Tax Cuts Steal Democracy

[Mikeoxenormous]

No jillian, you are the idiot, if you are promised by a liberal to make a deal, would you believe what the liberal tells you?

What deal? What are you talking about? Reagan wanted more spending, and that's what he got. Particularly in defense. Oh, also, your argument contradicts itself. You claim on the one hand that tax revenues grew 65% (not 94%, that was wrong) and that was thanks to the tax cuts, but at the same time you say that spending increased. So how is the supposed revenue growth the result of tax cuts and not increased spending? Seems to me it was more about the spending and not the tax cuts. Receipts actually dropped from 1982 to 1983. How could that be the case if tax cuts increase revenue?

The lesson is beware Conservatives bearing numbers. Those numbers are almost always exaggerated, misrepresented, or fabricated.

Why do you continue to use the liberal wording "Revenue Growth" which to normal US citizens means, "increase in Taxes"? Do you have your head so stuck up your ass, that you can see daylight through your mouth? Come on man, pull your head out, wipe the shit off your face, open your eyes and smell the roses. Government is bad, FREEDOM is good, taxes are stealing from those that produce and giving it to those that don't. Soon no one produces and everyone will starve. Liberalism is all about equality, where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable..

 

[The Derp]

What would be a sufficient amount for the RICH to pay in taxes that would make you happy? 50%, 75% 100%?

Calm down. This isn't about my happiness. So I am not sure why you are so determined to make this an emotional argument? Are you having your period or something? Why is it always about squishy emotions with you people? Can't you separate out your emotions from the argument?

To me, I am ambivalent about the tax rates. It's not emotional for me like it is for you. I want to see a top tax bracket that produces revenues while not harming growth. Most economists estimate that rate for the highest bracket should be between 50-75%. I don't know how high it should go, that's for credible economists to determine, but it definitely shouldn't be as low or lower than it is right now.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Just because you want to take it up the ass, doesn't mean the rest of US do.

LOL! Well, it's not liberals who get caught in airport bathrooms soliciting gay sex. And why are you making homophobic attacks? That is so 1993, and not very Raven.

If you want to make sure the bankrupt federal government continues to run, then please donate FREELY as much as you want. If the government cant control its spending, then I don't have to support paying for that FRAUD. When is the government going to cut back on their feckless spending. They have more fraud, waste and abuse than any RICH person. If the government could start showing more responsibility for tax dollar spending, I might actually want to help more.

Not sure what you're talking about with regard to fraud, but most of the waste in government spending is on Defense.

Are you 12 years old? I use the term, "to take it up the ass" in a sarcastic way and you think I REALLY mean it. You are dumber than a box of rocks, and I am done trying to converse with you. As I have shown you that throughout the WHOLE government the fraud waste and abuse is real, but you want US to pay higher taxes. Stupid is as stupid votes for Dumbocrats.

 

[The Derp]

Why do you continue to use the liberal wording "Revenue Growth" which to normal US citizens means, "increase in Taxes"? Do you have your head so stuck up your ass, that you can see daylight through your mouth? Come on man, pull your head out, wipe the shit off your face, open your eyes and smell the roses. Government is bad, FREEDOM is good, taxes are stealing from those that produce and giving it to those that don't. Soon no one produces and everyone will starve. Liberalism is all about equality, where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable..

"Normal US citizens"? How very Spicer of you. I have news for you, pal. More people voted for Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump. at least 2 million more. Likewise, Democratic Senators received 20,000,000 more votes in 2016 than Conservatives.

When you claim to be a "normal American", what that means is that those who oppose you, you don't see as legitimate citizens. So right away, you are alienating the majority of people in this country through your emotions. You need to take a Xanax or something because you seem to be out of control emotionally.

You say government is bad, but government is just a reflection of our society. If you think government is bad, why do you keep electing people to it who oppose government as an institution? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Conservatives claim government is the problem, then get elected and prove it. Maybe the answer is that Conservatives should just be removed from the table completely. After all, they have no policies they can point to that have been a success. All they do is obstruct and prevent progress. They bring nothing to the table.

 

[The Derp]

Are you 12 years old? I use the term, "to take it up the ass" in a sarcastic way and you think I REALLY mean it.

How typical of today's Conservatives...words don't mean what they mean. How many times has Trump used that excuse?

The word you are looking for is facetious, not sarcastic.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Tax-rate cuts are different from tax cuts.

No.

Our President could easily double the tax base by opening up full development of our natural resources.

Here's some cold reality for you; because of the natural gas bubble, the price of oil is at historic lows. In order for shale oil (the type of resources I think you're referring to here) to become profitable, it has to get up to at least $90/barrel. Why? Because the cost of extracting and refining Alberta sludge is far more than the cost of extracting and refining sweet crude (like you get from Saudi Arabia). The only reason they want to build KXL is because that way, the Canadian oil company can sell the sludge for the same price on the global markets that sweet crude goes for. There already are pipelines that carry oil into the US from the Tar Sands. So much oil, in fact, that it is currently oversupplied which means the Tar Sands sludge is discounted for US consumers because it can only come to the US. If that sludge is allowed to go to the Gulf, it will fetch a higher price by eliminating the oversupply in the US while being offered to global buyers. So if anything, KXL is going to increase energy costs here. Which means higher costs. Which means fewer jobs. Anyone who supports KXL does not know or understand how global oil markets work. If they did, they would oppose the pipeline because it would increase costs for consumers and businesses in the US. TransCanada (the company that wants the pipeline) even said so themselves in their permit application.

