Shhh. I'm projecting terrible (and imaginary) things upon you. Just accept that this is you, and make the best of it. 
Buy on AliExpress.com
'Murica! (244 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fake Melo
- Start date
- Tags afl_italia's cousins forza trump smocking gun
Buy on AliExpress.com
I don't agree that the wall is based on racism in general. Perhaps for some people it is if they hate Mexicans or something, but we really do have an issue with illegal immigration that needs to be corrected. While you are correct in that the wall would not be cost effective, it would still have practical use to deter certain groups from attempting to cross the border. We do have a major problem with illegal immigration, and this is one of Trump's ways to deal with it. The initial comments regarding Mexicans were probably out of line, but Trump has rescinded those several times. Perhaps he was trying to ignite the far right with his comments, but I would be surprised if Trump was actually a racist -- especially in knowing how he operates in New York and elsewhere. That's why I think this whole discussion is blown out of proportion -- purposely, which is what we call the racism card. That said, I don't agree with the wall.
As for the families, obviously I am against droning anybody without due process or any evidence as being part of ISIS.
You did say Europe should let them perish, so something must have changed. Nothing wrong with changing your mind.
If I was to vote for lesser of all evils, then I would probably vote for Trump at this point. His tax plan would definitely be a step in the right direction to decreasing the tax burden on the middle class, along with small businesses. He's also spoken about auditing the Fed and has criticized recent wars. Finally, I also believe that he's the least likely along with Bernie to be bribed by the party establishment or special interest since he's already a billionaire. I was watching old clips of him speaking before Congress and some of that was encouraging since he has not wavered on the economic problems we face, even as early as 1990. I do disagree with his forceful views on China, as the Fed engages in Ponzi schemes through QE.
This is in stark contrast to Hillary who is essentially a vote for everything that is wrong with this country. Bernie is obviously a better choice than her, but I simply do not agree with his solutions to the problems we face, nor do I like how he also pushes the race nonsense all the time.
At the end of the day, I will probably still write-in Rand Paul, but I have thought about voting Trump to negate a vote for Hillary. Let's face it, she will be the candidate whether people like it or not, and she will buy elections if necessary. My gut tells me no, don't vote for Trump because he is too much of an unknown, but my mind tells me Hillary is much more of a threat to us all.
As for the families, obviously I am against droning anybody without due process or any evidence as being part of ISIS.
You did say Europe should let them perish, so something must have changed. Nothing wrong with changing your mind.
If I was to vote for lesser of all evils, then I would probably vote for Trump at this point. His tax plan would definitely be a step in the right direction to decreasing the tax burden on the middle class, along with small businesses. He's also spoken about auditing the Fed and has criticized recent wars. Finally, I also believe that he's the least likely along with Bernie to be bribed by the party establishment or special interest since he's already a billionaire. I was watching old clips of him speaking before Congress and some of that was encouraging since he has not wavered on the economic problems we face, even as early as 1990. I do disagree with his forceful views on China, as the Fed engages in Ponzi schemes through QE.
This is in stark contrast to Hillary who is essentially a vote for everything that is wrong with this country. Bernie is obviously a better choice than her, but I simply do not agree with his solutions to the problems we face, nor do I like how he also pushes the race nonsense all the time.
At the end of the day, I will probably still write-in Rand Paul, but I have thought about voting Trump to negate a vote for Hillary. Let's face it, she will be the candidate whether people like it or not, and she will buy elections if necessary. My gut tells me no, don't vote for Trump because he is too much of an unknown, but my mind tells me Hillary is much more of a threat to us all.
Well this and his economic positions can be defended somewhat. I don't agree with them, but there are arguments in favor of it and a portion of the academic community agrees with him at least to some extent.
What I still can't believe is that he honestly thinks that the Iraq invasion was the right and just decision.
What I still can't believe is that he honestly thinks that the Iraq invasion was the right and just decision.
Most likely Trump. Sanders' policies would have a larger, more detrimental impact on the economy, IMO.
Interesting. I don't have the time to delve into the numbers right now, but hopefully later. I'm wondering what the TPC is looking at and using for sources. At the end of the day, it's still a step in the right direction. To me, the most fair solution is a flat tax. As for the debt, we need to cut spending in some areas anyway.
- - - Updated - - -
Trickle down economics at work... The most garbage economic theory around, debunked over and over again, and here it is again, an integral part of right-wing politics.
What's your economic theory? Let me guess -- tax increases. How much more should the rich be taxed than others? What constitutes fairness?
- - - Updated - - -
Trickle down economics at work... The most garbage economic theory around, debunked over and over again, and here it is again, an integral part of right-wing politics.
