fncceo
Diamond Member
- Nov 29, 2016
- 45,043
- 38,680
- 3,615
It Has Become A One Question IQ Test
- Thread starter PoliticalChic
- Start date
danielpalos
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #142
In our case, I prefer to advocate for maglev in vacuum environments.
Winston
Platinum Member
Actually the crime was caused by in large part systematic racist housing... Blacks were not allowed to move out of certain areas mainly due to lack of access to capital which was given to other groups... This is the main reasons for lack of opportunity in these areas...
Are either party innocent? No... But at least the Democrats can see the errors of there ways while Republicans thing that low taxes and bigger prisons is the answer...
A Very Brief History of Housing Policy and Racial Discrimination
More than 300 years of exploitive and racist housing policies fostered many of the socio-economic inequities currently borne by Black, Indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC).
There is an estimate that it could take 200 years to fix this...
Winston
Platinum Member
I gotcha. I know the argument, and I will not deny it can be compelling. Women discovered they could be better off financially--and it is true. But it is you on the right that have distorted the system. It is not about being rewarded as a mother as much as it is punishment for being a father.
For instance. Suppose you are one of those better off mothers. Single, two chidren, working low wage job forty hours a week. You get your earned income tax credit. You get some food assistance, the EBT card. You get some help with childcare. IT is at this crazy point on the tax table, that for every dollar in additional income you have to pay additional taxes while losing benefits, that you will receive less than twenty cents per dollar of additional income. That is an eighty percent marginal tax rate. YOU, the right, have inflicted on this particular demographic.
, ver
So, now in swoops the baby daddy. He is going to step up, marry you, and start supporting you. Except now he is losing eighty cents on the dollar, immediately. For at least the first ten or fifteen grand he brings in the household. Would you not call that punishment? What kind of screwed up system generates those kind of insulting results for people doing, well, the right thing. So your answer is throw the baby out with the bath water. Screw it, eliminate all assistance programs. Why not provide incentives for those young men to "step up". Hell, just stop punishing them.
And schools, come on. What is the property tax base of Bayshore verses Brownsville. I mean you couldn't design a more inequitable system of funding. It is comically dysfunctional. Who created that? You think it has been Democrats?
But here is the real kicker. Republicans are all about personal responsibility, when it comes to other people. And they talk a good game about how they can take care of themselves. But what they inevitably can't get a grip on, is that they ain't owed jack shit. They were granted special privileges, special skills, given advantages that they are so self-deluded, and disrespectful, that they don't even realize what they are. It is shameful. We all stand on the shoulders of others, it is just some people know they are, and some people don't.
Osiris-ODS
Diamond Member
- Jan 22, 2019
- 3,664
- 3,336
- 1,940
Exactly how autistic are you?
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #147
1. " I know the argument, and I will not deny it can be compelling."
There is no argument.....I posted the facts.
2. "But it is you on the right that have distorted the system."
A total and abject lie.
Democrat Lyndon Johnson, a racist from the start, blocking every anti-lynching bill the Republican authored, set out to buy the black vote.
Prior to 1957, LBJ “had never supported civil rights legislation- any civil rights legislation. In the Senate and House alike, his record was an unbroken one of votes against every civil rights bill that had ever come to a vote: against voting rights bills; against bills that would have struck at job discrimination and at segregation in other areas of American life; even against bills that would have protected blacks from lynching.” Robert Caro, “Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson, vol.3,” p. xv.
3.The holocaust of crime and poverty in black neighborhoods and cities is a direct result of liberal policies.
No doubt about it.
But don't take my word for it:
“There is, indeed, sociological literature showing that it was hardly unknown for black people to be raised by single mothers during slavery and afterward. In fact, over the last 150 years, there have always been proportionately more single-parent black homes than white ones.
