Remember how Conservatives complain bitterly about the 47%...

[rightwinger]

So Trump was setting it all up , collaborate with the Russian's, destroyed Hillary.. just to get a tax break

The issue is that Trump is acting in his own best interests rather than the nations. How he got elected is irrelevant

It doesn't appear that way... your hatred for one of your own is noted..

Now you are just babbling incoherently

Trying to diffuse it are we?

No, seriously

Are you on meds or something?




.

 

[Seawytch]

...who pay no income taxes?

Trump's tax plan would dramatically increase that number. Now you support that?

They don't care as long as Trump is one of the 47%

For the millionth time you really think Trump is doing it for the money?

He is profiting from this "venture"...likely more than we know since the whiny little ***** won't release his taxes. #TrumpRussia

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

How do income tax cuts help the poor?

As far as the poor getting government assistance helping the economy "in consumerism" where does the money come from to provide that "government assistance"? Isn't it the case that it first has to come out of some other consumers pocket, then be run through a bureaucracy (which takes it cut off the top) at which point the bulk of it is spent on basic necessities (food, housing, clothing) because government assistance doesn't provide enough to spend on higher end consumer items (or even mid level consumer items).
So as far as consumer stimulus effects of "government assistance" it's focused on a narrow section of the economy at the expense of the broad economy.

Are you aware that government spends around 13 cents of every subsidy dollar on people that are actually at or below the poverty line (i.e. the poor) the rest goes to subsidizing people that are NOT poor, doesn't make a real strong case for the effectiveness of "government assistance" for the poor now does it?

Having more consumers makes more sense, than having the rich as bigger consumers.

The rich are more likely to hoard money, and invest in housing, didn't that already cause a recession from the housing bubble?

 

[bodecea]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

 

[bodecea]

...who pay no income taxes?

Trump's tax plan would dramatically increase that number. Now you support that?

No , i don't remember the Conservatives complain bitterly about the 47%, ]

That would be attributable either to your being uninformed, or dishonest.

I just gave you link proving my honesty and how dishonest you are, and also how much of a goose stepping, kool aid drinking, low information, mind numbed useful liberal idiot that you are.

View attachment 123530

Name calling is the last resort for those with no solid argument.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

 

[Missouri_Mike]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

So how much would your parents have been fined?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

So how much would your parents have been fined?

My parents have over 1 million in assets, and make about $200,000 a year.
No, they're not criminal, and both have college degrees.

So, they'd probably be on the tax refund side for having kids.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

So how much would your parents have been fined?

My parents have over 1 million in assets, and make about $200,000 a year.
No, they're not criminal, and both have college degrees.

So, we'd probably be on the tax refund for having kids side.

Just goes to show even the rich aren't immune from having dumb kids. Money can't buy everything,

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

So how much would your parents have been fined?

My parents have over 1 million in assets, and make about $200,000 a year.
No, they're not criminal, and both have college degrees.

So, we'd probably be on the tax refund for having kids side.

Just goes to show even the rich aren't immune from having dumb kids. Money can't buy everything,

Dumb for supporting eugenics?

Like Nikola Tesla, William Shockley, and Francis Galton, among others?

Why would smart people want to have our society become more dumb?

Show me a single study that shows that there's no genetic heritability in intelligence, or criminality?
They simply don't exist.

If anything you represent the dumbing down of society, a sort of nitpicking of Nazis, to react to them with idiocy, even though Capitalists, and Communists killed far more.

 

[rightwinger]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If you tax the bottom half more, there will be less consumerism back into the economy...

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Studies show that intelligence, and criminality are both genetic, and environment.

But, let's pretend it really was all environment, even though such a view has no supporting evidence.

The fact would remain, by Liberal logic, that the poor would continue to breed idiocy, and criminality into our society, regardless.

Because they continue to not just have kids, but too many kids.

So, how is this beneficial for society, exactly?

 

[rightwinger]

If you reduced the ******* size of the already over bloated US government, then you wouldn't have to tax anyone any more and probable give back more to the people. But typical of liberals(Very stupid I might add) they must have Uncle Sugar there to give them all their wants and desires, just enough to survive, but punish the rest of US who have used our God given gifts to succeed in life.

Liberalism = Victim = someone took my stuff and the government has to take it back and give it to me for I am too stupid to know better.
Conservatism = Self Reliance = Took it upon themselves to develop skills and knowledge to make it in the world.

See video below for typical liberal.

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

Since the dawn of mankind, the poor have realized they may not have material wealth....but at least they can still ****
Why would you take that away?

 

[NightFox]

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

How do income tax cuts help the poor?

As far as the poor getting government assistance helping the economy "in consumerism" where does the money come from to provide that "government assistance"? Isn't it the case that it first has to come out of some other consumers pocket, then be run through a bureaucracy (which takes it cut off the top) at which point the bulk of it is spent on basic necessities (food, housing, clothing) because government assistance doesn't provide enough to spend on higher end consumer items (or even mid level consumer items).
So as far as consumer stimulus effects of "government assistance" it's focused on a narrow section of the economy at the expense of the broad economy.

Are you aware that government spends around 13 cents of every subsidy dollar on people that are actually at or below the poverty line (i.e. the poor) the rest goes to subsidizing people that are NOT poor, doesn't make a real strong case for the effectiveness of "government assistance" for the poor now does it?

Having more consumers makes more sense, than having the rich as bigger consumers.

You didn't answer my questions.

How do tax cuts help the poor?

Isn't it true that the stimulus effect of "government assistance" is offset by the fact that you're taking money from other consumers, paying bureaucrats on the pass-thru and then focusing the remainder on lower end goods and services at the expense of the ENTIRE REST OF THE ECONOMY?

