I'm voting for Tyrion Lannister.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hillary Sucks.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postgetting back on point
Hillary is clearly not fit to be President due to her public record. She is qualified, but not fit.
Trump may be unqualified, but he is fit.
So here we are.
The only choice and chance for changing all that's wrong in DC is Trump.
Clinton is more of the same, more of what got us here. If you like politics in America, if you like how our country has been run for decades, vote for Hillary
Johnson and Stein have no chance and are votes for Hillary. I'm not sure you can be "principled" when your vote is for the status quo.
Trump is not perfect by a long shot. Others perhaps more perfect chose not to run or were defeated in primaries.
We will never have a perfect candidate.
Vote Trump
Originally posted by LBJefferies View PostYou're a fucking idiot.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M-technik-3 View Post^ so you are saying if Bill and Hillary had done this then it's not an issue? He had his taxes prepared by a tax person and supposedly were legal at the time. I don't like the method of madness, but if my account said it was legal I would have done the same damn thing.
Resume.Si vis pacem, para bellum.
New Hawtness: 1995 540i/6 Claptrap
Defunct too: Cirrusblau m30 Project
Defunct (sold): Alta Vista
79 Bronco SHTF Build
Comment
-
Originally posted by M-technik-3 View Post^ so you are saying if Bill and Hillary had done this then it's not an issue? He had his taxes prepared by a tax person and supposedly were legal at the time. I don't like the method of madness, but if my account said it was legal I would have done the same damn thing.
Comment
-
pls tell me what is crazy about trump's tax plans o learned one
or
do you mean reducing corporate tax rates?
lower personal tax rates with limited deductions?
let me 'splain
i'm an old mechanical engineer so logic/data means a lot to me. results in the real world should drive policy. it's the reason i'm not a fan of our fed reserve. no data to back up their policies, in fact the exact opposite.
prolly before your time, but go back through history and see what happens when tax rates are reduced. economic expansion, job creation, increased tax revenues to the fed government. ala JFK and Reagan
corporate tax rates in the USA are noncompetitive with the rest of the world (too high) and one reason why businesses merge with foreign competitors and then relocate corporate offices outside the US.
All taxes are paid by you and me. Further, economic data shows higher corporate tax rates lead to lower wages.
I applaud millennials focus on the unethical/immoral behavior of corporate executive pay. But tax rates aren't going to change that.
i employ 4 people, and lower tax rates for my business might let me hire another person to expand.Last edited by gwb72tii; 10-05-2016, 03:23 PM.“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
I'll address this by pointing out this terribly false post you made pages ago and refused to walk back:
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Posti used to agree with your point but then listened and read his platform.
his tax proposals in particular are conservative, other than believing people like himself ought to pay more in taxes (the evil rich).
don't pretend you're data driven if you can't or won't do basic internet search to look up any of the many analyses on each candidate's tax plans.
I already pointed this out once but you refused to even read them apparently
This was before trump had to create a second tax plan, because the first one was projected to cost 10T over 10 years.
So here's the scoop on the new one: http://taxfoundation.org/article/det...september-2016
According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, the plan would reduce federal revenue by between $4.4 trillion and $5.9 trillion on a static basis. The amount depends on the nature of a key business policy provision.
After accounting for the larger economy and the broader tax base, the plan would reduce revenues by between $2.6 trillion and $3.9 trillion after accounting for the larger economy, depending on the nature of a key policy provision.
The plan reduces revenue by substantially less than the plan proposed by Trump last year, on both a static and dynamic basis.
On a static basis, the plan would lead to at least 0.8 percent higher after-tax income for all taxpayer quintiles. The plan would lead to at least 10.2 percent higher incomes for the top 1 percent of taxpayers or as much as 16.0 percent higher, depending on the nature of a key business policy provision.
More trickle up bullshit.
I'm not opposed to reduction of the corporate tax rate and removal of a huge portion of tax benefits carved out for certain industries and repatriation of money kept offshore.
