No to stimulus 5. Paying people to not work and to bail out bad local governments and unions is wrong

[toobfreak]

What are you even after?

If you still have to ask that after FIVE cogent answers, then I have to relegate you to the category of Idiot.

 

[Dick Foster]

What Nancy Pelosi wants is a pure government giveaway to discourage people from working by paying them more money to not work than work. And the rest is a giveaway to unions and bad blue State governments and their huge pension fund liabilities that were never adequately funded. And then she wants other green and leftist objectives to tie it all up in a nice bow. I didn't see ANYTHING in her bill that I supported. There is no compromise with that. Far better to not do anything.

This is an unusual time since government forced businesses to shut down. So I'm open even as a libertarian to spending I would not normally support. But the bill would have to be payouts to get businesses running and hiring again. A payroll tax suspension would be great for workers and businesses. But those are non-starters for Nancy. At least 20 or so Republicans realize that a deal is not always a good thing. And this deal isn't worth making. Let's send them home for their August break.

"Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, said Wednesday that at least 20 Senate Republicans will not vote for a fresh coronavirus stimulus deal."

At least 20 Senate Republicans won't vote for coronavirus stimulus deal: congressman

Rep. Lance Gooden said Wednesday that at least 20 Republicans won't vote for a new stimulus agreement.

www.foxnews.com

Wouldn’t a payroll tax break hurt social security?

No. There is no social security trust fund. There is no money. So the idea that it's taking money from the fund is a ruse since it doesn't exist. Social security is a welfare program

Social Security is paid for by workers. Subsidies to corporations is a welfare program.

Allowing companies to buy back their own stocks, which used to be illegal, at the expense of laying off employees, after receiving tax breaks is a welfare program.

You're just babbling Marxist propaganda. Nothing you said makes sense

I don’t know what you scofflaws are going to do when every tax cut since Reagan goes away, and programs like Social security are expanded, and we adopt a national health care system.

Do you plan on starting your own country someplace else?

No but we may just take this one back. Even if some have to die. Are you ready and willing to die for it?

 

[toobfreak]

Shove it up your ass.

Your head is in my way.

You're being a dick

Not at all. Just clearly, repeatedly and succinctly pointed out that your badly worded title is misleading and confusing as to your intent and you are just too stubborn to admit it and like too many here, try to pass the buck onto the READER to read the OP's mind what they intended.

Like all threads, you have to read the OP

Especially the TITLE, which is supposed to:

according to the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, take it up with flacaltenn

 

[JoeB131]

I didn't "give" my employees anything, Comrade. I paid them market wages for working for me. Benefits are not freebies, they are part of your pay.

Again, everything you say here indicates you were probably a horrible person to work for at your little dung-hill companies employing three people who'd rather be somewhere else. No wonder you are horrified at the government paying people to stay home.

"Please come to work and risk getting sick so I can abuse you!!!"
"Um, no thanks."

But we're going to make it easy for you. Universal Health Care... then you won't have to compete with real employers who offer benefits.

I remember you never understood that. It's your bad attitude towards your employer and your job that got you fired

Naw, what got me fired was thinking that when I was working for benefits/paying co pays, I could actually USE those benefits when I got injured. Silly me.

 

[sealybobo]

What Nancy Pelosi wants is a pure government giveaway to discourage people from working by paying them more money to not work than work. And the rest is a giveaway to unions and bad blue State governments and their huge pension fund liabilities that were never adequately funded. And then she wants other green and leftist objectives to tie it all up in a nice bow. I didn't see ANYTHING in her bill that I supported. There is no compromise with that. Far better to not do anything.

This is an unusual time since government forced businesses to shut down. So I'm open even as a libertarian to spending I would not normally support. But the bill would have to be payouts to get businesses running and hiring again. A payroll tax suspension would be great for workers and businesses. But those are non-starters for Nancy. At least 20 or so Republicans realize that a deal is not always a good thing. And this deal isn't worth making. Let's send them home for their August break.

"Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, said Wednesday that at least 20 Senate Republicans will not vote for a fresh coronavirus stimulus deal."

At least 20 Senate Republicans won't vote for coronavirus stimulus deal: congressman

Rep. Lance Gooden said Wednesday that at least 20 Republicans won't vote for a new stimulus agreement.

www.foxnews.com

Wouldn’t a payroll tax break hurt social security?

No. There is no social security trust fund. There is no money. So the idea that it's taking money from the fund is a ruse since it doesn't exist. Social security is a welfare program

Bull. we all pay into it every month.

 

[sealybobo]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Try reading my OP again. I said this is NOT a normal time. Free markets did not fail, government shut them down. Government schools, I'm so sorry what happened to you. Don't you want better for your children than the shit education you got?

I’m doing alright. I have nothing to complain about.

But I agree schools have been teaching the same way for over 100 years and they could do much much better

 

[sealybobo]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

There's nobody starving in the streets, asswipe.

I know but if there were what would be your response? Let the free market decide.

 

[Oddball]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

There's nobody starving in the streets, asswipe.

I know but if there were what would be your response? Let the free market decide.

So you know that what you said is bullshit....Thanks for admitting that you're a hyperbole spewing fool.

 

[sealybobo]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Please show one person starving in the streets because of lack of compassion, funding, or programs by the American taxpayer. You can't so you won't

That’s because libertarians don’t run the country thank god.

 

[eddiew]

Giving the unemployed an extra $600 and bailing out states irresponsible pension funds are anti country and anti worker. If my state ran up an irresponsible debt, I don't want them to unfairly tax people in responsible states to bail me out. That's fucking bullshit. The people who overspent in debtor states are totally responsible for the problems they caused. Maybe this will finally make us look at the teachers unions and other government unions that are bankrupting almost every city and state in this country. No competition, no union.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't blue states PAY out more in taxes than they get from Gov't and red pay out less than they get??

Paying too much in taxes pisses people off. Most Blue states charge far more for taxes. Blue states have developed a cast system where the rich elitists totally dominate the workers. Biden, or any other Democrat, will dramatically raise taxes and destroy jobs. That's a fact. In the meantime, teachers who refuse to work will still get paid by the taxpayer for doing next to nothing. Teachers and other government unions suck. They shouldn't exist.

Raise taxes on billionaires ?? Boo fn hoo Where do you think the money is going to come from to make up the huge amounts we're spending? And btw avoid a depression down the line? You in favor of Trump giving another couple of trillion to billionaires??

 

[Dragonlady]

What Nancy Pelosi wants is a pure government giveaway to discourage people from working by paying them more money to not work than work. And the rest is a giveaway to unions and bad blue State governments and their huge pension fund liabilities that were never adequately funded. And then she wants other green and leftist objectives to tie it all up in a nice bow. I didn't see ANYTHING in her bill that I supported. There is no compromise with that. Far better to not do anything.

This is an unusual time since government forced businesses to shut down. So I'm open even as a libertarian to spending I would not normally support. But the bill would have to be payouts to get businesses running and hiring again. A payroll tax suspension would be great for workers and businesses. But those are non-starters for Nancy. At least 20 or so Republicans realize that a deal is not always a good thing. And this deal isn't worth making. Let's send them home for their August break.

"Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, said Wednesday that at least 20 Senate Republicans will not vote for a fresh coronavirus stimulus deal."

At least 20 Senate Republicans won't vote for coronavirus stimulus deal: congressman

Rep. Lance Gooden said Wednesday that at least 20 Republicans won't vote for a new stimulus agreement.

www.foxnews.com

What Nancy Pelosi wants is to help working Americans - the people who have the LEAST, who have been underpaid for decades and who are now in crisis. The obvious solution is to raise the pay of working Americans to a liveable wage. You want to sent these people back to work with no sick time, no protection, and no health insurance, and no ability to sue their employers should they get sick.

What jobs are these people supposed to go back to? 150,000 small businesses are closed - permanently. The hospitality industry is still closed, and people aren't going out.

