packofwolves said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

It's comical that you think just taxing the rich is a solution to address the debt. Neither party has real solutions because they are bad politics.

---

Honest question, did Smapty say that taxing the rich would solve the deficit problem?

Taxing the Uber-wealthy isn't a panacea but it needs to happen and will help. We can argue about the specifics - challenges and hangups of taxing unrealized gains, capital gains debates, etc. - but there's no reason for elite earners to be taxed at significantly lower effective rates than normal folks.

If Bill ****ing Clinton can balance the budget, so can the rest of them.

---

The Uber rich are taxed under the same tax laws as everyone in the US right?

---

LOLOL. Have you seen how dense the IRS code is? Yeah, everyone is taxed using the same code but that code doesn't treat the tax situations of someone making $50k in a given tax year vs. $5MM or $50MM remotely the same.

Obviously corporations and the uber-wealthy are taxed at different effective rates because their revenue streams, allowable deductions, and available shelters are completely different than someone that's making money working gigs or is a W2 employee.

---

So people are required to work as a W2? Or working gigs? And these people do not have access to the same deductions, revenue streams and shelters?

---

Lol, yes! You seriously think that every single person in the country can be a millionaire rock star at the same time if they work hard enough? That's not how economies work. It's a zero sum game... someone has to scrub the toilets or the country will collapse.

---

First you do not understand why people would use different types of mortgages, then you call a poster stupid but takes you 4 edits to do it, and now you make a terrible assumption. SMH. By the way as long as value is being developed it is not a zero sum game.

And please not at all hard to be a millionaire. Save early, invest, reinvest any gains/dividends and hope the government does not take taxes on unrealized gains. Easy to do!

---

No, it's not easy to become a millionaire for most people and it's not because they're dumb or lazy.

But regardless the tax proposal in question that targets very high earners applies to households earning over a million dollars per year, which is a tiny subset of people that are millionaires according to the assets on their PFS.

---

my understanding is that this will also includes folks who have over $1M in assets in the market could be subject to the new future capital gains tax, which is not a tiny subset of people - 401k investors for example. That's a lot of people who sacrificed creature comforts to be responsible in retirement and are now going to be penalized for doing the right thing.

The fact that this is even a proposal from one of the parties is one of the most egregious and out of touch tax proposals I have ever seen. We want to encourage more investment, not less and this will certainly lead to less investment.

This is just like Harris lying about the corporate tax rate she is proposing. First she's calling it a cut, which it is not because Biden's really stupid 44% rate doesn't exist, the rate is 20% currently. 2nd, she says she is proposing a 28% rate, which is also not true, it's 33% with the surcharge. So, over a 50% increase in the corporate tax rate. Please explain to me how that is helpful.

For instance, the CHIPS act, that Sampty says is a win, and isn't because there will be NO production of 2mil-4mil chips in the US, and that's because even with subsidies to build plants and a 20% tax rate, it is still not cheap enough to produce the highest performing chips in the US, which I thought would have been the point of the CHIPS act, but it was not.


Putting an Intel plant in Ohio with zero infrastructure because a congressman wants to bring home the bacon is another reason why this act is a failure.

Throwing good money over bad to pick the winners, while filing the pockets of Democratic donors. A tradition like any other.

---

I thought it was over $1M in income not over $1M invested. Both are bad, but the second one, yikes! Mark Cuban spoke out against it, said Kamala won't do it and will still vote for her. Idiot.

Blows my mind there are people defending this proposal.

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Exactly! You would think you should reward people that are going to be less of a burden in their retirment years than to punish them.

A person who starts investing in their early 20s investing about $300 a month will have over $1million invested by the time they retire. Like I said earlier not that hard to do. Do not have to work harder or be smarter just have to understand compound interest.

As Albert Einstein said: "Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it. He who doesn't, pays it"

---

The left see your money as their money. They want your money to buy votes with.

---

No the left just doesn't hide from the fact that government spending requires funding.

The right does something much less sustainable, which is spend just as much as the left but also cuts taxes so they can't pay for their spending.

The left taxes and spends, the right doesn't tax but still spends.

---

Civ, appreciate your input but overall that is incorrect. GOP controlled state legislature has bankrolled a multi million dollar surplus. If anything they could spend more on some public projects, but from a save and spend perspective typically they do a much better job than the Democrats whose philosophy historically believes that spending money is the answer for all social ills. I wish Congress at the national level was required to balance the budget like the state is required to do.

---

hokiewolf said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

It's comical that you think just taxing the rich is a solution to address the debt. Neither party has real solutions because they are bad politics.

---

Honest question, did Smapty say that taxing the rich would solve the deficit problem?

Taxing the Uber-wealthy isn't a panacea but it needs to happen and will help. We can argue about the specifics - challenges and hangups of taxing unrealized gains, capital gains debates, etc. - but there's no reason for elite earners to be taxed at significantly lower effective rates than normal folks.

