Congratulations Zohran Mamdani…You and NYC are now in the crosshairs of an aggressive and very vengeful Donald Trump.

[SweetTea]

So the minute you take a few extra houses to creep over that 20K or 30K limit, you lose your Section 8, your health coverage, your food assistance.

So maybe we need to increase that incentive by lowering their benefits? Ever thought of that? Of course not. In your mind, we should manipulate the private labor market by raising the wage the must be paid.

 

[JoeB131]

So maybe we need to increase that incentive by lowering their benefits? Ever thought of that? Of course not. In your mind, we should manipulate the private labor market by raising the wage the must be paid.

No, guy, finding new ways to torment poor people is never something that enters my thought process. I couldn't imagine what kind of soulless creature would think, "Hey, we need to make life harder on poor people!!!"

It seems to me absurd that the CEO of McDonalds gets paid $18,000,000.00 while a line worker has to be careful not to exceed 30 hours a week to not hit that 18,000 that would put him above the "poverty level".

 

[SweetTea]

It seems to me absurd that the CEO of McDonalds gets paid $18,000,000.00 while a line worker has to be careful not to exceed 30 hours a week to not hit that 18,000 that would put him above the "poverty level".

Why would he have to be careful? He would make more money working than what he was getting from welfare but he chooses to make less so he doesn’t have to work.

 

[JoeB131]

Why would he have to be careful? He would make more money working than what he was getting from welfare but he chooses to make less so he doesn’t have to work.

No, he wouldn't.

Let's review, shall we?

A line worker in McDonald's make $9.90 an hour.

Working 30 hours a week she will make 297.00.

If she boosts that to 40 hours, she is now making 396.00 A whole whopping $99.00 more.

But she loses her SNAP, Section 8, and medicaid subsidies.

 

[SweetTea]

No, he wouldn't.

Let's review, shall we?

A line worker in McDonald's make $9.90 an hour.

Working 30 hours a week she will make 297.00.

If she boosts that to 40 hours, she is now making 396.00 A whole whopping $99.00 more.

But she loses her SNAP, Section 8, and medicaid subsidies.

Which begs the question, why are we paying people more not to work? Our system creates dependency and rewards people for not working, or not working as much. That is on purpose.

I know you likely think the solution is to artificially raise wages, but I would suggest a phase out plan for both SNAP and Medicaid. For example, SNAP reduces by 30% for every $1 above the income limit. Medicaid is on a sliding scale which gets subsidized up to a point. A person would always earn more working than not. Everyone working has skin in the game and has an incentive to work. They also aren’t as quick to vote to raise taxes across the board.

We could also make the child tax credit tied to work requirements as well(sliding scale), instead of being partially refundable to those that don’t work or pay federal income tax as it is now.

I don’t think Democrats would be interested in any of these ideas because they need and want government dependents.

 

[JoeB131]

Which begs the question, why are we paying people more not to work? Our system creates dependency and rewards people for not working, or not working as much. That is on purpose.

I agree, it creates dependency when you have a system where 1% have half the wealth and half the population only has 1% of the wealth.

The reason Republicans don't want to end welfare is that they know that in a generation, we'd have real socialism if we did. Even the poor dumb white trash down in Jesusland Trailer Parks would figure this shit out despite generations of inbreeding.

I used to argue with a guy here, Ray From Cleveland, who CONSTANTLY bitched about his Section 8 neighbors, but thought that he was totally entitled to some horseshit disability payment he was getting.

 

[SweetTea]

I agree, it creates dependency when you have a system where 1% have half the wealth and half the population only has 1% of the wealth.

The reason Republicans don't want to end welfare is that they know that in a generation, we'd have real socialism if we did. Even the poor dumb white trash down in Jesusland Trailer Parks would figure this shit out despite generations of inbreeding.

I used to argue with a guy here, Ray From Cleveland, who CONSTANTLY bitched about his Section 8 neighbors, but thought that he was totally entitled to some horseshit disability payment he was getting.

Is Democrats that have no desire to end welfare. In fact, they'd like to expand it. Themore people depdent on the government, the better it is for Democrats. The richest and the poorest people in the country are democrats. When will you figure this out? It isn't people down in "Jesusland" that are the problem, it's ignorant, naive, brainwashed people like you.

