If Mort Divine ruled the world

[viewerfromnihil]

(While I appreciate what you're saying) all of that in reaction to me making a joke connecting Ein's "shit sundae" comment to the whole "shithole" subject? There's a shit suffix meme forming here man, try to keep up.

Don't be shittin me.

edit: I should add that I figured it would bait Dak

 

[CiG]

 

[Dak]

Of course it is. I still can't believe you're delusional enough to think some of those are good things. But I should stop being surprised, you've been sliding this way for a while now.

Which of those things are something I have slid to? I was never in favor of an individual mandate. I was never in favor of multilateral price fixing/tariff agreements, I've never been in favor of federal taxes, and while I'm against US military adventurism, I'm also against half-measures. I've never been pro-illegal immigration. Gorsuch is considered a staunch Constitutionalist, and Obama neglected filling lower courts, depriving US citizens to some degree of the right to speedy trial. Related to smashing ISIS, I would have been/are pro putting a competent military leader in charge of the military, rather than some fucking twit(s) more interested in internal, misguided social change than accomplishing and supporting the mission of the military.

 

[rms]

just don't get how you can consider fed tax cuts OK while ignoring spending

Gorsuch i'd have to hear his position on something controversial. He had Mattis and Tillerson ( from what I could tell) and that was it. Everything else seemed to be an absolute garbage hire.

 

[Dak]

just don't get how you can consider fed tax cuts OK while ignoring spending

Well there is apparently zero political will on either side of the aisle to address rampant spending, so I can't lay that on Trump. We're stuck with continued inflation regardless.

Gorsuch i'd have to hear his position on something controversial. He had Mattis and Tillerson ( from what I could tell) and that was it. Everything else seemed to be an absolute garbage hire.

The important positions had solid or stellar appointments. Hamstringing the DoEducation and the EPA aren't exactly a bad thing in my mind. It's two steps removed from eliminating them (fucking half measures), which would definitely be preferable but likely politically impossible. But then, that's supposedly what moving the US Israeli embassy was, but it's already just about fallen out of the newscycle.

 

[Oblivious Maximus]

French author claims feminists want 'contract before sex'

She said several victims, including Samantha Geimer, who was raped by film director Roman Polanski when she was 13, have since signed their letter warning it had gone too far.

Geimer said she "agreed entirely" with Deneuve and the other signatories, tweeting that "women need equality, respect and sexual freedom.

"We get that by standing up for ourselves and each other. Not by asking others to protect us and define what is 'allowed' for ladies," said the Hawaii-based writer, who wants the charges against Polanski to be dropped so she can get on with her life.

She said #MeToo was being "used against men rather than for women... to glamorize victimhood rather than to show recovery and strength."

 

[Dak]

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html

Guess which state has the highest poverty rate in the country? Not Mississippi, New Mexico, or West Virginia, but California, where nearly one out of five residents is poor. That’s according to the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure, which factors in the cost of housing, food, utilities and clothing, and which includes noncash government assistance as a form of income.

It’s not as though California policymakers have neglected to wage war on poverty. Sacramento and local governments have spent massive amounts in the cause. Several state and municipal benefit programs overlap with one another; in some cases, individuals with incomes 200% above the poverty line receive benefits. California state and local governments spent nearly $958 billion from 1992 through 2015 on public welfare programs, including cash-assistance payments, vendor payments and “other public welfare,” according to the Census Bureau. California, with 12% of the American population, is home today to about one in three of the nation’s welfare recipients.

The generous spending, then, has not only failed to decrease poverty; it actually seems to have made it worse.

The rest of the article talks about how various other elite and liberal policies contribute to poverty, to include land use restrictions and environmental regulations.

 

[Einherjar86]

You know what else contributes to poverty? Taxing poor people more heavily than wealthy people.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

You know what else contributes to poverty? Taxing poor people more heavily than wealthy people.

Good thing we have a progressive tax policy then.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html

The rest of the article talks about how various other elite and liberal policies contribute to poverty, to include land use restrictions and environmental regulations.

tbh there are important considerations not mentioned including

1) Free travel between states meaning welfare acts as a magnet for the poor of other states, something well-known to occur when other states bus their homeless to California
2) Illegals moving to California are often funneled into sub-minimum wage jobs; that is their purpose to big-business
3) Same illegals are still less poor living in California than in their Latin American shitholes

Also, welfare states have significantly reduced poverty in much of Western and Northern Europe.

 

[Dak]

Also, welfare states have significantly reduced poverty in much of Western and Northern Europe.

Well, it's definitely arguable it was in spite of the welfare. Something about homogeneous populations too.

