OK, I'll admit it, our friends on the left are correct; there IS a catch to the Trump tax cuts

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'd say it would be none of our business if what they were paying were FAIR.

ah yes, our friends on the left; ever the arbitrators of what is "fair"

why is it always "fair" to them to take more of my money and give it to those that don't want to work

"A liberal believes if you make money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell

You're the one who believes the government, who printed the money in the first place, isn't entitled to control it.

That's exactly what I believe. Government may print the money, but they didn't create the wealth it represents.

Sorry......but you didn't build that.

 

[francoHFW]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

You mean a rich person's companies don't use the roads airports and ports, the police and the Army don't protect their assets? Another total dupe...

 

[Thinker101]

One of the dumbest responses to date. Thanks for proving you are nothing but a pawn for the hater dupes.

Any arguments at all, brainwashed functional moron? Poor America

I was waiting for you to make an argument, you claim it is ruining America, even though I will get the largest tax break in my lifetime, even though I am middle class. The left didn’t give a damn about the deficit for 8 years, I have wanted higher taxes for all and a huge reduction of spending for decades, yet you dupes think we need to increase spending and increase taxes, only on certain people, usually those you are envious of.

And the ones who have been getting all the new Wealth for 35 years... We need consumer demand in this country and not gigantic tax breaks for the rich who are so bloated it's ridiculous. And the biggest tax break you got ever was the payroll tax breaks Obama gave you and which the GOP would not extend.

Payroll tax breaks from Obama?! LOL...dumbass.

What is your question?

Yup, I figured you'd have a dumbass response.

What this country is dying for is a healthy middle class and working class, so we have demand for product. That would truly float all boats, as opposed to your Pander to the rich mess, super doopity dupe LOL

With a one month paid vacation and parental leave how in the heck do you plan on being productive. That may float your boat but no one else's.

Every other modern country has all that stuff, super dupes.

Great, move your fat ass there.


.

God you ignorant right-wingers are stupid assholes. I'm not going anywhere and if I find out where you are going to come down there and give you a new face. What the f*** is wrong with you people? Since you're such a dumbass, I'll tell you you can't move to another country unless you don't need to work I have a lot of money. See, what a smart people would like is to have a fair country instead of giving it all away to the rich you stupid a******LOL merry Christmas.

Read your own fricken post.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

Yes, I mean like people like Soros especially.

Ray, I don't live in your partisan fantasy world. I didn't say whatever the fuck it is you think I'm saying. Stop reading into what I didn't say.

Yes, I mean like the NRA.

I'd say the wealthy benefit a lot more than the poor from government.

No, you clearly don't understand that question. Anything that doesn't fit your agenda and suddenly you don't understand. Maybe that is the problem Ray, you just don't get a lot of things that are quite simple, because your head is so far up the partisan's ass, that you can't see simple things. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you'd see.

I've asked you similar questions in the past, and you always manage to ignore them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

collective donations corrupt the system as much as any from individuals

many times, union leaders actually donate to and advocate for things that are not in the interest of their members

that union vote is all MAGA now & will remain so for the foreseeable future; especially with these tax cuts

the average union worker will benefit to the tune of roughly $2,000 dollars (more if they have kids)

Oh, they can do.

However a Congressmen who is looking after more than just one person is less corrupt.

HOWEVER, this is why I support Proportional Representation. The Unions can have their own party which they support. Other people can have their own party they support, and people can decide if they agree with this or not.

In the US there are two sides for thousands of different viewpoints.

So why don't they? There is no law that unions (or anybody else for that matter) cannot start their own political party.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

You mean a rich person's companies don't use the roads airports and ports, the police and the Army don't protect their assets? Another total dupe...

Or go around warring on their behalf?

 

[francoHFW]

ah yes, our friends on the left; ever the arbitrators of what is "fair"

why is it always "fair" to them to take more of my money and give it to those that don't want to work

"A liberal believes if you make money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell

Like all liberals are the same. Bullshiters quoting bulshitters.

