her husband sounds like he's the one rolling in dough.

HER net worth (excluding her husband) is est. $438,005.
http://members-of-congress.insidegov.com/l/338/Maxine-Waters

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"How many millions do professional football players"

Guys who played professional football in the 1960s?

Zero.

"Maxine Waters Net Worth: Maxine Waters is the U.S. Representative for California’s 43rd Congressional district and previously the 35th and 29th district, serving since 1991. Considering her long career in politics, we estimate that Maxine Waters net worth to be around $2 million."

http://salary-networth.com/maxine-waters-net-worth/

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Don't change my sentence. My sentence: How many millions do professional football players, bankers and car dealership owners make? Her husband worked in multiple professions.

Your site sucks because it has no sources listed. My site is based on government records which it lists including her 2017 Financial Disclosure Record.

Her husband receives two football pensions and two consulting fees (auto dealership & golf). She receives a California pension. Some income from dividends and interests. All houses have mortgages and it appears their equity is low with plenty of bad debt. Her est. net worth is lower on opensecret.org at $275,505.

You don't appear to be aware that most people who enter Congress and the Senate already have money. As you can see, most of their income originated before she entered Congress.

Poor people are impressed by big houses and luxury cars not understanding that many middle-income people have high debt like they do.

If you're going to cry about rich people in government, then at least pick one who is really rich like Bob Corker with an est. net worth of $69,450,025.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

If you want to be gullible enough to believe she's worth only 400 grand while living in a 4.5 million dollar house, and owns two other houses and a time share, that's your choice.

Democrats depend on gullible morons like you.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

You don't understand how the whole marriage thing works in relation to property.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"You don't understand how the whole marriage thing works in relation to property."

Seriously? So she has no claim whatsoever on her husband's property?

Hahahahahaha! What are you, like twelve years old?

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

You're obviously clueless about her husband's finances.

You're very obsessed with her, aren't you? You're weird.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

And now we get the typical libtard deflection.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

You don't know the definition. And you're still weird.

Obviously, her husband had multiple successful careers and can afford nice things. You're dumb for not taking that into account.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"You don't know the definition."

Huh? Definition of what? You're talking gibberish now.

And you're the one trying to pass off bullshit that someone living in a $4.5 million house isn't wealthy.

reply

[–] 3840x2160 (359) 6 years ago

Now that it is going to be passed let's tell a bit of truth instead of lie after lie.
expands medical expense deduction
doubles the standard deduction for everyone
repeals obamacare tax
doubles estate tax exemption
keeps alternative min tax
keeps student loan deduction
increases child tax credit
allows credit for non-child dependants

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5612) 6 years ago

From a political standpoint, it's when the taxes start going up for the active voters that Trump's Tax Plan will backfire.

The Liberal establishment with their phony outrage over the Rich not paying their "fair share" is NOT going to win against Trump's agenda. Hillary couldn't pull it off after pushing Bernie aside, and Bernie's stance only motivated his vocal but small base of supporters.

Another key factor is seeing what the large corporations do with their offshore accounts. Will they move money back into the U.S. at the lower rate as Trump promised? I for one don't necessarily think that will be the case because the US economy for the past 25 years has migrated from manufacturing to service industry and that service industry relies on finished goods manufactured Offshore. I don't see US firms moving money back stateside and spending it on local manufacturing to replace foreign "cheaper" labor and assembly. This is the part that I think matters most to the legacy of the tax cut in relation to it helping build and strengthen the middle-class. The money given back in their tax returns is only temporary and in my opinion negligible in the bigger scheme of things.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Most people know it's a giveaway to the rich which is why it's so unpopular. Taxes could go down temporarily, but other things go up. This tax plan also hurts ACA so you'll pay more in health insurance.

"The Liberal establishment with their phony outrage over the Rich not paying their "fair share" is NOT going to win against Trump's agenda."
The outrage is middle-class taxes going up making it harder to survive while the rich get richer. This is a major wealth transfer. For example, Trump himself is robing the coffers blind by giving golf course owners a huge tax break. Can it be more obvious?

"Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It."
All you have to do is ask what happened last time. Under Reagan, Feds lowered taxes for individuals which lead to municipalities having to cut services and raising taxes for individuals. Feds then added the sin tax. Jobs were lost. Corporations and rich used their large tax break to create factories in foreign countries to hire cheap labor, stock buybacks and invest in art and other high-end assets.

Presently, the main problem isn't foreign workers, but technology replacing humans.

The small bump up in paychecks and any initial taxcut is to lull critics of this tax plan. Don't fall for it.

reply

[–] [email protected] (5495) 6 years ago

Just one point, a tax cut is NOT,NOT NOT a "giveaway. When the almighty holy federal government "allows" people to keep their OWN money, it's NOT a "giveaway"!

Sadly you have been brainwashed to think that ALL MONEY belongs to the government and in their kindness they "allow" some people to keep their own money.

Have you ever been to Washington D.C.? I have. Can you tell me about the factories and businesses which are located there? Can you tell me the "jobs" that Congress and the Senate do to create wealth? Do they make money? No! They vote to take money from earners. If some people earn millions, well good for them. I am not one of those people, but I am not envious of them either and they deserve to keep everything they can without the federal government sucking their wealth from them.

The major PROBLEM is that we send our money to those bloodsuckers in Washington and they waste it and misuse it. If Washington tightened it's belt and told its laziest voters "your freebies are cut off", maybe they wouldn't need everyone else's money so badly.

Sin tax?, talk about that. Back in 1991 the government in its "wisdom" put a sin tax on yachts. Well... people who can afford yachts can afford to go overseas to buy them which is what they did. It destroyed the yacht business in the northeast. Workers lost their jobs. Taxpaying workers lost their jobs due to the government's asinine, greedy policies.

Blame the feds for the sin tax.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

For each $1.00 my state gives in Federal taxes, we get 84 cents back. Meanwhile, South Carolina gets $7.87 back! That is an example of wealth transfer. Am I supporting your state aka you with my tax dollars? Scroll to first chart for answer:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/

It is a giveaway because it's the rich who will keep more of their money while the middle-class will eventually pay more. Why do you believe that only the middle-class should pay taxes?

"Basketball legend Charles Barkley sarcastically mocked Republican economic theories on Thursday night, saying he would "trickle my fat a** down to the jewelry store" to treat himself to a Rolex (foreign product) rather than use his tax cut windfall to help the poor.

Charles Barkley isn't the first wealthy black entertainer to joke that the Republican tax bill is more helpful to people like him than poor and middle-class whites who helped elect Trump last year. This week, standup comedian Dave Chappelle also cast Republican priorities in that context.

"I listened to them say naive, poor-white-people things: 'Man, Donald Trump's gonna go to Washington and he's gonna fight for us,'" Chappelle said in a clip from his new Netflix special. “I'm standing there thinking in my mind, 'You dumb, m*th****r. You. Are. Poor. He's fighting for me.'""
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94oSf_56ilU
85% of (middle-income) taxpayers will eventually see their tax bills rise.

Sin tax is a tax on cigarettes and alcohol. Reagan bragged about lowering the Federal tax, but than he increased the sin tax to make up for it. Then, localities increased their taxes because they were receiving less Federal dollars.

We're in agreement with taxes too high. Our disagreement is which economic class should pay them.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"Basketball legend Charles Barkley sarcastically mocked Republican economic theories..."

Hahahahaha! Seriously? You're taking economic advice from Charles Barkley?

Hahahaha!

"Dave Chappelle also cast Republican priorities in that context."

Wow. Hard to debate your logic when you have those intellectual heavyweights as backup.

Thanks for the laugh. I needed it.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

Barkley and Chappelle are both obviously smarter than the working-class morons who voted for Trump. Top 1% get 83% of the tax benefit.

How's that high-paying factory job that Trump promised coming along?