Republicans - people who will vote for corporations and against their own interests every single time.

 

[kaz]

I didn't "give" my employees anything, Comrade. I paid them market wages for working for me. Benefits are not freebies, they are part of your pay.

Again, everything you say here indicates you were probably a horrible person to work for at your little dung-hill companies employing three people who'd rather be somewhere else. No wonder you are horrified at the government paying people to stay home.

"Please come to work and risk getting sick so I can abuse you!!!"
"Um, no thanks."

But we're going to make it easy for you. Universal Health Care... then you won't have to compete with real employers who offer benefits.

I remember you never understood that. It's your bad attitude towards your employer and your job that got you fired

Naw, what got me fired was thinking that when I was working for benefits/paying co pays, I could actually USE those benefits when I got injured. Silly me.

Yes, you did hate working for me. And everyone in the office hated working with you. When I finally fired you, they told me how much easier the job got without you around. I mean you didn't do nothing, you just did as little as possible. But you drained the life out of the people who worked with you.

I didn't even have to replace you

 

[kaz]

What Nancy Pelosi wants is a pure government giveaway to discourage people from working by paying them more money to not work than work. And the rest is a giveaway to unions and bad blue State governments and their huge pension fund liabilities that were never adequately funded. And then she wants other green and leftist objectives to tie it all up in a nice bow. I didn't see ANYTHING in her bill that I supported. There is no compromise with that. Far better to not do anything.

This is an unusual time since government forced businesses to shut down. So I'm open even as a libertarian to spending I would not normally support. But the bill would have to be payouts to get businesses running and hiring again. A payroll tax suspension would be great for workers and businesses. But those are non-starters for Nancy. At least 20 or so Republicans realize that a deal is not always a good thing. And this deal isn't worth making. Let's send them home for their August break.

"Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, said Wednesday that at least 20 Senate Republicans will not vote for a fresh coronavirus stimulus deal."

At least 20 Senate Republicans won't vote for coronavirus stimulus deal: congressman

Rep. Lance Gooden said Wednesday that at least 20 Republicans won't vote for a new stimulus agreement.

www.foxnews.com

What Nancy Pelosi wants is to help working Americans - the people who have the LEAST, who have been underpaid for decades and who are now in crisis. The obvious solution is to raise the pay of working Americans to a liveable wage. You want to sent these people back to work with no sick time, no protection, and no health insurance, and no ability to sue their employers should they get sick.

What jobs are these people supposed to go back to? 150,000 small businesses are closed - permanently. The hospitality industry is still closed, and people aren't going out.

Republicans - people who will vote for corporations and against their own interests every single time.

Exactly. Nancy is trying to leverage the Biden virus for her own Marxist agenda. Thanks for admitting that

 

[kaz]

What Nancy Pelosi wants is a pure government giveaway to discourage people from working by paying them more money to not work than work. And the rest is a giveaway to unions and bad blue State governments and their huge pension fund liabilities that were never adequately funded. And then she wants other green and leftist objectives to tie it all up in a nice bow. I didn't see ANYTHING in her bill that I supported. There is no compromise with that. Far better to not do anything.

This is an unusual time since government forced businesses to shut down. So I'm open even as a libertarian to spending I would not normally support. But the bill would have to be payouts to get businesses running and hiring again. A payroll tax suspension would be great for workers and businesses. But those are non-starters for Nancy. At least 20 or so Republicans realize that a deal is not always a good thing. And this deal isn't worth making. Let's send them home for their August break.

"Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, said Wednesday that at least 20 Senate Republicans will not vote for a fresh coronavirus stimulus deal."

At least 20 Senate Republicans won't vote for coronavirus stimulus deal: congressman

Rep. Lance Gooden said Wednesday that at least 20 Republicans won't vote for a new stimulus agreement.

www.foxnews.com

Wouldn’t a payroll tax break hurt social security?

No. There is no social security trust fund. There is no money. So the idea that it's taking money from the fund is a ruse since it doesn't exist. Social security is a welfare program

Bull. we all pay into it every month.

