Rand Paul should be the new President

[blunthead]

You haven't responded about what I wondering. While you're doing that, if you are going to, do you mind telling me how you define "liberal"?

I'm referring to classical liberalism, not social liberalism as developed in America. Liberals usually support capitalism, so.. fuck em.

So then what about classical liberals makes them worthy of being sent to Siberia?

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

 

[blunthead]

Rand Paul vs Bernie Sanders would be an interesting election to be sure, as they are at opposite ends of the spectrum. But it is far more likely to be Jeb Bush vs Hillary Clinton, so I am not getting my hopes up for any kind of significant shift in the status quo in 2017.

I'm having hopes it's not Bush vs Clinton, mainly because I don't think Bush can win against her. In fact, I'm pretty sure only Trump can beat her and I think he will.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Name a first world nation that doesn't spend tax dollars on its economy and Regulate.

Sure some corporations get rich off of doing such but they're regulated and should be taxed right....South Korea economy works like this.

 

[Socialist]

I'm referring to classical liberalism, not social liberalism as developed in America. Liberals usually support capitalism, so.. fuck em.

So then what about classical liberals makes them worthy of being sent to Siberia?

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

 

[Socialist]

The opposite of the socialist state which Barack Obama has made.

Oh, okay. It's curious that modern Democrats claim the term "liberal" when they are anything but.

You're right, liberalism is a disease and liberals need to be sent to siberian camps.

You haven't responded about what I wondering. While you're doing that, if you are going to, do you mind telling me how you define "liberal"?

I'm referring to classical liberalism, not social liberalism as developed in America. Liberals usually support capitalism, so.. fuck em.

You think liberals support capitalism? I guess I'm having a hard time not thinking "modern American liberal" when someone says liberal. Of course modern American liberals don't support capitalism, they hate it. You do too, don't you?

Err, almost all liberals support capitalism, even modern liberals, regulations aren't anti capitalist, you show me liberals rallying for the seizing of factories.

 

[blunthead]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

 

[Avorysuds]

Lol, one poster here wants to take the accomplishments of failed Governments of the past as to why we should be just like them and the other won't move their ass to China but claims it's just super fantastic.

I don't want to go back to slavery, or corporations ruling everything (corporations were made by Government to protect the rich btw, can't go after the person anymore LOLOLOLOLOLOLOz)... Matt just likes to say the same tired lines because whelp, he took some classes and we should all just stfu and listen to him! no no! We should just let people like him rule our lives because they would be so much better at it than us cuz he's so super smart!

 

[Socialist]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

 

[blunthead]

So then what about classical liberals makes them worthy of being sent to Siberia?

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

You said that liberalism is a disease, that liberals should be sent to Siberia, so I wondered what the symptoms of the disease are, which I now deduce are the symptoms exhibited by capitalists. So what are these symptoms in your view?

 

[Avorysuds]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

Odd, Government is like, bigger in the US than has ever been at anytime, anywhere in this planets history......... Why does Obama or Bush or Clinton or Bush or or or fix this problem? Oh Oh OH OH! Wait WAIT!!! I know!!!! It's because <breath> IT'S BECAUSE OF SMAAAAAALLL GOVERNMENT!!!

Genius!

 

[ScienceRocks]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

The super rich the past 30 years have hogged most of the wealth, while our middle class collapsed. I don't think more tax cuts for the super rich at this point is going to do anything to fix this.

We should tariff the crap out of all imports so they don't want to outsource.

 

[Socialist]

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

You said that liberalism is a disease, that liberals should be sent to Siberia, so I wondered what the symptoms of the disease are, which I now deduce are the symptoms exhibited by capitalists. So what are these symptoms in your view?

You obviously don't recognize the joking nature I've been using through this thread.. Not my problem.

 

[ScienceRocks]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

Odd, Government is like, bigger in the US than has ever been at anytime, anywhere in this planets history......... Why does Obama or Bush or Clinton or Bush or or or fix this problem? Oh Oh OH OH! Wait WAIT!!! I know!!!! It's because <breath> IT'S BECAUSE OF SMAAAAAALLL GOVERNMENT!!!

Genius!