I would call that a pretty accurate statement. Liberals believe in taking money from those that earn it and giving it to those that don't, or are you going to argue that point too?

Yes, I know you would. But then Ray, I've seen a lot of your posts and seen the utter blatant blinkered partisanship from you, so it doesn't surprise me at all.

"A liberal", what is a liberal Ray? You couldn't define "a liberal" if you tried and be accurate because there is nothing that defines a liberal.

A liberal is a leftist. A liberal is a person of wealth envy. A liberal is a believer in Cradle-to-Grave government where personal responsibility is at the bare minimum and government makes all their decisions for them and everybody else. A liberal is a Socialist lite. A liberal is one who believes we live in a bubble, and within our bubble, there is only a finite amount of money, therefore, the reason some have too little is because others have too much.

A liberal is one who sides with evil over good at every turn. A liberal is one that desires for our country to look like a giant freak show where guys hold hand with guys in public, guys wearing dresses use female bathroom and shower facilities, and animals having more rights than humans.

Yes I am a partisan. I am anti-liberal. I am pro-conservative and yell it from the highest mountain tops with pride.

And a Duke believes all that crap they get from a propaganda machine paid for exclusively bye greedy idiot GOP billionaires and their dupes. YouTube's are always telling us we're sucking Obama's dick or other obscenities and believe that liberals just care about their welfare checks. You are absolutely a disgrace. Poor America. Breaking... GOP and Democratic whites are exactly the same economically. Minorities know where the racists and obscene ignoramuses are, in the GOP.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

collective donations corrupt the system as much as any from individuals

many times, union leaders actually donate to and advocate for things that are not in the interest of their members

that union vote is all MAGA now & will remain so for the foreseeable future; especially with these tax cuts

the average union worker will benefit to the tune of roughly $2,000 dollars (more if they have kids)

Oh, they can do.

However a Congressmen who is looking after more than just one person is less corrupt.

HOWEVER, this is why I support Proportional Representation. The Unions can have their own party which they support. Other people can have their own party they support, and people can decide if they agree with this or not.

In the US there are two sides for thousands of different viewpoints.

So why don't they? There is no law that unions (or anybody else for that matter) cannot start their own political party.

Because Ray, if you haven't noticed, the US has a FPTP political system which benefits the main two parties.

Remember when you said "freedom is choice" and then later I said Proportional Representation is choice and you said something like 'fuck that shit, I like the system where the Republicans get an easy ride'?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

Yes, I mean like people like Soros especially.

Ray, I don't live in your partisan fantasy world. I didn't say whatever the fuck it is you think I'm saying. Stop reading into what I didn't say.

Yes, I mean like the NRA.

I'd say the wealthy benefit a lot more than the poor from government.

No, you clearly don't understand that question. Anything that doesn't fit your agenda and suddenly you don't understand. Maybe that is the problem Ray, you just don't get a lot of things that are quite simple, because your head is so far up the partisan's ass, that you can't see simple things. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you'd see.

I've asked you similar questions in the past, and you always manage to ignore them.

I've answered your questions honestly and the way I really feel. YOU are the one that can't accept that people on the right believe in what they preach. As far as you're concerned, if you're not a moderate, you have your head up other people's asses.

How do the wealthy benefit more from government than the poor? Do wealthy people need social programs? Do wealthy people need to be fed or housed by the government? Do wealthy people need police or other law enforcement to protect them? Do wealthy people need government for their retirement or healthcare when they get older?

 

[francoHFW]

I'd say it would be none of our business if what they were paying were FAIR.

ah yes, our friends on the left; ever the arbitrators of what is "fair"

why is it always "fair" to them to take more of my money and give it to those that don't want to work

"A liberal believes if you make money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell

You're the one who believes the government, who printed the money in the first place, isn't entitled to control it.

That's exactly what I believe. Government may print the money, but they didn't create the wealth it represents.

Sorry......but you didn't build that.

Democrats built the Great infrastructure we had and you Republicans have been failing to invest in it for 35 years now. Keep watching us go to hell. I know a big tax cut for the rich and some scraps for us....