 

[JoeB131]

Is Democrats that have no desire to end welfare. In fact, they'd like to expand it. Themore people depdent on the government, the better it is for Democrats. The richest and the poorest people in the country are democrats. When will you figure this out? It isn't people down in "Jesusland" that are the problem, it's ignorant, naive, brainwashed people like you.

Okay, stupid, let's look at this.

The bottom 40% controls less than 1% of the wealth.
The middle 20% controls only 4% of the wealth.

NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ANY GOOD REASON TO VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS. EVER!

So already, you have 60% of the population that would vote for change.

The next 20%, where I probably fall (and if I'm being generous this week, so do you) control 8% of the wealth. They might have a reason to vote GOP, but not really. The One Percenters are looking to replace their jobs with AI as we speak.

Next up, the Top 20% who control 87% of the wealth. They vote Republican, and probably have a good reason to. Some of them might actually be decent human beings and vote Democratic because they don't see greed a core value.

So if you really voted in self-interest, then the bottom 60% would vote Democrat, the top 20% would vote Republican, with that second-from-the-top group splitting the difference.

The reality, though, is quite different.

How Groups Voted in 2024 | Roper Center for Public Opinion Research

TypeDemographicGroupHarrisTrumpSEXMen474355Women535345RACEWhite714257African-American118613Hispanic

ropercenter.cornell.edu

Trump won 50% of those making less than 50K a year. He won 52% of those making from 50K to 100K, and he won 47% of those making over $100K.

In 2020, when he utterly wrecked the country, those numbers were 44% of those under 50K, 42% of those between 50K and 100K, and 54% those over $100K.

 

[SweetTea]

Okay, stupid, let's look at this.

The bottom 40% controls less than 1% of the wealth.
The middle 20% controls only 4% of the wealth.

NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ANY GOOD REASON TO VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS. EVER!

So already, you have 60% of the population that would vote for change.

The next 20%, where I probably fall (and if I'm being generous this week, so do you) control 8% of the wealth. They might have a reason to vote GOP, but not really. The One Percenters are looking to replace their jobs with AI as we speak.

Next up, the Top 20% who control 87% of the wealth. They vote Republican, and probably have a good reason to. Some of them might actually be decent human beings and vote Democratic because they don't see greed a core value.

So if you really voted in self-interest, then the bottom 60% would vote Democrat, the top 20% would vote Republican, with that second-from-the-top group splitting the difference.

The reality, though, is quite different.

How Groups Voted in 2024 | Roper Center for Public Opinion Research

TypeDemographicGroupHarrisTrumpSEXMen474355Women535345RACEWhite714257African-American118613Hispanic

ropercenter.cornell.edu

Trump won 50% of those making less than 50K a year. He won 52% of those making from 50K to 100K, and he won 47% of those making over $100K.

In 2020, when he utterly wrecked the country, those numbers were 44% of those under 50K, 42% of those between 50K and 100K, and 54% those over $100K.

Has it ever occurred to you that not everyone is envious of those at the top? Middle class in the US is far better than being middle class in most other countries. The fact that there are people that have more doesn't really make a difference to many people. It obviously does to Democrats who feel as though somebody always owes them something just for existing.

Not that it matters, but I am well within the top 5%, but I was a Republican when I was in that bottom 40% as well.

 

[JoeB131]

Has it ever occurred to you that not everyone is envious of those at the top? Middle class in the US is far better than being middle class in most other countries. The fact that there are people that have more doesn't really make a difference to many people. It obviously does to Democrats who feel as though somebody always owes them something just for existing.

Not that it matters, but I am well within the top 5%, but I was a Republican when I was in that bottom 40% as well.

I'm sure you were. They appealled to all your racial, religious, and sexual fears.

I'm not envious of the top, I just see the danger of oligarchy and plutocracy.

Now, let's play a little word association game about other countries that had lots of poor people and a very few rich people.

France 1787
Russia - 1917
China 1949
Cuba - 1959
Iran - 1979

What they all had in common was oligarchy and the result of it, when people just got fed up.

 

[SweetTea]

I'm sure you were. They appealled to all your racial, religious, and sexual fears.

I'm not envious of the top, I just see the danger of oligarchy and plutocracy.

Now, let's play a little word association game about other countries that had lots of poor people and a very few rich people.