That's not the bulk of trump's plan--it's his enormous cuts for income taxes that aren't paid for by the rest of his tax plan. His plan is fiscally insolvent, by a huge margin. I'm not a fan of Hillary's tax increases but they at least cover her proposed spending increases.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BraveUlysses View PostI'll address this by pointing out this terribly false post you made pages ago and refused to walk back:
100% full of shit. no wonder you like trump, you refuse to own up to your own bullshit just like him.
don't pretend you're data driven if you can't or won't do basic internet search to look up any of the many analyses on each candidate's tax plans.
I already pointed this out once but you refused to even read them apparently
This was before trump had to create a second tax plan, because the first one was projected to cost 10T over 10 years.
So here's the scoop on the new one: http://taxfoundation.org/article/det...september-2016
Experts Weigh Donald Trump’s Tax Plan, and Find It Wanting
More trickle up bullshit.
I'm not opposed to reduction of the corporate tax rate and removal of a huge portion of tax benefits carved out for certain industries and repatriation of money kept offshore.
That's not the bulk of trump's plan--it's his enormous cuts for income taxes that aren't paid for by the rest of his tax plan. His plan is fiscally insolvent, by a huge margin. I'm not a fan of Hillary's tax increases but they at least cover her proposed spending increases.
"A good memory for quotes combined with a poor memory for attribution can lead to a false sense of originality."
-----------------------------------------
91 318is Turbo Sold
87 325 Daily driver Sold
06 4.8is X5
06 Mtec X3
05 4.4i X5 Sold
92 325ic Sold & Re-purchased
90 325i Sold
97 328is Sold
01 323ci Sold
92 325i Sold
83 528e Totaled
98 328i Sold
93 325i Sold
Comment
-
yes yes yes i've heard it all before, from the likes of you, the left and economic "experts"
Reaganomics was predicted to leave a huge hole in the budget when it was passed, and was i believe the larges tax cut ever although i might be wrong on that.
Go look at what happened. There was NO reduction in tax receipts, There were record capital gain taxes collected (predicted to decrease) and record personal taxes collected (predicted to decrease)
There was NO reduction.
There was however a huge increase in economic activity and job creation.
and before you mention the deficit
If the democratic dominated congress would have held back on spending that they promised to do the budget would never have had the hole in it that happened.
You can espouse whatever economic theories and pseudo economic experts you want, but the actual economic data backs me up“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View PostYou can espouse whatever economic theories and pseudo economic experts you want, but the actual economic data backs me up
In a perfect world where our government had not stuck us in a 20 trillion dollar hole... I'd be the first one saying we need low taxes and can afford social spending. But as it sits now, we need moderately higher taxes... and lower social spending. Oh, and to cut subsidies, defense spending, aid to other nations, etc, etc. But that's just a pipe dream because the corporations and special interests like the system we have now. It works for them.
Edit: Just going back and looking at the debt during the 80's out of curiosity. Reagan put us over 1 trillion, and ended at 2.6 trillion. Doesn't sound that great either. It DOES sound awesome when you compare it to the numbers added by GWB and Obama... but still I'd hardly call adding 186% to the national debt fiscally conservative, or successful.Last edited by Schnitzer318is; 10-06-2016, 02:08 PM."A good memory for quotes combined with a poor memory for attribution can lead to a false sense of originality."
-----------------------------------------
91 318is Turbo Sold
87 325 Daily driver Sold
06 4.8is X5
06 Mtec X3
05 4.4i X5 Sold
92 325ic Sold & Re-purchased
90 325i Sold
97 328is Sold
01 323ci Sold
92 325i Sold
83 528e Totaled
98 328i Sold
93 325i Sold
Comment
-
George you have to remember a lot of these guys were barely an itch in there fathers sack at best, when Regan 1st sat in the Oval. Me I was around when Carter was in office, but way to young to even remember that.
With my generations view on history, "it happened in the past it dose not affect me now," and times have changed and there for we need to do something modern, since everyone told me growing up that " I am special and my feelings matter" we should only do things that I deem to be right....Last edited by mrsleeve; 10-06-2016, 02:25 PM.Originally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-
Comment
Comment