 

[jasonnfree]

ah yes, our friends on the left; ever the arbitrators of what is "fair"

why is it always "fair" to them to take more of my money and give it to those that don't want to work

"A liberal believes if you make money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell

Like all liberals are the same. Bullshiters quoting bulshitters.

I would call that a pretty accurate statement. Liberals believe in taking money from those that earn it and giving it to those that don't, or are you going to argue that point too?

Yes, I know you would. But then Ray, I've seen a lot of your posts and seen the utter blatant blinkered partisanship from you, so it doesn't surprise me at all.

"A liberal", what is a liberal Ray? You couldn't define "a liberal" if you tried and be accurate because there is nothing that defines a liberal.

A liberal is a leftist. A liberal is a person of wealth envy. A liberal is a believer in Cradle-to-Grave government where personal responsibility is at the bare minimum and government makes all their decisions for them and everybody else. A liberal is a Socialist lite. A liberal is one who believes we live in a bubble, and within our bubble, there is only a finite amount of money, therefore, the reason some have too little is because others have too much.

A liberal is one who sides with evil over good at every turn. A liberal is one that desires for our country to look like a giant freak show where guys hold hand with guys in public, guys wearing dresses use female bathroom and shower facilities, and animals having more rights than humans.

Yes I am a partisan. I am anti-liberal. I am pro-conservative and yell it from the highest mountain tops with pride.

Nothing wrong with being in the center. Sometimes conservative, sometimes liberal. I'd hate to see the country swing too far to the left or right.

 

[Papageorgio]

One of the dumbest responses to date. Thanks for proving you are nothing but a pawn for the hater dupes.

Any arguments at all, brainwashed functional moron? Poor America

I was waiting for you to make an argument, you claim it is ruining America, even though I will get the largest tax break in my lifetime, even though I am middle class. The left didn’t give a damn about the deficit for 8 years, I have wanted higher taxes for all and a huge reduction of spending for decades, yet you dupes think we need to increase spending and increase taxes, only on certain people, usually those you are envious of.

And the ones who have been getting all the new Wealth for 35 years... We need consumer demand in this country and not gigantic tax breaks for the rich who are so bloated it's ridiculous. And the biggest tax break you got ever was the payroll tax breaks Obama gave you and which the GOP would not extend.

That is right in 2010 he extended the Bush tax cuts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The middle of a giant corrupt GOP economic meltdown is hardly the time to raise taxes on anyone duh...

So dummy, Obama didn’t do a damn thing, it was Bush and his tax cuts, you are a big dupe. Trying to give Obama credit, desperate even for you!

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

Yes, I mean like people like Soros especially.

Ray, I don't live in your partisan fantasy world. I didn't say whatever the fuck it is you think I'm saying. Stop reading into what I didn't say.

Yes, I mean like the NRA.

I'd say the wealthy benefit a lot more than the poor from government.

No, you clearly don't understand that question. Anything that doesn't fit your agenda and suddenly you don't understand. Maybe that is the problem Ray, you just don't get a lot of things that are quite simple, because your head is so far up the partisan's ass, that you can't see simple things. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you'd see.

I've asked you similar questions in the past, and you always manage to ignore them.

I've answered your questions honestly and the way I really feel. YOU are the one that can't accept that people on the right believe in what they preach. As far as you're concerned, if you're not a moderate, you have your head up other people's asses.

How do the wealthy benefit more from government than the poor? Do wealthy people need social programs? Do wealthy people need to be fed or housed by the government? Do wealthy people need police or other law enforcement to protect them? Do wealthy people need government for their retirement or healthcare when they get older?

Yes, I know. I'm not criticizing you for answering the questions as you feel. I'm criticizing you because the way you "feel" is the way you're told to feel. I would prefer you open your eyes, look at the facts, see things for what they are, then the way you feel might actually make sense.

No, you're right. I can't accept what people on the right say.