France 1787
Russia - 1917
China 1949
Cuba - 1959
Iran - 1979

What they all had in common was oligarchy and the result of it, when people just got fed up.

The US doesn't have lots of poor people and very few rich people. By world standards, the US has a very large number of very rich people, lots of rich people, many well-off people, few poor people and a very small number of very poor people. Poor people don't have cell phones in many other countries. They have no food and no way to get food.

Before you bring up the Democrats dream Nordic countries, their Social Democracies, not Socialism, won't work here in large part because of, ironically, our extreme diversity.

 

[JoeB131]

The US doesn't have lots of poor people and very few rich people. By world standards, the US has a very large number of very rich people, lots of rich people, many well-off people, few poor people and a very small number of very poor people. Poor people don't have cell phones in many other countries. They have no food and no way to get food.

40% of the population controls less than 1% of the wealth. We have too many poor people. Period. Full stop.

Your argument is that we are doing better than the Third World Countries that white people have looted and exploited, isn't much to be proud of. We shouldn't have slums or barrios or trailer parks at all.

Before you bring up the Democrats dream Nordic countries, their Social Democracies, not Socialism, won't work here in large part because of, ironically, our extreme diversity.

So you are saying we are too racist? I agree, we are. Dumb ignorant people in Jesusland are happy to be poor as long as they can look down on black people.

 

[SweetTea]

40% of the population controls less than 1% of the wealth. We have too many poor people. Period. Full stop.

People become rich every single day in this country and it is not because they are exploiting the poor. The US has the best oppotrunity to succeed of anywhere in the world. Success doesn’t just mean having a penthouse on Fifth Ave.

So you are saying we are too racist? I agree, we are. Dumb ignorant people in Jesusland are happy to be poor as long as they can look down on black people.

No, I mean we have a diversity of thought and not even the same goals. We don’t promote assimilation, we promote diversity. That will not work if we wish to have the same type of government a Norway, for example. Many of the Nordic countries have increased immigration of late. If they fail to promote assimilation, they will fail, but they may be smarter than the average Democrat.

 

[Deadstick]

Will we see troops in NYC….A major iCE presence? Cuts in federal funding? I suspect that Trump already has the wheels turning…I’m sure he’s got his people staying up late tonight to come up with the ‘plan’ that he’ll no doubt unleash on NYC and the foreign mayor ASAP.
Get ready NYC….you asked for it.

Trump news at a glance: president endorses and threatens on eve of New York City mayoral election

Trump backs Cuomo on Truth Social post on election eve as Mamdani hits back – key US politics stories from 3 November

www.theguardian.com

At the same time Trump has the Al Qaeda terrorist Julani having a sleep over at the White House, how about that.

 

[JoeB131]

People become rich every single day in this country and it is not because they are exploiting the poor. The US has the best oppotrunity to succeed of anywhere in the world. Success doesn’t just mean having a penthouse on Fifth Ave.

Success is kind of an illusion. Between my wife and I, we make over six figures (I used to make six figures on my own, but Trump Economy!) We live in a nice condo, I have vacation property with my family, we have extensive savings but not quite where we want to be in retirement, yet.

But I know that all it would take is one serious illness to wipe all that out. And that's where 80% of the population is.

No, I mean we have a diversity of thought and not even the same goals. We don’t promote assimilation, we promote diversity. That will not work if we wish to have the same type of government a Norway, for example. Many of the Nordic countries have increased immigration of late. If they fail to promote assimilation, they will fail, but they may be smarter than the average Democrat.

Uh, guy, you can't boast about 'diversity" when you send masked, jackbooted thugs into neighborhoods to round up people who are too brown or don't have their papers in order.

Last time I checked, if you want a government that provides basic needs- Food security, health care, public safety - there really shouldn't be a lot of disagreement on that. There is because too many inbreds think that immigrant wants half their cookie.

 

[SweetTea]

Success is kind of an illusion. Between my wife and I, we make over six figures (I used to make six figures on my own, but Trump Economy!) We live in a nice condo, I have vacation property with my family, we have extensive savings but not quite where we want to be in retirement, yet.

I can only imagine that your standard of living isn’t nearly as good as you think it is living around Chicago with that salary. That being said, I could certainly do with much less and still be happy. I just choose to make the most of the money and not live in a place where Democrats like to play Robin Hood.