The rich are more likely to hoard money, and invest in housing, didn't that already cause a recession from the housing bubble?

LOL, "the rich" are more likely to INVEST money (newsflash: nobody gets or stays rich by "hoarding money" since it's a depreciating asset) which leads to higher productivity and business expansion which in turn leads to higher wages and more jobs and no it wasn't "the rich" that caused the 2008 market collapse, it was a combination of idiotic monetary policy coupled with excessive leveraging and shortsightedness by the Investment Banks and poor decisions by home buyers and lenders.

"It is ludicrous to believe that asset bubbles can only be recognized in hindsight" -- Michael Burry

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

No one chose to be bought into this World, it seems ridiculous to not take care of our own people.

However, I do have a problem with the poor, criminals, and idiots having kids, and not just kids, but many kids.

The poor, criminals, and idiots should be fined for having Kids, that should deter bringing mistakes into this World.

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

Since the dawn of mankind, the poor have realized they may not have material wealth....but at least they can still ****
Why would you take that away?

A lot of the poor can afford cell phones nowadays, but somehow can't afford condoms, really?

Besides, they seem to be creating hardship, as they create kids who will lack the resources of their counterparts, how is this good?

 

[rightwinger]

Eugenics.

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

Since the dawn of mankind, the poor have realized they may not have material wealth....but at least they can still ****
Why would you take that away?

A lot of the poor can afford cell phones nowadays, but somehow can't afford condoms, really?

Besides, they seem to be creating hardship, as they create kids who will lack the resources of their counterparts, how is this good?

So you oppose defunding planned parenthood?
Sex education?

You are not a very good conservative

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Helping the poor through tax cuts, and government assistance not only helps them to survive, but it helps them spend back into the economy in consumerism.

How do income tax cuts help the poor?

As far as the poor getting government assistance helping the economy "in consumerism" where does the money come from to provide that "government assistance"? Isn't it the case that it first has to come out of some other consumers pocket, then be run through a bureaucracy (which takes it cut off the top) at which point the bulk of it is spent on basic necessities (food, housing, clothing) because government assistance doesn't provide enough to spend on higher end consumer items (or even mid level consumer items).
So as far as consumer stimulus effects of "government assistance" it's focused on a narrow section of the economy at the expense of the broad economy.

Are you aware that government spends around 13 cents of every subsidy dollar on people that are actually at or below the poverty line (i.e. the poor) the rest goes to subsidizing people that are NOT poor, doesn't make a real strong case for the effectiveness of "government assistance" for the poor now does it?

Having more consumers makes more sense, than having the rich as bigger consumers.

You didn't answer my questions.

How do tax cuts help the poor?

Isn't it true that the stimulus effect of "government assistance" is offset by the fact that you're taking money from other consumers, paying bureaucrats on the pass-thru and then focusing the remainder on lower end goods and services at the expense of the ENTIRE REST OF THE ECONOMY?

The rich are more likely to hoard money, and invest in housing, didn't that already cause a recession from the housing bubble?

LOL, "the rich" are more likely to INVEST money (newsflash: nobody gets or stays rich by "hoarding money" since it's a depreciating asset) which leads to higher productivity and business expansion which in turn leads to higher wages and more jobs and no it wasn't "the rich" that caused the 2008 market collapse, it was a combination of idiotic monetary policy coupled with excessive leveraging and shortsightedness by the Investment Banks and poor decisions by home buyers and lenders.

"It is ludicrous to believe that asset bubbles can only be recognized in hindsight" -- Michael Burry

If you cut down government assistance programs, there would be far less consumerism.

Just look at poor people buying cell phones, and other items, as opposed to the rich who just buy a certain extent, while largely hoarding their money into investments.

But, investments would be useless without consumerism.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I can't blame the poor, idiots, and criminals for being born, but I can blame them for burdening the system by having kids, and passing on their potentially deleterious genes.

Here's a paper supporting that by the stupid having more kids, that yes we'll see a decline in intelligence, which is only being offset by increases in education.

If you’re worried that stupid people have more kids, don’t be (yet)

Here's a paper supporting that criminals are more likely to have criminals as kids.

Parents can pass criminality on to children

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

Since the dawn of mankind, the poor have realized they may not have material wealth....but at least they can still ****
Why would you take that away?

A lot of the poor can afford cell phones nowadays, but somehow can't afford condoms, really?

Besides, they seem to be creating hardship, as they create kids who will lack the resources of their counterparts, how is this good?

So you oppose defunding planned parenthood?
Sex education?

You are not a very good conservative

I'm more of a Fascist, rather than a Conservative.

I'm certainly no Christian Conservative, I'm Agnostic.

I could care less if the government hands out condoms to the poor masses.

 

[rightwinger]

So what are you telling the poor? You can't have a life?
You may be struggling to earn enough to support a family. You are unable to afford the basic standard of living. You are expected to toil through life without a spouse, without children

Those are luxuries for the rich

The poor shouldn't be having kids in the first place, they should be aware that they can't afford kids, and that's a burden to both their kids, and to society.

It's a sort of senseless stupidity.

Since the dawn of mankind, the poor have realized they may not have material wealth....but at least they can still ****
Why would you take that away?

A lot of the poor can afford cell phones nowadays, but somehow can't afford condoms, really?

Besides, they seem to be creating hardship, as they create kids who will lack the resources of their counterparts, how is this good?

So you oppose defunding planned parenthood?
Sex education?

You are not a very good conservative

I'm more of a Fascist, rather than a Conservative.

I'm certainly no Christian Conservative, I'm Agnostic.

I could care less if the government hands out condoms to the poor masses.

I was just teasing you

Doesn't take much to figure out you are a Nazi

But even Nazi's are allowed to breed, even though they produce undesirable offspring