I can't accept that you say "choice is freedom" and then you reject choice. It doesn't make sense to me, but somehow it makes sense to you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

collective donations corrupt the system as much as any from individuals

many times, union leaders actually donate to and advocate for things that are not in the interest of their members

that union vote is all MAGA now & will remain so for the foreseeable future; especially with these tax cuts

the average union worker will benefit to the tune of roughly $2,000 dollars (more if they have kids)

Oh, they can do.

However a Congressmen who is looking after more than just one person is less corrupt.

HOWEVER, this is why I support Proportional Representation. The Unions can have their own party which they support. Other people can have their own party they support, and people can decide if they agree with this or not.

In the US there are two sides for thousands of different viewpoints.

So why don't they? There is no law that unions (or anybody else for that matter) cannot start their own political party.

Because Ray, if you haven't noticed, the US has a FPTP political system which benefits the main two parties.

Remember when you said "freedom is choice" and then later I said Proportional Representation is choice and you said something like 'fuck that shit, I like the system where the Republicans get an easy ride'?

I don't ever recall that conversation, although I did say choice is freedom.

Nobody is stopping anyone from starting their own party. The Green party is alive and well, the Libertarian party is alive and well, the problem is that voters (by choice) won't vote for those people. In fact one of the many excuses why Hillary lost was because a small fraction of votes went to the Green Party.

 

[bgrouse]

I'd say it would be none of our business if what they were paying were FAIR.

ah yes, our friends on the left; ever the arbitrators of what is "fair"

why is it always "fair" to them to take more of my money and give it to those that don't want to work

"A liberal believes if you make money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell

You're the one who believes the government, who printed the money in the first place, isn't entitled to control it.

That's exactly what I believe. Government may print the money, but they didn't create the wealth it represents.

Sorry......but you didn't build that.

But the lazy rich kid who inherited the money did?

 

[francoHFW]

Any arguments at all, brainwashed functional moron? Poor America

I was waiting for you to make an argument, you claim it is ruining America, even though I will get the largest tax break in my lifetime, even though I am middle class. The left didn’t give a damn about the deficit for 8 years, I have wanted higher taxes for all and a huge reduction of spending for decades, yet you dupes think we need to increase spending and increase taxes, only on certain people, usually those you are envious of.

And the ones who have been getting all the new Wealth for 35 years... We need consumer demand in this country and not gigantic tax breaks for the rich who are so bloated it's ridiculous. And the biggest tax break you got ever was the payroll tax breaks Obama gave you and which the GOP would not extend.

That is right in 2010 he extended the Bush tax cuts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The middle of a giant corrupt GOP economic meltdown is hardly the time to raise taxes on anyone duh...

So dummy, Obama didn’t do a damn thing, it was Bush and his tax cuts, you are a big dupe. Trying to give Obama credit, desperate even for you!

Obama gave a tax cut to the non-rich only, something that Republicans never do. they just give scraps while giving the rich huge tax cuts. Totally bought off scumbags and then you dupes. And they block good vacations good roads paid parental leave cheap daycare minimum wage living wage. You think nothing of that when voting but you know all the phony scandals on Hillary LOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

Yes, I mean like people like Soros especially.

Ray, I don't live in your partisan fantasy world. I didn't say whatever the fuck it is you think I'm saying. Stop reading into what I didn't say.

Yes, I mean like the NRA.

I'd say the wealthy benefit a lot more than the poor from government.

No, you clearly don't understand that question. Anything that doesn't fit your agenda and suddenly you don't understand. Maybe that is the problem Ray, you just don't get a lot of things that are quite simple, because your head is so far up the partisan's ass, that you can't see simple things. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you'd see.

I've asked you similar questions in the past, and you always manage to ignore them.

I've answered your questions honestly and the way I really feel. YOU are the one that can't accept that people on the right believe in what they preach. As far as you're concerned, if you're not a moderate, you have your head up other people's asses.

How do the wealthy benefit more from government than the poor? Do wealthy people need social programs? Do wealthy people need to be fed or housed by the government? Do wealthy people need police or other law enforcement to protect them? Do wealthy people need government for their retirement or healthcare when they get older?

