2016 Presidential Primaries [ SUPER TUESDAY | 3-1-'16]

Well, if you own the money you earn, and someone else takes it, what do you call it?

Good thing Bernie can't get his 90% tax increases passed. Bullet dodged there

called paying for a society

never wanted that anyway
 
without sturg providing details of stats he doesn't care about

can we open up the floor to why maybe that blacks, hispanics etc would be more in need of public assistance in the states like Mississippi and Alabama and through out the south?
 
without sturg providing details of stats he doesn't care about

can we open up the floor to why maybe that blacks, hispanics etc would be more in need of public assistance in the states like Mississippi and Alabama and through out the south?

My guess is it's due to education. What's your thoughts?

Also - perhaps you should give more of your income to help these causes. The IRS gladly will accept it.
 
That's not what I want to know. I want to know if you volunteer more than the minimum to the government... Are you applying for a refund this year?

i haven't started my taxes this year yet

but i will pay what i owe

and we can jump to the end of this conversation and not waste the time. i am just going to pay what i owe. i could give more if i wanted to and i am not going to

now go ahead with your point
 
i haven't started my taxes this year yet

but i will pay what i owe

and we can jump to the end of this conversation and not waste the time. i am just going to pay what i owe. i could give more if i wanted to and i am not going to

now go ahead with your point

Yeah I figured... I always find it ironic that folks who want to raise taxes on others to "pay for a better society" don't tend to volunteer more of their own money first.
 
historically why would these groups be behind in education?

Slavery set blacks back... no question about it.

So how do we help solve for it? Dumping more money into the educational fund doesn't seem to be working.

Broken homes seems to be an issue too.
 
Yeah I figured... I always find it ironic that folks who want to raise taxes on others to "pay for a better society" don't tend to volunteer more of their own money first.

well that was fun

now, let's get back to the topic you don't care about

or the other thread where you made up your mind that the whole conversation is irrelevant cause of something i never responded to is where the conversation started

ah, **** it. i'm going to get lunch instead
 
well that was fun

now, let's get back to the topic you don't care about

or the other thread where you made up your mind that the whole conversation is irrelevant cause of something i never responded to is where the conversation started

ah, **** it. i'm going to get lunch instead

You are so delirious on the other thread it's kind of sad. It is clear as day what my original comment was and yet you seem to try to be twisting it around. Move on already.

Enjoy your lunch!
 
Sturg, two questions and a suggestion. First question, where was your info sourced? Second question, what are you categorizing as entitlements? Suggestion: consider that many congressional districts in the rural South that are overwhelmingly white have high percentages of government assistance recipients, and ask yourself how that squares with your statement that Republicans win in the South without "the entitlement vote."
 
Sturg, two questions and a suggestion. First question, where was your info sourced? Second question, what are you categorizing as entitlements? Suggestion: consider that many congressional districts in the rural South that are overwhelmingly white have high percentages of government assistance recipients, and ask yourself how that squares with your statement that Republicans win in the South without "the entitlement vote."

1. Link

2. I classify "entitlements" as anyone who's not paying income taxes or is receiving direct government benefits (other than social security & medicare)

For your suggestion: I didn't say that they are winning the state without the entitlement vote... I said that they can. I could be wrong. I don't have the data. But it's just an opinion. If you have the data to show this is not possible, I'm happy to read it
 
1. Link

2. I classify "entitlements" as anyone who's not paying income taxes or is receiving direct government benefits (other than social security & medicare)

For your suggestion: I didn't say that they are winning the state without the entitlement vote... I said that they can. I could be wrong. I don't have the data. But it's just an opinion. If you have the data to show this is not possible, I'm happy to read it

OK, the link to the actual poll from which the data is derived that is dead. I'm not necessarily disputing it, but I would like to know where it came from.

So, in the category of people who pay no income tax, you would include retired folks?
 
12321574_10150763295974999_7553496393009219676_n.png
 
Back
Top