You pay for the military too. Why isn't that a trust fund?

Paying into it doesn't make it a trust fund. It actually has to save money. No money was ever saved, there is no trust fund, the money was spent as it came in like every other tax.

Not one dime of the money in your social security check will ever be from money that you "paid into" social security.

There is no difference between Social Security/Medicare and any other welfare program. 100% is paid by today's taxpayers

 

[kaz]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Try reading my OP again. I said this is NOT a normal time. Free markets did not fail, government shut them down. Government schools, I'm so sorry what happened to you. Don't you want better for your children than the shit education you got?

I’m doing alright. I have nothing to complain about.

But I agree schools have been teaching the same way for over 100 years and they could do much much better

And the problem is clearly not money. We have the worst schools in the West and the most expensive in the world. Something else is wrong. We need to figure out what and stop throwing money at it

 

[Dick Foster]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Try reading my OP again. I said this is NOT a normal time. Free markets did not fail, government shut them down. Government schools, I'm so sorry what happened to you. Don't you want better for your children than the shit education you got?

I’m doing alright. I have nothing to complain about.

But I agree schools have been teaching the same way for over 100 years and they could do much much better

No the schools have absolutely NOT been teaching the same way nor have they been teaching the same stuff. They used to teach useful subjects and they used to teach thier students to think but now they just teach them to conform and be dependent and useless whineing punks and drooling idiots.

 

[Camp]

Why is it so hard for so many trumpoholics to grasp the meaning of "Stimulus"? The main purpose is not to help people who need financial help with government financial assistance. The main purpose is to stimulate the economy by infusing cash into in. All the funds are quickly poured inro paying bills and stimulating the economy.

 

[sealybobo]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Try reading my OP again. I said this is NOT a normal time. Free markets did not fail, government shut them down. Government schools, I'm so sorry what happened to you. Don't you want better for your children than the shit education you got?

I’m doing alright. I have nothing to complain about.

But I agree schools have been teaching the same way for over 100 years and they could do much much better

And the problem is clearly not money. We have the worst schools in the West and the most expensive in the world. Something else is wrong. We need to figure out what and stop throwing money at it

I’m thinking the pandemic is going to open our eyes that public schools, brick and mortar, using all that gas busing kids to and from school and the incredible amount of time is wasted inside classrooms.

Think about back when you were in school. Each class you kept looking at the clock waiting for it to end. Or you’d want to fall asleep. Or you’d write notes. So fucking unproductive.

Take science or history for example. I could go to YouTube and look up any subject and find an interesting video on the subject. So I watch and learn because it’s interesting. Was your high school history of science class interesting? Mine weren’t.

 

[Rocko]

Obviously the devil is in the details, and I have no problem with help for people that need it, but there’s plenty of people that are making more money staying at home. One would think the government would be capable of ensuring that doesn’t happen, but they’re not.

 

[sealybobo]

I bet it happens. And while you are blaming dems, repubs control the presidency, senate, and Supreme Court. It wouldn’t happen if repubs didn’t want it to.

The OP says he is a Libertarian. The people who like to see people starve.

The only people that think that are people that like the govt to wipe their ass for them.

People are starving in the streets what do you do? Let the free market decide. Isn’t that what libertarian say?

Try reading my OP again. I said this is NOT a normal time. Free markets did not fail, government shut them down. Government schools, I'm so sorry what happened to you. Don't you want better for your children than the shit education you got?

I’m doing alright. I have nothing to complain about.

But I agree schools have been teaching the same way for over 100 years and they could do much much better

No the schools have absolutely NOT been teaching the same way nor have they been teaching the same stuff. They used to teach useful subjects and they used to teach thier students to think but now they just teach them to conform and be dependent and useless whineing punks and drooling idiots.

College for example is the exact same format as it was in 1920. 3 credit hours per class, you need 120 credit hours. Social sciences, electives, humanities, etc. Half way through you get a wothless associates degree then you pick a major.

When did they do better? What years?