But I know that all it would take is one serious illness to wipe all that out. And that's where 80% of the population is.

You don’t have health insurance? If so, you likely have a maximum out of pocket that shouldn’t bankrupt you.

If we had single payer, that one serious illness at your age may very well be the end of you. Single-payer isn’t free and they make health choices based on $$$ and life expectancy.

Uh, guy, you can't boast about 'diversity" when you send masked, jackbooted thugs into neighborhoods to round up people who are too brown or don't have their papers in order.

Who is boasting about diversity? Also, they aren’t rounding up people who are too brown. They are rounding up people who are in this country illegally, many of which are brown. You have it backwards because race is always at the forefront of your every thought.

Last time I checked, if you want a government that provides basic needs- Food security, health care, public safety - there really shouldn't be a lot of disagreement on that. There is because too many inbreds think that immigrant wants half their cookie.

Actually, there is disagreement on portions of that. The federal government in the US wasn’t designed to provide social welfare. It was designed for defense and to protect individual liberties. We have obviously gone down the path of providing social welfare since, but many believe too far. You believe not enough.

 

[JoeB131]

I can only imagine that your standard of living isn’t nearly as good as you think it is living around Chicago with that salary. That being said, I could certainly do with much less and still be happy. I just choose to make the most of the money and not live in a place where Democrats like to play Robin Hood.

Actually, I like living in a cultured place with good services, and my neighbors don't all look like extras from Deliverance.

You don’t have health insurance? If so, you likely have a maximum out of pocket that shouldn’t bankrupt you.

62% of Bankruptcies are linked to medical crisis, and 75% of them had insurance when the crisis started.

If we had single payer, that one serious illness at your age may very well be the end of you. Single-payer isn’t free and they make health choices based on $$$ and life expectancy.

Except people in Single Payer Countries live longer and have lower infant mortality rates. We have death panels in this country, they work for the insurance industry.

Who is boasting about diversity? Also, they aren’t rounding up people who are too brown. They are rounding up people who are in this country illegally, many of which are brown. You have it backwards because race is always at the forefront of your every thought.

No, you guys have it backward when the ICEstapo goes into Little Village and rounds up people outside the Home Depot, and then makes them prove if they have papers or not.

Actually, there is disagreement on portions of that. The federal government in the US wasn’t designed to provide social welfare. It was designed for defense and to protect individual liberties. We have obviously gone down the path of providing social welfare since, but many believe too far. You believe not enough.

The country was founded by slave rapists who shit in chamber pots and didn't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
We've evolved above that, thankfully. Those issues were settled with the Civil War and the New Deal.

 

[SweetTea]

Actually, I like living in a cultured place with good services, and my neighbors don't all look like extras from Deliverance.

Hilarious. I prefer not to have to wear a bullet proof vest when I walk out of my home. See how hyperbole works?

62% of Bankruptcies are linked to medical crisis, and 75% of them had insurance when the crisis started.

Because they couldn’t pay the maximum out of pocket or didn’t have insurance? My maximum out of pocket is 10k. That shouldn’t bankrupt someone.

Except people in Single Payer Countries live longer and have lower infant mortality rates.

They live longer because they aren’t as fat and exercise regularly. We are a country of fat people who have the luxury of sitting around all day and complaining about how bad we have it.

No, you guys have it backward when the ICEstapo goes into Little Village and rounds up people outside the Home Depot, and then makes them prove if they have papers or not.

How would you suggest we find people who are here illegally? If a murderer is on the loose and I fit the description, I have no problem being stopped and interrogated because I recognize that it is necessary. What you want is for them to just be ignored unless they commit (another) crime and then we can spend thousands of dollars and countless hours on deporting them when it is proven they aren’t here legally. The bottom line is that you want illegals here. Democrats want illegals here.

For the record, I have no problem with people of all different nationalities being here legally. I would like them to assimilate into our American culture. My wife and her family are legal immigrants. They have assimilated. I do have a problem with people just walking across our border. I couldn’t care less what color they are.

The country was founded by slave rapists who shit in chamber pots and didn't want to pay their fair share of taxes.
We've evolved above that, thankfully. Those issues were settled with the Civil War and the New Deal.