Yes, I know. I'm not criticizing you for answering the questions as you feel. I'm criticizing you because the way you "feel" is the way you're told to feel. I would prefer you open your eyes, look at the facts, see things for what they are, then the way you feel might actually make sense.

No, you're right. I can't accept what people on the right say.

I can't accept that you say "choice is freedom" and then you reject choice. It doesn't make sense to me, but somehow it makes sense to you.

When did I ever reject choice?

Years ago when I started to get interested in politics, I was at my sisters house for a family doing when I got into a heated political discussion with my father. As my then brother-in-law was bringing dinner to the table, he laughed and said to me "You must be a huge Rush Limbaugh fan." Rush Limbaugh? WTF is that I thought to myself.

Anyway, several months went by and something happened in politics that really pissed me off; I can't remember now what it was. But thinking of my brother-in-laws comment, I found this Rush Limbaugh guy and listen to his show.

I was amazed. It was like I was hearing a guy reading my mind and broadcasting it over the air. Everything he said is what I have felt for years, and I've been a listener ever since.

Point is, we on the right are not brainwashed by anybody. Our beliefs are genuine and nobody tells us how to think; we've always thought this way.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

collective donations corrupt the system as much as any from individuals

many times, union leaders actually donate to and advocate for things that are not in the interest of their members

that union vote is all MAGA now & will remain so for the foreseeable future; especially with these tax cuts

the average union worker will benefit to the tune of roughly $2,000 dollars (more if they have kids)

Oh, they can do.

However a Congressmen who is looking after more than just one person is less corrupt.

HOWEVER, this is why I support Proportional Representation. The Unions can have their own party which they support. Other people can have their own party they support, and people can decide if they agree with this or not.

In the US there are two sides for thousands of different viewpoints.

So why don't they? There is no law that unions (or anybody else for that matter) cannot start their own political party.

Because Ray, if you haven't noticed, the US has a FPTP political system which benefits the main two parties.

Remember when you said "freedom is choice" and then later I said Proportional Representation is choice and you said something like 'fuck that shit, I like the system where the Republicans get an easy ride'?

I don't ever recall that conversation, although I did say choice is freedom.

Nobody is stopping anyone from starting their own party. The Green party is alive and well, the Libertarian party is alive and well, the problem is that voters (by choice) won't vote for those people. In fact one of the many excuses why Hillary lost was because a small fraction of votes went to the Green Party.

Oh, wow, now you don't recall. How the hell you don't recall it when I've reminded you of it many times, it way, way, way beyond me Ray.

Nothing is stopping people making their own parties EXCEPT THE POLITICAL SYSTEM WHICH RESTRICTS HOW PEOPLE VOTE. You don't understand this basic point.

FPTP is negative voting. The FDP in Germany would have had ZERO seats in the last election. Instead they got 80, or 10.7% of the votes.

Now, when 10.7% of the people CHOOSE one particular party and that party gets 0% of the seats, do you think this encourages people to vote for that party, or for people to set up their own parties? Seriously?

The Green Party is alive and well.

In Germany they got 66 seats in the Bundestag. In the US what do they have?

ZERO seats in the Senate
ZERO seats in the House
ZERO seats in the Supreme Court
ZERO presidents to their name
ZERO governorships
ZERO seats in state senates
TWO seats in state houses
ONE mayor
ONE deputy major


They have two people, in the WHOLE of the USA. But they probably have more support than this. Were the vote to be PR they'd probably have people in the Senate, people in the House and for sure more people in state government.

But no, the system prevents this. The system says to people "fuck off, the Reps and Dems control this shit" and you support this.

Democrats don't believe in choice.....they never have. Choice means freedom. The more choices one has, the more freedom one has. Democrats hate it.

 

[francoHFW]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

collective donations corrupt the system as much as any from individuals

many times, union leaders actually donate to and advocate for things that are not in the interest of their members

that union vote is all MAGA now & will remain so for the foreseeable future; especially with these tax cuts

the average union worker will benefit to the tune of roughly $2,000 dollars (more if they have kids)

Oh, they can do.