Sweaty Macho Oilfield Workers Offend Girlymen Tiptoeing Through the Tulips

Jihadist Saudi oil costs them 50 cents a barrel to let flow from the well, but shale oil on our continent only costs 5 dollars a barrel to extract. You feel all self-righteous in your Oedipal attack on the oil companies, but then quote the creative accounting they want sucker consumers to believe in. Trustfundie Treehuggers don't have minds of their own; they are totally driven to increase the power of the class they were born in. No wonder an HeirHead spoiled-putrid brat like Bobby Kennedy, Jr., is one of your false-flag movement's chief sponsors.

 

[The Derp]

Jihadist Saudi oil costs them 50 cents a barrel to let flow from the well, but shale oil on our continent only costs 5 dollars a barrel to extract. You feel all self-righteous in your Oedipal attack on the oil companies, but then quote the creative accounting they want sucker consumers to believe in. Trustfundie Treehuggers don't have minds of their own; they are totally driven to increase the power of the class they were born in. No wonder an HeirHead spoiled-putrid brat like Bobby Kennedy, Jr., is one of your false-flag movement's chief sponsors.

It doesn't seem like you know what you're talking about at all. It's really simple;

There already is a pipeline that carries sludge from Alberta into the US.
That pipeline carries so much sludge, that it is actually oversupplied to the US PADD II region (Illinois)
Because of the oversupply, the price of that sludge is discounted.
If KXL is built, the oversupply the PADD II region currently has will disappear because the sludge can be redirected down to the Gulf
If the sludge gets to the Gulf refineries, it can be sold anywhere in the world which means the price of that sludge increases because it can now be sent by ship anywhere from the Gulf.
So KXL is built, the oversupply of sludge is erased, the cost of the sludge increases, which leads to increased energy costs in the PADD II region, which relies on this energy to power the farms and plants throughout the Midwest and Great Plains.

BTW - "Oedipal attack". Do you know what "Oedipal" means? Doesn't seem like you do.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Nixon's men didn't reveal anything corrupt about McGovern's DNC

That's not the point. The suspect ends do not justify the means. If the allegations are true, there is no telling how deep that treason runs. Was it contained to the Trump Administration, or if it filtered all the way down to individual candidates from the Republican Party and their media surrogates on Fox and on Talk Radio? Trump picked Gorsuch for the Supreme Court. Was that his pick? Was it Putin's pick? Does Gorsuch have Russia ties too? WE DON'T KNOW.



So nice try at rewriting history, but it wasn't that long ago and we still remember.

As for Trump's contacts with Russia, he was trying to see if he could partner with Russia to get us thousands of jobs, billions in profits, and billions saved by getting out of imperialist NYETO.

Wait - so you're now admitting Trump spoke with Russia?

When Mature People Told You to Get a Pair, They Didn't Mean Paranoia

Strung Out Together Demwits get sillier and sillier as they frantically spin their childish and dopey superheroine yarns into our threads.

 

[The Derp]

Strung Out Together Demwits get sillier and sillier as they frantically spin their childish and dopey superheroine yarns into our threads.

You're in denial, man.

 

[The Derp]

yes they have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's first. If Newts had passed debt would be $0 today rather than $20 trillion. Democrats killed every BBA because it might have meant a cut in welfare entitlement spending. This is the only way they get votes, they buy them thus subverting our democracy.

Well that's just not true. Conservatives never wanted a balanced budget. That's why Clinton vetoed their 1998 tax cut. It would have erased the surplus you're now trying to give them credit for creating. Your entire premise contradicts itself. Furthermore, BBA's are stupid because it forces government to scramble to get revenues. So what happens is like what happened in Kansas; they cut revenues so much that they had to close schools early for the year because they lacked the money to fund them. That's because of the BBA. And the "welfare spending" isn't cut. Because welfare is distributed in states via block grants, the states are only required to spend 33% of that block grant on federal welfare programs. The rest they can do what they please, and every single red state uses the rest to close the deficits created by their tax policies.

So Conservatives are the welfare queens because they use welfare to pay for tax cuts.

 

[The Derp]

so, many private competing interests are far better than the interest of one monopoly govt

How so? Private interests care only about themselves, not the citizenry they are supposed to be supporting.

which our founders described as the source of evil in human history,

No they didn't.

not charter schools( for God's sake!!) that replace the worst schools in the civilized world.

Charter schools perform no better or worse than Public Schools. What they do, though, is take funding away from Public Schools, which results in Public School failures, which you people use as an excuse to fund charter schools even more, which continues the death spiral. But that's the Conservative goal; to do away with Public Education because it doesn't credit Jesus with riding dinosaurs 6,000 years ago.