However, as classic work by Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman has shown, despite the horrors of slavery, overall, during the pre-emancipation era, about two-thirds of enslaved families had two parents — far more than today. More recent revisionist work has stressed that, while forced separations were always an important part of the picture, the two-thirds figure remained dominant (Wilma Dunaway is especially handy on this).
And this tendency continued into the Jim Crow era, contrary to a false sense one might have of daily life in a black ghetto of the 1930s and ’40s — think Richard Wright’s 12 Million Black Voices or Claude Brown’s Manchild in the Promised Land. Namely, it is wrong to suppose that, amid the misery of those neighborhoods, all but a sliver of children grew up without a dad. That is a modern phenomenon, whose current extent — fewer than one in three black children are raised by two parents — would shock even the poorest black folk 100 or even 50 years ago.”
http://hiphoprepublican.com/politics/2011/07/14/john-mcwhorter-in-defense-of-marriage-vow-passage/
Not only has the Democrat Party successfully kept blacks in poverty....
....but they have managed to keep your sort ignorant.
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #148
1. "So, now in swoops the baby daddy. He is going to step up, marry you, and start supporting you. Except now he is losing eighty cents on the dollar, immediately. For at least the first ten or fifteen grand he brings in the household. Would you not call that punishment?"
That is the Democrat design, you dope.
It is meant to keep the underclass on welfare.
- Of course, our Liberal friends have made certain that their ‘client base’ cannot escape! There is no way out of the ‘Poverty Trap’- those who try to work to find their way out of the trap will find that, as income rises, the loss of their welfare benefits is the same as a huge tax on their earnings!
- Take the example of someone receiving $12,000 in welfare benefits. She takes a new job earning $16,000 a year. But if she loses 50 cents in benefits for every dollar she now earns, that is the equivalent of a 50% tax! Plus, the payroll tax is another 7.65%, and federal tax is another 10% on the margin, plus state tax of 5%.... total: 72.65% tax. Where is the incentive to work? Comes to a salary of $84.15/ week. Now subtract transportation, lunches, etc., etc.
The Earned Income Tax Credit was created by Republicans.
Last edited:
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #149
"And schools, come on."
You are naught but an apologist for Democrats attempts to maintain the slavery that Republicans fought them to end.
It is not the schools....it is not poverty......it is not a genetics problem.
It is your party excusing and encouraging and incentivizing all the behaviors that cause poverty, low income and ignorance.
It is the Left/Liberals/Democrats who originated dogma like "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"
and fought against marriage, the nuclear family, and the traditions that made America successful.
You are nothing but an apologist for failure.
danielpalos
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #150
Less than you being full of fallacy. Are you on the literally incredible, right-wing?
Winston
Platinum Member
Just what is your solution? Shotgun weddings? I mean short of that, I don't see any concrete ideas to address the problem. Here is a thought, restructure the EITC so that people are not punished for attempting to climb out of poverty, by marriage or by work. Instead of taking benefits away because a marriage brings in more income, how about granting a marriage credit? I mean the savings from child support enforcement alone would probably pay the costs. , As you have pointed out, the EITC was a Republican concept, including the extreme marginal tax rates that I mentioned and you documented. So who is attempting to keep the poor impoverished?
And lets quit basing educational funding on property taxes. It is stupid. Quite honestly, it is worse than "separate but equal", because now it is separate and unequal. Make wealthy neighborhoods pay for some of the costs of schools in poor neighborhoods. Because who came up with property taxes funding public education, why it was the Republicans again.
ra
There are two inherent components of the status quo, placed there by Republicans, that is encouraging the very behavior you are complaining about, and attempting to cast blame on the Democrats. Seems to be a pattern with you Republicans. Obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, and then complain about a lack of progress.
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #152
"Just what is your solution?"
I doubt you are a Shakespeare reader (I'm studying Titus Andronicus at this moment) but the Bard had an interesting suggestion....
"Let's kill all the lawyers" is a line from William Shakespeare's Henry VI
Insert "Democrats" in the quote.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 297,863
- 219,738
- 3,615
Shakespeare was a fraud
So are you
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #154
"....restructure the EITC so that people are not punished for attempting to climb out of poverty, by marriage or by work."