There it is. The hatred for our country. Sad.

 

[JoeB131]

Because they couldn’t pay the maximum out of pocket or didn’t have insurance? My maximum out of pocket is 10k. That shouldn’t bankrupt someone.

Wow, are you retarded? I mean, seriously, do you have a ******* learning disability?

If your insurance is linked to your employment, and you have a medical crisis where you can't work, your insurance goes bye-bye.

They live longer because they aren’t as fat and exercise regularly. We are a country of fat people who have the luxury of sitting around all day and complaining about how bad we have it.

Yes, the fact that a large slice has no coverager or inadequate coverage has nothing to do with it. You keep telling yourself that.

Do you know what your problem is, you don't see people who are less well off than you are.

How would you suggest we find people who are here illegally?

Well, we could start by actually establishing a National ID system. Then going after the greedy white people who hire them. Knowing who you are looking for is a good start. There are 350,000 undocumented immigrants who have valid orders of removal.

If a murderer is on the loose and I fit the description, I have no problem being stopped and interrogated because I recognize that it is necessary.

Check your privilege.

What you want is for them to just be ignored unless they commit (another) crime and then we can spend thousands of dollars and countless hours on deporting them when it is proven they aren’t here legally. The bottom line is that you want illegals here. Democrats want illegals here.

If they aren't committing crimes, I don't see any reason to go after them. (I mean real crimes, not being here without papers or reckless driving). Even Ronald Reagan saw the wisdom of amnesty.

For the record, I have no problem with people of all different nationalities being here legally. I would like them to assimilate into our American culture. My wife and her family are legal immigrants. They have assimilated. I do have a problem with people just walking across our border. I couldn’t care less what color they are.

SUre you don't. You are fine with treating them like criminals for merely seeking a better life.

There it is. The hatred for our country. Sad.

Again, only one of us has a DD214.

This country was built on slavery and genocide. This is an established fact.

 

[SweetTea]

Wow, are you retarded? I mean, seriously, do you have a ******* learning disability?

No, I just think and plan beyond your ability.

If your insurance is linked to your employment, and you have a medical crisis where you can't work, your insurance goes bye-bye.

Aren’t you an ACA fan? If so, you could get a heavily subsidized ACA plan if you no longer have income during the special enrollment period. There are no restrictions on assets, just income. You could keep your savings and not go bankrupt.

What about apply for SSDI? You could Medicare for up to 24 months.

If you have a 401(k) and are not drawing on it, Medicaid can’t touch it.

Glad I could help.

Do you know what your problem is, you don't see people who are less well off than you are.

But I thought I was just a dumb ole’ redneck who lives in a trailer park and votes against my own self-interest? Which is it?

You are probably correct to some extent, though, it is hard to imagine being the spot that I see some in. Illness or disability aside, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who rely on the government for their keep. I know for an absolute fact that I could walk away from everything I have today and start over and make ends meet without government assistance, and I am no spring chicken. There are no excuses.

Check your privilege.

I have been stopped for fitting the description of a drug dealer in a bad neighborhood. It was very late/early morning and I was leaving the hospital and driving through a rough neighborhood. I was pulled over, my person and my car was searched and I was then let go. They told me that I fit the description of someone that would be selling drugs in the area. To put it simply, I was a white guy in a black neighborhood late at night. I didn’t care, because frankly, it makes sense. If that is what they have to do to catch those guys, so be it.

Privilege, not so much.

If they aren't committing crimes, I don't see any reason to go after them. (I mean real crimes, not being here without papers or reckless driving). Even Ronald Reagan saw the wisdom of amnesty.

Right, lets give everyone who sneaks into the country amnesty. Now explain how that is different than having an open border.

SUre you don't. You are fine with treating them like criminals for merely seeking a better life.

Yeah, I also treat bank robbers like criminals for taking money from the bank. They were just trying to make a better life for themselves, right? You are kind of stupid.

Again, only one of us has a DD214.

Neat, a veteran who swore to fight for a country which he despises. I am just glad you aren’t the norm.

My high ranking(retired Col, Lt. Col.) armed forces relatives would not agree with your sentiments.

This country was built on slavery and genocide. This is an established fact.

Most countries were built on indiscretions of some sort. Cry me a river and get over it.