I am pretty sure that deregulations of the 80s-00's lead to the economic collapse...So small government allowing corps to do stupid shit = cluster fuck. the same can be said about the 20's pre-depression.

 

[Avorysuds]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

The super rich the past 30 years have hogged most of the wealth, while our middle class collapsed. I don't think more tax cuts for the super rich at this point is going to do anything to fix this.

We should tariff the crap out of all imports so they don't want to outsource.

Good plan! Luck is on your side Matt, you have GIANT ASS Government sitting right there to help make this happen! It's so easy, all you have to do is write to "them" and the US Government will represent you and all the other poor people out there!

So easy! All we needed was to inform our massive Government that the rich needed to be taxed more!!!! Oh and tariffs!!! Yeeeeaaah! That will do it!

 

[blunthead]

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

You said that liberalism is a disease, that liberals should be sent to Siberia, so I wondered what the symptoms of the disease are, which I now deduce are the symptoms exhibited by capitalists. So what are these symptoms in your view?

You obviously don't recognize the joking nature I've been using through this thread.. Not my problem.

Joking is not what you've been doing; I know a joke when I hear it. You clearly don't like capitalism. For 15 minutes I've been trying to find out what your thoughts are, why you don't like it. If you sincerely are trying to avoid starting trouble then I'll back off. But I saw your Marxist footnote stuff and thought it'd be interesting to hear what you had to say, that's all.

 

[Libertary]

So then what about classical liberals makes them worthy of being sent to Siberia?

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

Left liberals do not support capitalism.

 

[blunthead]

If you didn't catch the obvious joking, it's the support of capitalism.

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

Left liberals do not support capitalism.

"Left liberals" are socialists. They're not classical liberals who are actually conservative.

 

[Avorysuds]

During Kennedys time the taxes on the top were like 3-4 times as high compared to today...There weren't nearly as many loop holes to hide in either.

What good could possibly come with lowering them more today??? They already don't pay enough for what they take out of the economy.

It's common sense. Less in taxes and regulations on businesses means more money for them, which means they can expand, which means they can create more jobs, which means more taxpayers, which means more tax revenue. Kennedy and Reagan, who went on to do this as President, were both correct about it.

Yeah, not like wages have been stagnant for decades, with a shrinking middle class/growing income gap..

Odd, Government is like, bigger in the US than has ever been at anytime, anywhere in this planets history......... Why does Obama or Bush or Clinton or Bush or or or fix this problem? Oh Oh OH OH! Wait WAIT!!! I know!!!! It's because <breath> IT'S BECAUSE OF SMAAAAAALLL GOVERNMENT!!!

Genius!

I am pretty sure that deregulations of the 80s-00's lead to the economic collapse...So small government allowing corps to do stupid shit = cluster fuck. the same can be said about the 20's pre-depression.

That's odd because it sounds like you have about 1 1 billionth of the story. Like I said, you have no idea what yer talking about Matt.

 

[Libertary]

Rand Paul vs Bernie Sanders would be an interesting election to be sure, as they are at opposite ends of the spectrum. But it is far more likely to be Jeb Bush vs Hillary Clinton, so I am not getting my hopes up for any kind of significant shift in the status quo in 2017.

I think it is very safe that Hillary will be the candidate.

 

[Libertary]

Are you saying that you think I'm an idiot or something? Have I insulted you? Why suggest that I should've caught something obvious which you said? And while you answer maybe can defend some of what your saying by being specific. What about capitalism do you hate? Are you saying classical liberalism is the same thing as capitalism? I'm just curious what a communist thinks and why.

Going with the insulting nature of this forum, probably, (Not really.)
Oh lord, what about capitalism do I hate? I could write an essay, but I don't have time and don't want to start a shit storm...
No, I'm not, I'm referring to the support of capitalism.

Look, I just wish you'd stop being cryptic and say what you mean, or at least say it so I can understand what you're saying. What do you mean by "the support of liberalism"? What are you talking about?

I don't think I said support of liberalism, I said capitalism, almost all liberals support capitalism.

Left liberals do not support capitalism.

"Left liberals" are socialists. They're not classical liberals who are actually conservative.

Socialist are not liberal.