Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
why? you said yourself the only criteria is a reduction in taxes. doesn't matter what it would do to the economy, the debt or the deficit, just so long as taxes are cut.so that ought to tell you how much his endorsement is worth.That's awesome. Norquist endorsed Bush' plan too.
So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Well, for conservatives it is a big endorsement, and it makes it hard to call Trump a socialist, though some retards do anyway.
does that sound in any way responsible to you?
i think we all get that it carries value with republicans, we're just damned if we can figure out why"Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass."That's awesome. Norquist endorsed Bush' plan too.
So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Right. Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass.
Do you really not understand that this is of some value in the Republican nomination process or are you only acting like an idiot?
would you increase taxes coupled with spending cuts to reduce the deficit?why? you said yourself the only criteria is a reduction in taxes. doesn't matter what it would do to the economy, the debt or the deficit, just so long as taxes are cut.so that ought to tell you how much his endorsement is worth.That's awesome. Norquist endorsed Bush' plan too.
So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Well, for conservatives it is a big endorsement, and it makes it hard to call Trump a socialist, though some retards do anyway.
does that sound in any way responsible to you?
Norquist also wants to avoid increasing the deficit, but that isn't his primary concern.
And yes, I think , that the primary problem with our deficits is government spending, not government revenues as both are at record levels. The government just cant tell itself 'no'; it is addicted to tax payer money.
That's awesome. Norquist endorsed Bush' plan too.
the republicans still think supply side economics works. it doesn't.i think we all get that it carries value with republicans, we're just damned if we can figure out why"Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass."That's awesome. Norquist endorsed Bush' plan too.
So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Right. Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass.
Do you really not understand that this is of some value in the Republican nomination process or are you only acting like an idiot?
What are the reasons that Republicans give for pursuing these tax policies? Maybe if you actually read what the Republicans had to say on the matter would help you to understand?
would you increase taxes coupled with spending cuts to reduce the deficit?why? you said yourself the only criteria is a reduction in taxes. doesn't matter what it would do to the economy, the debt or the deficit, just so long as taxes are cut.so that ought to tell you how much his endorsement is worth.So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Well, for conservatives it is a big endorsement, and it makes it hard to call Trump a socialist, though some retards do anyway.
does that sound in any way responsible to you?
Norquist also wants to avoid increasing the deficit, but that isn't his primary concern.
And yes, I think , that the primary problem with our deficits is government spending, not government revenues as both are at record levels. The government just cant tell itself 'no'; it is addicted to tax payer money.
Democrats oppose this plan. It has too much detail. They want "hope and change". They are "ready for hiLIARy"
so you only have one criteriawould you increase taxes coupled with spending cuts to reduce the deficit?why? you said yourself the only criteria is a reduction in taxes. doesn't matter what it would do to the economy, the debt or the deficit, just so long as taxes are cut.so that ought to tell you how much his endorsement is worth.
Well, for conservatives it is a big endorsement, and it makes it hard to call Trump a socialist, though some retards do anyway.
does that sound in any way responsible to you?
Norquist also wants to avoid increasing the deficit, but that isn't his primary concern.
And yes, I think , that the primary problem with our deficits is government spending, not government revenues as both are at record levels. The government just cant tell itself 'no'; it is addicted to tax payer money.
No because taxes are too high in and of themselves already.
Even coupled with spending cuts, it wont do more than add more tax payer funds for the government to mismanage.
Taxes need to come down more, and getting there responsibly without causing a devaluation of the currency is the policy that is most needed, I think.
it's a fairy tale. you have to see that.Democrats oppose this plan. It has too much detail. They want "hope and change". They are "ready for hiLIARy"
the republicans still think supply side economics works. it doesn't.i think we all get that it carries value with republicans, we're just damned if we can figure out why"Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass."So what? Which Bush?
All Norquist is concerned about is reducing taxers and not raising them. Do that and he basically will endorse your tax plan.
Right. Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass.
Do you really not understand that this is of some value in the Republican nomination process or are you only acting like an idiot?
What are the reasons that Republicans give for pursuing these tax policies? Maybe if you actually read what the Republicans had to say on the matter would help you to understand?
so you only have one criteriawould you increase taxes coupled with spending cuts to reduce the deficit?why? you said yourself the only criteria is a reduction in taxes. doesn't matter what it would do to the economy, the debt or the deficit, just so long as taxes are cut.Well, for conservatives it is a big endorsement, and it makes it hard to call Trump a socialist, though some retards do anyway.
does that sound in any way responsible to you?
Norquist also wants to avoid increasing the deficit, but that isn't his primary concern.
And yes, I think , that the primary problem with our deficits is government spending, not government revenues as both are at record levels. The government just cant tell itself 'no'; it is addicted to tax payer money.
No because taxes are too high in and of themselves already.
Even coupled with spending cuts, it wont do more than add more tax payer funds for the government to mismanage.
Taxes need to come down more, and getting there responsibly without causing a devaluation of the currency is the policy that is most needed, I think.
Realists understand that the gov is spending more than we make and there's no end in sight. Somehow that's gotta stop or we're totally fucked...
Dem's want to pull funds from elsewhere (usually the military) and raise taxes on the wealthy and businesses in order to financially support our poor Americans (and perhaps /all/ americans in specific particular ways; like medical and such.)
Repub's want to cut funding from welfare projects and basically give that cash to businesses in an effort to bring business' back to America and thus provide jobs to the poor.
I think Trumps actually tries to bridge the two political camps with his budget; he gives a little to both business/rich and the less fortunate/struggling American. It's probably not going to fix everything (I'm not sure /any/ tax reform actually could satisfactorily at this point honestly) but it's not a bad compromise.
and what circumstances are those?the republicans still think supply side economics works. it doesn't.i think we all get that it carries value with republicans, we're just damned if we can figure out why"Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass."Right. Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass.
Do you really not understand that this is of some value in the Republican nomination process or are you only acting like an idiot?
What are the reasons that Republicans give for pursuing these tax policies? Maybe if you actually read what the Republicans had to say on the matter would help you to understand?
Supply side economics does work in certain circumstances.
What does that economic phrase mean to you, anyway?
it's a fairy tale. you have to see that.Democrats oppose this plan. It has too much detail. They want "hope and change". They are "ready for hiLIARy"
yes. the idea that somehow a tax plan with cuts for everyone is revenue neutral. that's a fairy tale.it's a fairy tale. you have to see that.Democrats oppose this plan. It has too much detail. They want "hope and change". They are "ready for hiLIARy"
Do you know what a fairy tale is?
yes. the idea that somehow a tax plan with cuts for everyone is revenue neutral. that's a fairy tale.it's a fairy tale. you have to see that.Democrats oppose this plan. It has too much detail. They want "hope and change". They are "ready for hiLIARy"
Do you know what a fairy tale is?
Supply side economics is not 'trickle down' economics, though some use that phrase for just about anything that doesn't give away more tax payer money.and what circumstances are those?the republicans still think supply side economics works. it doesn't.i think we all get that it carries value with republicans, we're just damned if we can figure out why"Which makes his endorsement worth about as much as the hair on my ass."
Do you really not understand that this is of some value in the Republican nomination process or are you only acting like an idiot?
What are the reasons that Republicans give for pursuing these tax policies? Maybe if you actually read what the Republicans had to say on the matter would help you to understand?
Supply side economics does work in certain circumstances.
What does that economic phrase mean to you, anyway?
the phrase means trickle down - that putting more money at the top drives the economy when the opposite is true.