 

[The Derp]

Ross Perot was free to spend as much of his own money in 1992 as he wished. Same as today. Duh.

Again, stop being obtuse. We aren't talking about self-financing, and you know it.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Jihadist Saudi oil costs them 50 cents a barrel to let flow from the well, but shale oil on our continent only costs 5 dollars a barrel to extract. You feel all self-righteous in your Oedipal attack on the oil companies, but then quote the creative accounting they want sucker consumers to believe in. Trustfundie Treehuggers don't have minds of their own; they are totally driven to increase the power of the class they were born in. No wonder an HeirHead spoiled-putrid brat like Bobby Kennedy, Jr., is one of your false-flag movement's chief sponsors.

It doesn't seem like you know what you're talking about at all. It's really simple;

There already is a pipeline that carries sludge from Alberta into the US.
That pipeline carries so much sludge, that it is actually oversupplied to the US PADD II region (Illinois)
Because of the oversupply, the price of that sludge is discounted.
If KXL is built, the oversupply the PADD II region currently has will disappear because the sludge can be redirected down to the Gulf
If the sludge gets to the Gulf refineries, it can be sold anywhere in the world which means the price of that sludge increases because it can now be sent by ship anywhere from the Gulf.
So KXL is built, the oversupply of sludge is erased, the cost of the sludge increases, which leads to increased energy costs in the PADD II region, which relies on this energy to power the farms and plants throughout the Midwest and Great Plains.

BTW - "Oedipal attack". Do you know what "Oedipal" means? Doesn't seem like you do.

Kentucky Derpy

You should get off your high horse; it makes your ass look big.

 

[The Derp]

insane and liberal of course since the top 1% paying 35% of govt spending, not 1% , under Bush is the opposite of giving away the store.

First of all, if you are complaining about the tax burden of the 1% without being a part of the 1% you are attacking your own best interests. You think the 1% gives a damn how high your taxes are? So why do you care how high theirs are? Furthermore, the tax burden was more equitable prior to the Reagan trickle-down. It only is where it is today because you cut taxes! So you are basically supporting policies that perpetuate the thing you are complaining about. It's basically masturbation, for lack of a better term.

if liberals had even a low IQ they would see that ripping off productive people to make others lazy makes things worse not better. This is how the USSR and Red China slowly starved 120million to death??

Not sure how you're reaching that conclusion. In order to receive most "welfare" benefits, you have to be employed, in job training, or in school. That's thanks to the 1996 welfare reform Conservatives passed. Welfare was already reformed according to your tastes. If you're still screeching about welfare today, then that means either a) the welfare reform Conservatives passed 20 years ago wasn't as great as they made it out to be or b) the screeching about welfare today is a bunch of BS.

So were we being BS'd then or are we being BS'd today?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Strung Out Together Demwits get sillier and sillier as they frantically spin their childish and dopey superheroine yarns into our threads.

You're in denial, man.

You're indy nihil, child.

 

[The Derp]

You should get off your high horse; it makes your ass look big.

I mean, at this point, why are you even responding? It doesn't appear that you have anything to contribute to the debate. Is this just an exercise in narcissism?

 

[The Derp]

they have to be for the rich since they pay all the taxes. Top 1% alone pays 40%.

They may pay 40% of the burden, but the top tax rate has been nearly cut in half. Also, the reason their burden is so high is only because Conservatives cut taxes. So how is this not a circular argument?

You complain that half the people pay no taxes, yet you cut their taxes so they don't pay, so your solution is to cut taxes??? You see how it's circular, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ross Perot was free to spend as much of his own money in 1992 as he wished. Same as today. Duh.

Again, stop being obtuse. We aren't talking about self-financing, and you know it.

Your "point" seems to be that the rich can buy elections.
Didn't work for Ross Perot in 1992 or 1996, so you were wrong.
So stop being obtuse.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

they have to be for the rich since they pay all the taxes. Top 1% alone pays 40%.

They may pay 40% of the burden, but the top tax rate has been nearly cut in half. Also, the reason their burden is so high is only because Conservatives cut taxes. So how is this not a circular argument?

You complain that half the people pay no taxes, yet you cut their taxes so they don't pay, so your solution is to cut taxes??? You see how it's circular, right?

They may pay 40% of the burden, but the top tax rate has been nearly cut in half.

Yup. And everyone else benefits, because the nasty rich people are picking up a larger portion of the total.

 

[The Derp]

Your "point" seems to be that the rich can buy elections.
Didn't work for Ross Perot in 1992 or 1996, so you were wrong.So stop being obtuse.

They can and do buy elections. Just because Perot lost in 1992 doesn't mean the Koch brothers or Art Pope don't buy political parties instead of having the courage to run themselves. By doing what they do, they can hide in the shadows and pull strings from behind the curtain. You seriously believe that the wealthy don't contribute to political campaigns and the politicians don't serve their interests accordingly??? Really??? Who's being obtuse now?