Flat tax and tax breaks for the rich are fantastic, if you support a caste system and people being absolutely crushed down below the poverty line. Considering tax income for the government would go down massively, spending would be slashed for education, health care, social services, etc. and guess what that means... Rich get richer, poor get poorer, and it gets even harder to escape poverty, both for people in it and their children. It's essentially supporting a caste system where you are born, live and die in an economic group. Might as well get rid of minimum wage like so many right wingers support and bring back slavery.
There's a middle ground, but I wouldn't expect a Conservative think tank flunky to understand that.
Yes. Let's tax people below the poverty line on a flat tax with people who make millions. Seriously.
There's a middle ground, but I wouldn't expect a Conservative think tank flunky to understand that.
Yes. Let's tax people below the poverty line on a flat tax with people who make millions. Seriously.
What does that have to do with... anything? Would you not use the bankruptcy laws to your advantage? If not, you'd be rather stupid, really. Chances are you probably will need to, so you better get on board.
Do you seriously think the tax code is the reason for the large income gaps in this country? You cannot fix everything through taxes and social programs. You can also destroy investment at home with increasing taxes on certain groups. Whether you like it or not, capital investment creates jobs. The government doesn't create anything -- it simply borrows and spends, or takes in this case. Even if you tax the 1% at 100%, you're not really going to solve anything. You'll just have more people on social programs -- if the government decides to allocate the funds to that. Is that your definition of prosperity?
Regarding the debt -- we're going to have to cut eventually anyway. We should be cutting defense spending and all this security state nonsense first and foremost. There is no easy way to solve the debt problem, but we are at a point where we need to cut spending, period. Increasing taxes will tank the economy, which has been on life support since 2008.
That's what irks me as well. It goes against his other views on the Fed. Trump says we don't try to devalue our currency, but that's a lie. QE is basically devaluing through purchasing certain securities, causing their balance sheet to grow in size. It helps the banks, but hurts our pockets. Surely he understands that, so this is another troubling thing about Trump that most don't understand.
Flat tax and tax breaks for the rich are fantastic, if you support a caste system and people being absolutely crushed down below the poverty line. Considering tax income for the government would go down massively, spending would be slashed for education, health care, social services, etc. and guess what that means... Rich get richer, poor get poorer, and it gets even harder to escape poverty, both for people in it and their children. It's essentially supporting a caste system where you are born, live and die in an economic group. Might as well get rid of minimum wage like so many right wingers support and bring back slavery.
There's a middle ground, but I wouldn't expect a Conservative think tank flunky to understand that.
Yes. Let's tax people below the poverty line on a flat tax with people who make millions. Seriously.
There's a middle ground, but I wouldn't expect a Conservative think tank flunky to understand that.
Yes. Let's tax people below the poverty line on a flat tax with people who make millions. Seriously.
Regarding the debt -- we're going to have to cut eventually anyway. We should be cutting defense spending and all this security state nonsense first and foremost. There is no easy way to solve the debt problem, but we are at a point where we need to cut spending, period. Increasing taxes will tank the economy, which has been on life support since 2008.
That's what irks me as well. It goes against his other views on the Fed. Trump says we don't try to devalue our currency, but that's a lie. QE is basically devaluing through purchasing certain securities, causing their balance sheet to grow in size. It helps the banks, but hurts our pockets. Surely he understands that, so this is another troubling thing about Trump that most don't understand.
I said Middle ground... Yeah, that means tax the 1% at 100%... Yeah, that means raise taxes...
Perhaps it means there's middle ground between massive tax cuts for the wealthy/a flat tax-rate, and raising taxes on business and the rich and not taxing low-income earners at all.
As in: graduated taxes, of a reasonable nature.
- - - Updated - - -
I do agree with you on slashing spending, especially on defense and security... I'm not a fan of over-isolationist policies, but taking a more subdued role in overseas politics and conflicts seems like a good idea to me.
I also think smaller government, and more streamlined processes could help with keeping tax rates more reasonable, without dramatically cutting social spending... but that's never going to happen.
Even our Canadian healthcare system, which is a pretty good one in some ways, is massively inefficient with tax dollars, and mismanaged terribly. Especially with regard to pharmaceuticals and effective outcomes/re-treatments.
Perhaps it means there's middle ground between massive tax cuts for the wealthy/a flat tax-rate, and raising taxes on business and the rich and not taxing low-income earners at all.
As in: graduated taxes, of a reasonable nature.
- - - Updated - - -
I do agree with you on slashing spending, especially on defense and security... I'm not a fan of over-isolationist policies, but taking a more subdued role in overseas politics and conflicts seems like a good idea to me.
I also think smaller government, and more streamlined processes could help with keeping tax rates more reasonable, without dramatically cutting social spending... but that's never going to happen.
Even our Canadian healthcare system, which is a pretty good one in some ways, is massively inefficient with tax dollars, and mismanaged terribly. Especially with regard to pharmaceuticals and effective outcomes/re-treatments.