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?????????????
The EITC does nothing of the sort.
It rewards work and personal responsibility.
This is exactly the opposite of what Democrat tax policy does when individual try to get off welfare, Uncle Sam's Plantation.
"We try and discourage people from self help." – Former MASS A.G. Coakley
Here's your remediation, so you sound less ignorant:
- The EITC has a sterling Republican heritage. It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. Repealed in 1943, Republican President Gerald Ford revived it in 1975.
- EITC supporters argued that because the credit would be available only to those with earned income, it would reinforce work incentives and help get people off welfare. By making the credit refundable, it would offset the disincentive effects of higher payroll tax rates, which had risen from 4.8 percent on workers and employers in 1970 to 5.85 percent in 1975.
- In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan supported a big increase in the EITC rate from 10 percent to 14 percent. In 1990, George H.W. Bush supported a further increase.
- Despite the exploding cost of the EITC, Republicans in Congress created another tax credit in the 1997 tax bill. The child credit was intended to make it easier for mothers to stay at home and raise their children, rather than work outside the home. Republicans and the Earned Income Tax Credit
“…a child care tax deduction included in the immense Internal Revenue Code of 1954…” http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry.php?id=17275&area=All
The origins of the EITC, which has done so much to reduce income tax liabilities for lower-income people, can be found in Ronald Reagans famous testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in 1972, where he proposed exempting the working poor from all Social Security and income taxes as an alternative to welfare. It was that testimony that led Congress to adopt the credit in 1975. As President, Reagan cut federal income tax rates across the board for all taxpayers by 25%. He also indexed the tax brackets for all taxpayers to prevent inflation from pushing workers into higher tax brackets. In the Tax Reform Act of 1986, President Reagan reduced the federal income tax rate for ”folks who make less” all the way down to 15%. That act also doubled the personal exemption, shielding more income from taxation for everybody, but a higher percentage of income of lower-income workers.
"... the earned income tax credit (the pride of Ronald Reagan), which has become the biggest and most effective antipoverty program by giving working families thousands of dollars a year in tax refunds."
Opinion | The New Resentment of the Poor (Published 2011)
Winston
Platinum Member
Honey, you have yet to reflect even an ounce of intelligence. I mean you are like talking to one of those computer generated phone calls that pretend to be a real person. You pretend to think. The EITC promotes work, to a point. But don't let the commoners make too much.
Nothing for the middle class: Why expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit won’t provide the tax relief Illinois families need
The latest version of Senate Bill 397, as recently amended, is quickly working its way through the political channels in Springfield. Included in this bill is a proposal to expand the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit to as high as 15 percent in 2013, up from its current rate of 5 percent of the...
That article does a good job of explaining what I am talking about. But let me take a shot at it because the article is a little dated. Three phases to the EITC, the phase in, the plateau, and the phase out. During the phase in the taxpayer gets forty cents for every dollar earned. Once they reach the plateau, they get nothing. Then, when they start the phase out, they lose forty cents for every dollar earned. You Republicans set it up that way. Obviously, you want these poor people to make, in 2021, married couple with two children, no more than $25,470. Because after that, your Republican system PUNISHES THEM to the tune of 40 cents on the dollar. Add the individual share of the payroll tax, and the lowest marginal tax rate, and you are looking at a marginal tax rate in excess of 57%. Even the wealthiest taxpayers don't face that kind of rate. Throw in loss of food stamps and daycare subsidies and we start hitting close to 80%.
Look, I got no problem if you want to keep the status quo, just don't go bitching when we raise the top marginal income tax rate to 65%. You got no problem making the hotel maid with two children pay that rate, and you expect them to work as much as possible. So why can't we expect the same from our wealthiest citizens. Because I got to tell you, I would much rather keep 35% of a million dollars than 35% of twelve dollars an hour.