If Bill ****ing Clinton can balance the budget, so can the rest of them.

---

The Uber rich are taxed under the same tax laws as everyone in the US right?

---

LOLOL. Have you seen how dense the IRS code is? Yeah, everyone is taxed using the same code but that code doesn't treat the tax situations of someone making $50k in a given tax year vs. $5MM or $50MM remotely the same.

Obviously corporations and the uber-wealthy are taxed at different effective rates because their revenue streams, allowable deductions, and available shelters are completely different than someone that's making money working gigs or is a W2 employee.

---

So people are required to work as a W2? Or working gigs? And these people do not have access to the same deductions, revenue streams and shelters?

---

Lol, yes! You seriously think that every single person in the country can be a millionaire rock star at the same time if they work hard enough? That's not how economies work. It's a zero sum game... someone has to scrub the toilets or the country will collapse.

---

First you do not understand why people would use different types of mortgages, then you call a poster stupid but takes you 4 edits to do it, and now you make a terrible assumption. SMH. By the way as long as value is being developed it is not a zero sum game.

And please not at all hard to be a millionaire. Save early, invest, reinvest any gains/dividends and hope the government does not take taxes on unrealized gains. Easy to do!

---

No, it's not easy to become a millionaire for most people and it's not because they're dumb or lazy.

But regardless the tax proposal in question that targets very high earners applies to households earning over a million dollars per year, which is a tiny subset of people that are millionaires according to the assets on their PFS.

---

my understanding is that this will also includes folks who have over $1M in assets in the market could be subject to the new future capital gains tax, which is not a tiny subset of people - 401k investors for example. That's a lot of people who sacrificed creature comforts to be responsible in retirement and are now going to be penalized for doing the right thing.

The fact that this is even a proposal from one of the parties is one of the most egregious and out of touch tax proposals I have ever seen. We want to encourage more investment, not less and this will certainly lead to less investment.

This is just like Harris lying about the corporate tax rate she is proposing. First she's calling it a cut, which it is not because Biden's really stupid 44% rate doesn't exist, the rate is 20% currently. 2nd, she says she is proposing a 28% rate, which is also not true, it's 33% with the surcharge. So, over a 50% increase in the corporate tax rate. Please explain to me how that is helpful.

For instance, the CHIPS act, that Sampty says is a win, and isn't because there will be NO production of 2mil-4mil chips in the US, and that's because even with subsidies to build plants and a 20% tax rate, it is still not cheap enough to produce the highest performing chips in the US, which I thought would have been the point of the CHIPS act, but it was not.


Putting an Intel plant in Ohio with zero infrastructure because a congressman wants to bring home the bacon is another reason why this act is a failure.

Throwing good money over bad to pick the winners, while filing the pockets of Democratic donors. A tradition like any other.

---

I thought it was over $1M in income not over $1M invested. Both are bad, but the second one, yikes! Mark Cuban spoke out against it, said Kamala won't do it and will still vote for her. Idiot.

Blows my mind there are people defending this proposal.

---

both you and Sampty are correct. I was incorrect. BUT this still will affect the market as it will drive away US investors

---

hokiewolf said:

---

I hate tariffs about as much as the Jones Act. However, this is not a new policy by Trump. Harris has finally staked out poor positions on tax policy so that's what interests me at the moment.

Why has Harris chosen to reward foreign investors over US Investors by making it more expensive for US based investors to you know, invest?

That to me is worse then Tarrifs, not as bad as the Jones Act.

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Werewolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Love the cavalier attitude. If you'll agree to take 100 of em in an encampment in your back yard, I'll FED-X you fifty pup tents for housing.

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Was gonna say... we have about a million Canadian geese crapping all over our parks that I wouldn't mind ending up in someone's stew pot.

---

Ncsufist said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

I hate tariffs about as much as the Jones Act. However, this is not a new policy by Trump. Harris has finally staked out poor positions on tax policy so that's what interests me at the moment.

Why has Harris chosen to reward foreign investors over US Investors by making it more expensive for US based investors to you know, invest?

That to me is worse then Tarrifs, not as bad as the Jones Act.

---

Kamala's proposals would almost entirely affect individuals who are sitting on massive piles of their own company's stock. They aren't going anywhere. But if they're going to benefit bigly from the greatest market on Earth (courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer), then they should start chipping in a little more fairly.

Meanwhile Trump's tariff proposal (which goes way beyond what he'd done previously) would amount to a massive new tax on every American that would make our recent spike of inflation look like a lazy walk on the beach. If that's not dramatically worse then I don't know what to tell
you.

---

So a massive sell off of stocks to pay their taxes won't hurt the market?

---

Ncsufist said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Was gonna say... we have about a million Canadian geese crapping all over our parks that I wouldn't mind ending up in someone's stew pot.

---

Aren't Canadian geese a protected species? I always heard it was a felony to kill one.

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Love the cavalier attitude. If you'll agree to take 100 of em in an encampment in your back yard, I'll FED-X you fifty pup tents for housing.