 

[arg]

You know what else contributes to poverty? Taxing poor people more heavily than wealthy people.

That’s fucking dumb coming from you. Poor people pay nothing, they get checks that came out of rich and middle class people’s salaries.

What claim do they have on our wealth? What did they do to deserve it? Exist, breathe and shit? Fuck them and fuck lefties

 

[arg]

Would I get mad if I pay $2000 less tax while a rich guy pays $2000000 less? No! That’s his money and he gets to keep more of it! I’m not an entitled envious lefty like you

 

[Einherjar86]

Good thing we have a progressive tax policy then.

The Republican tax plan is "progressive"? Please.

That’s fucking dumb coming from you. Poor people pay nothing, they get checks that came out of rich and middle class people’s salaries.

I never quote you because you're predictably insane; but you should do your research about the Republican tax bill.

 

[Matt]

I got a $1500 one time bonus from my employer because of the tax bill (it ended up being around 800 after taxes). I work for a fortune 500 company that is going to save billions because of the bill which they're probably going to use on stock buybacks and dividends. But Republicans think that a small one time payoff is worth increasing the deficit in a huge way. Yeah okay.

 

[Matt]

That’s fucking dumb coming from you. Poor people pay nothing, they get checks that came out of rich and middle class people’s salaries.

What claim do they have on our wealth? What did they do to deserve it? Exist, breathe and shit? Fuck them and fuck lefties

What are these so called 'checks' the poor receive? Last year I was incredibly broke and practically homeless, and I couldn't get a damn thing besides food stamps which amounted to like 90 bucks per month.

 

[CiG]

Holy shit welcome back.

Oh and Arg thinks he lives in a social democracy rather than America. American welfare sounds bare-bones.

 

[arg]

The Republican tax plan is "progressive"? Please.



I never quote you because you're predictably insane; but you should do your research about the Republican tax bill.

So lefties want the middle class to pay 10% tax and the rich to pay 70% tax, is that right?

How is that fair?

I think 19% for the middle to 29% for the rich is fair. Then cut the military, social programs and foreign aid.

I got a $1500 one time bonus from my employer because of the tax bill (it ended up being around 800 after taxes). I work for a fortune 500 company that is going to save billions because of the bill which they're probably going to use on stock buybacks and dividends. But Republicans think that a small one time payoff is worth increasing the deficit in a huge way. Yeah okay.

You should be happy with your bonus and happy your employer saves money that may allow them to keep your ass hired. Did you donate your check to a black baby momma?

What are these so called 'checks' the poor receive? Last year I was incredibly broke and practically homeless, and I couldn't get a damn thing besides food stamps which amounted to like 90 bucks per month.

Good. You haven’t learned to scam the system. You must have gotten a check when you filed taxes. I hope it was small

Holy shit welcome back.

Oh and Arg thinks he lives in a social democracy rather than America. American welfare sounds bare-bones.

The fuck? It should be barer bones such that they’re almost dead and can’t reproduce. You want welfare recipients to get more?

 

[Dak]

The Republican tax plan is "progressive"? Please.

A married couple with 2 children, under the poverty line (24,600 in 2018) will pay increased, negative taxes once you include the (increased) child tax credit. The entire tax bracket is still progressive, as in rich persons pay more than poor persons. The biggest tax breaks are on business/investment, which will encourage business/investment. Other countries have already taken note:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/business/tax-bill-global-profits.html

It all starts with the corporate tax rate.

The new rate — down to 21 percent, from 35 percent — takes the United States from the top of the global tax spectrum to the lower end. Countries like Australia, France, Germany and Japan, all of which have effective corporate tax rates of at least 30 percent, will be under pressure to follow.

“It’s a huge incentive to governments around the world who want to see more investment to be part of that,” said Andrew Mackenzie, the chief executive of the mining giant BHP, which has its headquarters in Australia and major operations in North and South America. “They will have to follow suit.”

Corporate rates were already on a downward trajectory. Many countries have used low taxes as an advantage over the United States, which offers a huge domestic market, plentiful venture capital and relatively light workplace regulation.

“There will be pressure for a new round of lowering corporate taxes,” said Stefano Micossi, the director general of Assonime, an Italian association of publicly listed companies.

China, a frequent target of Mr. Trump’s over its trade practices, may also be forced to play the tax game.

It's funny Matt is suddenly concerned about the deficit. Liberals are never concerned about the deficit when it comes to increasing spending (military excluded), only when reducing taxation.

 

[CiG]

The fuck? It should be barer bones such that they’re almost dead and can’t reproduce. You want welfare recipients to get more?

Not in Australia no, I like where we're at here though some cuts wouldn't hurt.