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #157
Honey, you have yet to reflect even an ounce of intelligence. I mean you are like talking to one of those computer generated phone calls that pretend to be a real person. You pretend to think. The EITC promotes work, to a point. But don't let the commoners make too much.
Nothing for the middle class: Why expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit won’t provide the tax relief Illinois families need
The latest version of Senate Bill 397, as recently amended, is quickly working its way through the political channels in Springfield. Included in this bill is a proposal to expand the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit to as high as 15 percent in 2013, up from its current rate of 5 percent of the...www.illinoispolicy.org
That article does a good job of explaining what I am talking about. But let me take a shot at it because the article is a little dated. Three phases to the EITC, the phase in, the plateau, and the phase out. During the phase in the taxpayer gets forty cents for every dollar earned. Once they reach the plateau, they get nothing. Then, when they start the phase out, they lose forty cents for every dollar earned. You Republicans set it up that way. Obviously, you want these poor people to make, in 2021, married couple with two children, no more than $25,470. Because after that, your Republican system PUNISHES THEM to the tune of 40 cents on the dollar. Add the individual share of the payroll tax, and the lowest marginal tax rate, and you are looking at a marginal tax rate in excess of 57%. Even the wealthiest taxpayers don't face that kind of rate. Throw in loss of food stamps and daycare subsidies and we start hitting close to 80%.
Look, I got no problem if you want to keep the status quo, just don't go bitching when we raise the top marginal income tax rate to 65%. You got no problem making the hotel maid with two children pay that rate, and you expect them to work as much as possible. So why can't we expect the same from our wealthiest citizens. Because I got to tell you, I would much rather keep 35% of a million dollars than 35% of twelve dollars an hour.
Like a Good German....er, good Democrat, you either misstate or outright lie.
Democrats are the minority's problem: they purposely keep the underclass under, so they have their vote.
"It was the misfortune of black Americans that they were just on the verge of passing through the immigrant experience when damaging ideas about welfare and the lenient attitude about crime took hold. It could have happened to the Italians, Germans, Jews or Irish, but luckily for them, there were no Liberals around to “help” when they arrived."
Coulter
We simply need to get rid of the lying, iniquitous Democrat Party
If books weren't anathema to your sort, I'd be happy to recommend several.
Winston
Platinum Member
Not really understanding why it is so difficult to accept the reality that the structure of the EITC provides an incentive to NOT WORK at even minimal income levels. You have admitted that the EITC is a Republican program. You have documented the high marginal tax rate due to the phase out of the EITC. I am sure you understand that the structure of the program also discourages marriage and fathers taking responsibility for their children. So why do you keep screaming that Democrats are the problem. Republicans created the EITC and purposely structured it to do what you are claiming Democrats do, incentivize those in poverty to remain in poverty. Just ball parking it, but for the person getting the maximum EITC, it would take about twenty grand in income to climb to a decent level. During most of that climb they will be lucky to keep thirty cents on the dollar, and even in the end, they are going to be getting no more than sixty cents on the dollar. Sorry, but that makes taking a second job paying $15 and hour worth about $4.50 an hour. Not worth putting gas in the car.
PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #159
"Not really understanding why it is so difficult to accept the reality that the structure of the EITC provides an incentive to NOT WORK at even minimal income levels."
Another lie.
It is Democrat 'welfare' policy that does that.
You can do as well working one week a month at minimum wage as you can working $60,000-a-year, full-time, high-stress job.
WITH WELFARE IT MAKES SENSE TO WORK LESS,”
The chart is quite revealing. A one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year. If the family provider works only one week a month at minimum wage, he or she makes 92 percent as much as a provider grossing $60,000 a year.
http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/u..._With-welfare-it-makes-sense-to-work-less.pdf
What happened to that "successful welfare reform in the 1990s"?
The Democrat party killed it to prevent their 'slaves' from escaping the plantation.