---

50 ain't enough at the moment lol

---

Civilized said:

---

Ncsufist said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Was gonna say... we have about a million Canadian geese crapping all over our parks that I wouldn't mind ending up in someone's stew pot.

---

Aren't Canadian geese a protected species? I always heard it was a felony to kill one.

---

I think that may be right but the people that make these protected species laws need to have some sort of "species aggravation factor" litmus test they use before protecting a species, LOL

---

Civilized said:

---

Ncsufist said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Not sad about the Haitian killing the goose. Could use his services at the lake!

---

Was gonna say... we have about a million Canadian geese crapping all over our parks that I wouldn't mind ending up in someone's stew pot.

---

Aren't Canadian geese a protected species? I always heard it was a felony to kill one.

---

I think that may be right but the people that make these protected species laws need to have some sort of "species aggravation factor" litmus test they use before protecting a species, LOL

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

See video of Harris in the 2nd slide...She admits that she and Biden allowed 100,000 Haitians into the country.


https://instagr.am/p/C_s8HK7OwM7

---

Werewolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

See video of Harris in the 2nd slide...She admits that she and Biden allowed 100,000 Haitians into the country.


https://instagr.am/p/C_s8HK7OwM7

---

#Gobbler laughs off the Haitians' killing the goose, he doesn't give a rat's ass about this kid or the young women that have been raped.

---

• Springfield police have no reports of Haitians stealing pets. The goose thing is probably overblown b.s. too
• The 11 year old was killed in a traffic accident with a Haitian driver
• The vast majority of Haitians in Springfield came to the U.S. via the Cuban Haitian Entrant Program of 1980!
• The Springfield economic development team said the Haitian community that relocated there actually saved the town, which had been wrecked by drug addiction and unfilled blue collar jobs. By all accounts, the Haitian settlers were hard working, law abiding, and healthy. "It was incredible to witness the transformation of our community," said Horton Hobbs, vice president of economic development for the Greater Springfield Partnership, which executed the plan to relocate the Haitians there.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

See video of Harris in the 2nd slide...She admits that she and Biden allowed 100,000 Haitians into the country.


https://instagr.am/p/C_s8HK7OwM7

---

#Gobbler laughs off the Haitians' killing the goose, he doesn't give a rat's ass about this kid or the young women that have been raped.

---

Let's run this though the Propagand-o-matic to see what's really going on:

• Springfield police have no reports of Haitians stealing pets. The goose thing is probably overblown b.s. too
• The 11 year old was killed in a traffic accident with a Haitian driver
• The vast majority of Haitians in Springfield came to the U.S. via the Cuban Haitian Entrant Program of 1980!
• The Springfield economic development team said the Haitian community that relocated there actually saved the town, which had been wrecked by drug addiction and unfilled blue collar jobs. By all accounts, the Haitian settlers were hard working, law abiding, and healthy. "It was incredible to witness the transformation of our community," said Horton Hobbs, vice president of economic development for the Greater Springfield Partnership, which executed the plan to relocate the Haitians there.

Sooo yeah. Congrats, you guys live in a fantasy world of disinformation.

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

I was referring to both parties as a whole not just at the national level. For both Trump and Biden administrations, Covid was a situation that no president had a playbook for. That accounted for tremendous amounts of unprecedented government spending. If not mistaken, Clinton was last president to balance the budget which is commendable. In my opinion, Clinton was the last of Democratic presidents that still resembled the Democrat Party and it's ideals that anchored it during the last half of the 20th century. I was hoping that Biden would be a moderate but that is obviously not the case.

---

The only reason the budget got balanced was because the Republicans took over the House in 1994 with Newt and The Contract for America. That did not happen because of Clinton. He was forced to sign the bill to be re-elected. The big Republican take over in 1994 was the impetus of that, but unfortunately the GOP lost it's way after that.

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

I was referring to both parties as a whole not just at the national level. For both Trump and Biden administrations, Covid was a situation that no president had a playbook for. That accounted for tremendous amounts of unprecedented government spending. If not mistaken, Clinton was last president to balance the budget which is commendable. In my opinion, Clinton was the last of Democratic presidents that still resembled the Democrat Party and it's ideals that anchored it during the last half of the 20th century. I was hoping that Biden would be a moderate but that is obviously not the case.

---

The only reason the budget got balanced was because the Republicans took over the House in 1994 with Newt and The Contract for America. That did not happen because of Clinton. He was forced to sign the bill to be re-elected. The big Republican take over in 1994 was the impetus of that, but unfortunately the GOP lost it's way after that.

---

Don't forget that Dick Morris became his Chief of Staff (or, was it a high-level advisor) and significantly moderated Clinton. Clinton was a very moldable person that cared more about being liked, than anything else. Also, Clinton was a master at the emotional feel good message! Right now, I would have taken Clinton, 100 to 1 over the wreck we've dealt with for 3
1/2 years…

---