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"working-class morons who voted for Trump"

Of course. To a liberal, everyone who disagrees with them is a moron. And you can't figure out why your party lost control of the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

Keep it up.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Top 1% get 83% of the tax benefit."
A moron is someone who doesn't know simple math nor the negative consequences.

"And you can't figure out why your party lost control of the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court."
What goes around comes around. The smarter Republicans are disgusted with the anti-working class policies of the Republican Party. Consider 2018 the beginning of a Democratic turnaround.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

""Top 1% get 83% of the tax benefit."
A moron is someone who doesn't know simple math nor the negative consequences."

Actually, a moron is someone who tries to spread lies to other morons. Your 'statistics' are bullshit.

"The smarter Republicans are disgusted with the anti-working class policies of the Republican Party. Consider 2018 the beginning of a Democratic turnaround."

Hahahaha! After the 2016 election, it's hard to take Democrats seriously when they start using their crystal balls.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Your 'statistics' are bullshit."
I'm waiting for you to enlighten me with the correct statistic and your source.

"it's hard to take Democrats seriously when they start using their crystal balls. "
Nah, just history.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

""Your 'statistics' are bullshit."
I'm waiting for you to enlighten me with the correct statistic and your source."

They're your statistics. Provide the source.

Let me guess - you checked and couldn't find any source for your bullshit claim, so you tried to turn it around and ask me for a source.

"Nah, just history."

Hahahahaha. You mean the history of the 2016 election, where you morons thought there was no way you could lose?

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Your 'statistics' are bullshit."

Fine. What are the correct statistics? You must have them since you believe mine are in error. Enlighten me with a link.

I'll give you a link from politifact.com(won a Pulitizer!).
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/sep/07/mary-jordan/do-presidents-always-get-shellacked-midterm-electi/

Your turn!

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"Fine. What are the correct statistics? You must have them since you believe mine are in error. Enlighten me with a link."

You're as stupid as a fucking rock. YOU made the claim. YOU back up the claim with facts.

And there's no mention of "Top 1% get 83% of the tax benefit" in that linked article. This is like having a discussion with a retard.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

The link is in reference to ""Nah, just history," genius.

I gave you a link. You owe me one. Give me your correct stats!

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"Give me your correct stats!"

What the fuck is wrong with you? You made the claim. Back it up.

It's obvious you can't.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

Let me try this dumbass logic:

Top 1% get 1% of the tax benefit.

Think I'm wrong? Provide a link to the correct stats!

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

"Think I'm wrong? Provide a link to the correct stats!"

OK!
https://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

I'm still waiting for your link.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

https://nypost.com/2017/09/29/the-rich-get-richer-under-trumps-tax-plan/

The top 1 percent, people who make $730,000 or more, would pocket about half of the plan’s tax cuts while middle-income households, those making between about $50,000 and $90,000, would get only about 8 percent of the total benefit according to the center.

Yes, you're a fucking moron.

I'll be waiting for your link to prove your dumbass claim.

reply

[–] Keelai (31779) 6 years ago

You just provided a link that repeated what I wrote. Thanks. Why are you happy that the rich are getting richer? Your link's headline: "The rich get richer under Trump’s tax plan"

"By 2027, the top 1 percent would get 80 percent of the plan’s tax cuts while the share for middle-income households would drop to about 5 percent."

What are you arguing about since we're in agreement?

"Your 'statistics' are bullshit."

Your quote. But, you provided a link stating the same thing I did.

You owe me an apology.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

Your claim:

"Top 1% get 83% of the tax benefit."

Nothing there about 2027. Which is a projection, supposing that nothing changes in the tax law in next 10 years.

Yes, you're still an idiot.

STILL waiting for your link to proof.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 6 years ago

"Why are you happy that the rich are getting richer?"

Same tired old class-envy from the Democrats. The Rich are getting more back from the tax cuts because they pay more in taxes. Much more. The top 1% pay nearly half of federal taxes. Basic math tells you that if you cut taxes across the board, those paying most of the taxes will receive the highest cuts.

But idiots like you flunked basic math classes.

reply