The Trump Presidency

Runnin said:
Taxing the rich in an unfair economic reality is the only decent thing to do.

Btw, I'm not really interested in seeing Trump's taxes. We already know what they're gonna reveal.
Click to expand...

I'd like to understand what is "unfair" about our economic reality. Can you elaborate?

This reminds me of when Obama said he'd raise capital gains tax - even though data shows that decreases revenue - simply out of fairness. In other words, it doesn't help anyone, it only hurts people. But it appeals to the emotional and thus people support it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJimLZRC9N8
 
sturg33 said:
5. Warren attacks Dan Snyder for buying a yacht... As if she has some power to decide what people do with their own money. As if she doesn't understand how rich people buying rich things produces jobs (see what happened during the luxery tax days of the 90s). Shey says it hurts people struggling with student debt but then she turns around and charges University millions of dollars for her to speak at their campus. What a hero she is. A very rich one at that... Reminds me when it was revealed that Bernie has a lower tax rate than you and me
Click to expand...

I don't want to get drug into a sturg debate because they're always inane and go nowhere but can we PLEASE stop this notion that rick people buying rich things produce jobs? How many people are employed by the yacht industry? It's not a ton. Rich people perpetuate the cycle of richness.

Granted this is income only, so it doesn't even factor in other revenues for gaining assets that appreciate in value.

11-28-11povf1.png


11-28-11povf2.png


When you have money, it's easier to keep making money. That's the facts. I'm not here to debate if that's "right" or "wrong" I'm here to tell you that rich don't make jobs for the rest of America by just existing. Especially since oftentimes the jobs they create are jobs that pay other wealthy people.

I live in a unique situation where I live. It sees both the positive and negative effects of the rich in my area. Where I live has a healthy number of "second homers" which are people who have enough money to own a second house. Which almost universally puts them near or above the top 1%. They travel here and they do create jobs. But the jobs they create are seasonal and temporary. I live in an area that is ski heavy, but the majority of the business we do isn't related to skiing, but to summer and fall tourism. Which isn't as many of these second homers, but is middle and upper middle class people on vacation. It's not to deny the economic impact of the wealthy because they are having an economic impact, but what would be even better for our area is if the rich lost a little bit of money and the middle class had a bit more. Maybe to extend their vacations a day or two or maybe they didn't come to this area because they didn't quite have enough money to swing it. That's what would drive our business higher. And it's true of most of the area. Add in that people with a lot of money drive up the prices of real estate to the point that many people struggle to find a decent place to live. Where I live has apartment prices kind of similar to NJ because 1. There is no apartment complexes here so no way to get a lot of people into a kind of small place. 2. The rates have jumped too drastically for the market to react. A co-worker of mine is paying 700 bucks a month for basically a studio apartment. My girlfriend's brother and friend are paying about a grand to live on the first floor of a drafty ass house. And it's because of an artificial inflation to the real estate market by second homers. But it does'nt take a long time leaving the tourism heavy areas until you see the negative effects ripple.

Reality is that the rich in this country created this mess for themselves. They could easily have paid people more money and not created this us vs. them mechanic that they did. I don't give a **** if it's fair or not. They've been ****ting on the working class since the dawn of society.

TL;DR: Rich don't just create jobs, and it's been statistically proven that more money in more hands is better for the economy than more many in fewer hands.
 
sturg33 said:
I'd like to understand what is "unfair" about our economic reality. Can you elaborate?

This reminds me of when Obama said he'd raise capital gains tax - even though data shows that decreases revenue - simply out of fairness. In other words, it doesn't help anyone, it only hurts people. But it appeals to the emotional and thus people support it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJimLZRC9N8
Click to expand...

Only if you intentionally misinterpret it.
 
Here's a VA legislator arguing for the right for women to abort a child up until seconds before the birth.

What is happening to the left in this country? Barbaric third world countries wouldn't stand for this

[Tw]1090346857925144576[/tw]
 
I can understand why a women would get an abortion in the first trimester. I don't agree with it but who am I to force the burden on someone even though I think its a heinous act.

But to be a monster and want late term abortions is a disgrace and anyone that supports it is an animal.
 
sturg33 said:
Here's a VA legislator arguing for the right for women to abort a child up until seconds before the birth.

What is happening to the left in this country? Barbaric third world countries wouldn't stand for this

[Tw]1090346857925144576[/tw]
Click to expand...


this is the Virginia GOP website you seem to be endorsing
correct me i I 'm wrong, but you are a Libertarian -- right?

Or have you just been joshin' everybody over your party affiliations ?
Oh, I get it --- you are an independent free thinker


Curiosity drives me to ask, is this an emotional argument you are making.
Because the video specifies the context of under what medical circumstances her position would apply.

Just trying to get a straight answer from you.
But like any other questions you are asked you will respond with either a curt irrelevancy or another question.
Compete with graphs and charts

I sense emotion and hysteria in your tone, that's all


Are you advocating for the death or permanent mental/physical damage of pregnant women ?
 
Last edited:
57Brave said:
this is the Virginia GOP website you seem to be endorsing
correct me i I 'm wrong, but you are a Libertarian -- right?

Or have you just been joshin' everybody over your party affiliations ?
Oh, I get it --- you are an independent free thinker


Curiosity drives me to ask, is this an emotional argument you are making.
Because the video specifies the context of under what medical circumstances her position would apply.

Just trying to get a straight answer from you.
But like any other questions you are asked you will respond with either a curt irrelevancy or another question.
Compete with graphs and charts

I sense emotion and hysteria in your tone, that's all


Are you advocating for the death or permanent mental/physical damage of pregnant women ?
Click to expand...

I dunno what all that word vomit means.

But I'd like for you to show me.some examples of late term abortions necessary for mental or physical health of a mother.

It appears to me your response is defending the murdering a child.

I dont support murder.
 
57Brave said:
oh,

According to the Virginia GOP it is murder ?

That is who you are taking your marching orders from these days
Click to expand...

Seriously what is wrong with you?

I listened to the words right out of her mouth. This has nothing to with the VA GOP - it's the bill that was presented to the legislature.

She said her bill would allow an infant to be aborted even if the mother was dilated.

Do you have any issue with that, 57? I asked you to provide me an example where an abortion her would be medical necessary. Can you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top