13. And Obama killed it.
"Obama kills welfare reform
By Dick Morris - 07/17/12 10:07 PM EDT
Determined to destroy Bill Clinton’s signature achievement, President Obama’s administration has opened a loophole in the 1996 welfare reform legislation big enough to make the law ineffective. Its work requirement — the central feature of the legislation — has been diluted beyond recognition by the bureaucrats at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
On Thursday of last week, HHS issued regulations that modified — gutted — the work requirement.
Section 415(a)(2)(B) of the welfare reform act, now codified at 42 U.S.C. § 615(a)(2)(B), expressly states that ‘a waiver granted under section 1315 of this title [the one that HHS now claims it is acting under] or otherwise which relates to the provision of assistance under a State program funded under this part (as in effect on Sept. 30, 1996) shall not affect the applicability of section 607 of this title [which applies the work requirements] to the State.’ In short, whatever else might be said of the scope of the waiver authority, the Secretary has no lawful authority to waive the work requirements of section 607, which is what HHS is contemplating in its Memorandum.”
Obama kills welfare reform TheHill
Obama kills welfare reform
This is what Obama killed:
"...welfare rolls plunged by over 60 percent, as many as two million mothers entered the labor force, earnings for females heading families increased while their income from welfare payments fell, and child poverty declined every year between 1993 and 2000. By the late 1990s, both black child poverty and poverty among children in female-headed families had reached their lowest levels ever. " Interview: Welfare reform, 10 years later | Brookings Institution
The Democrats/Liberals don't want folks working, self-reliant, independent.
They want slaves who need them, and vote for them.
marvin martian
Diamond Member
The news is pretty much the same....name a Democrat stronghold, run by Democrat officials....and the crime news is no longer astounding.
Remember when, in 1929, the murder of seven members and associates of Chicago's North Side Gang that occurred on Saint Valentine's Day, was shocking???
Now it's practically daily.
“You can’t even react”...Armed Men Rob 14 in Less Than an Hour in Downtown Chicago
It’s a criminal’s paradise in downtown Chicago these days. With a shortage of officers and the soft-on-crime tactic coming from the Democrat-led city, brazen robbers are fanning out to rob, carjack and steal whatever they can while they can’t be caught. Just last week, Chicago’s Police Superintendent David Brown said violent offenders needed top consequences in the city’s courts with longer jail time.
Last Saturday, a crew of robbers described as two to four males, African-American, 16-30 years old, wearing dark and red hooded sweatshirts, red and black skull caps, and surgical masks struck in downtown Chicago and then again on Tuesday. That wasn’t enough for these armed robbers. They stuck again on Thursday night:
It took less than 45 minutes for a team of armed assailants to rob ten people in seven separate incidents across River North, Old Town, and the Near North Side on Thursday evening, police said. The offenders appear to be the same crew that struck the same area five times in under an hour on Tuesday evening."
"You can't even react"...Armed Men Rob 14 in Less Than an Hour in Downtown Chicago * 100PercentFedUp.com * by Leisa Audette
It’s a criminal’s paradise in downtown Chicago these days. With a shortage of officers and the soft-on-crime tactic coming from […]100percentfedup.com
Democrat response:
Crime: Chicago Mayor Lightfoot Says City 'Can't Arrest Our ...
https://pressfrom.info › news › crime ›
Chicago Mayor Lightfoot Says City 'Can't Arrest Our Way' Out of Surging Violence : 'Protecting every single resident': Chicago approves new ...
The one question IQ test?
"Do you still vote Democrat?"
Rampant crime, violence, homelessness, drug use, and corruption exists in the blue shitholes because the DemoKKKrats who run them WANT it that way. It will never get better as long as they are in charge.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
U.K Migrant crossings hit 10,000 so far in 2025, a 40% increase from last year.- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 1
-
-
No More Tariffs? Rand Paul allegedly has the votes to stop them.- Started by TemplarKormac
- Replies: 2
-