However a Congressmen who is looking after more than just one person is less corrupt.

HOWEVER, this is why I support Proportional Representation. The Unions can have their own party which they support. Other people can have their own party they support, and people can decide if they agree with this or not.

In the US there are two sides for thousands of different viewpoints.

So why don't they? There is no law that unions (or anybody else for that matter) cannot start their own political party.

Because Ray, if you haven't noticed, the US has a FPTP political system which benefits the main two parties.

Remember when you said "freedom is choice" and then later I said Proportional Representation is choice and you said something like 'fuck that shit, I like the system where the Republicans get an easy ride'?

I don't ever recall that conversation, although I did say choice is freedom.

Nobody is stopping anyone from starting their own party. The Green party is alive and well, the Libertarian party is alive and well, the problem is that voters (by choice) won't vote for those people. In fact one of the many excuses why Hillary lost was because a small fraction of votes went to the Green Party.

definitely the reason
Gore lost Florida

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can honestly say that only the wealthy have enough money to throw at politicians for politicians to do their bidding.

Oh, you mean like George Soros, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, Warren Buffett?

So how are these people buying less political influence than those that contribute to the Republican party?

Unions give money, but they give the money of many. People getting together in groups. This isn't about individuals.

Oh, you mean like the NRA?

Fair isn't a figure, it's not a percentage. It's a "you benefit from the govt, therefore you need to pay for what you benefit from it".

Who benefits more from government, a rich person or a poor person? Why should a person who benefits the least from government have to pay more than the person who benefits the most?

If you have a multinational and they pay 10% of tax, and a competing business which pays 30% of tax, but the multinational pays $500 million and the small business pays $10,000, which of those figures makes it unfair?

I don't even understand the question, however multinational companies pay corporate taxes on money they made from their US operations. If they make money elsewhere, why should they pay taxes there and here?

Yes, I mean like people like Soros especially.

Ray, I don't live in your partisan fantasy world. I didn't say whatever the fuck it is you think I'm saying. Stop reading into what I didn't say.

Yes, I mean like the NRA.

I'd say the wealthy benefit a lot more than the poor from government.

No, you clearly don't understand that question. Anything that doesn't fit your agenda and suddenly you don't understand. Maybe that is the problem Ray, you just don't get a lot of things that are quite simple, because your head is so far up the partisan's ass, that you can't see simple things. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you'd see.

I've asked you similar questions in the past, and you always manage to ignore them.

I've answered your questions honestly and the way I really feel. YOU are the one that can't accept that people on the right believe in what they preach. As far as you're concerned, if you're not a moderate, you have your head up other people's asses.

How do the wealthy benefit more from government than the poor? Do wealthy people need social programs? Do wealthy people need to be fed or housed by the government? Do wealthy people need police or other law enforcement to protect them? Do wealthy people need government for their retirement or healthcare when they get older?

Yes, I know. I'm not criticizing you for answering the questions as you feel. I'm criticizing you because the way you "feel" is the way you're told to feel. I would prefer you open your eyes, look at the facts, see things for what they are, then the way you feel might actually make sense.

No, you're right. I can't accept what people on the right say.

I can't accept that you say "choice is freedom" and then you reject choice. It doesn't make sense to me, but somehow it makes sense to you.

When did I ever reject choice?

Years ago when I started to get interested in politics, I was at my sisters house for a family doing when I got into a heated political discussion with my father. As my then brother-in-law was bringing dinner to the table, he laughed and said to me "You must be a huge Rush Limbaugh fan." Rush Limbaugh? WTF is that I thought to myself.

Anyway, several months went by and something happened in politics that really pissed me off; I can't remember now what it was. But thinking of my brother-in-laws comment, I found this Rush Limbaugh guy and listen to his show.

I was amazed. It was like I was hearing a guy reading my mind and broadcasting it over the air. Everything he said is what I have felt for years, and I've been a listener ever since.

Point is, we on the right are not brainwashed by anybody. Our beliefs are genuine and nobody tells us how to think; we've always though this way.

You reject choice when you decide that FPTP is the system of your choice.