Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well now, when Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher percentage of her income in taxes than does Buffet, then something is seriously wrong with tax system. The very wealthy should be paying the actual tax rate.Why does a tax plan have to benefit anyone to be acceptable? The middle class wants new roads, healthcare etc.Just like everyone else. Why would they think they shouldn't pay for it but the rich should?More lies and dishonesty from the reprehensible right.
The Republican plan is in fact bad for middle class Americans:
‘Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)…explained, accurately, that the Senate GOP tax plan isn’t intended to help the middle class; it’s written to benefit the richest Americans.
[…]
Brown’s argument was, at its core, substantive: non-partisan analyses of the Senate Republican tax plan make clear that it would disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans, and raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. That’s not some lazy “political play”; it’s an argument backed up by evidence.’
A senatorial clash that explains what's wrong with the tax fight
I've never got this part of the liberal mind set. We want all of this free government shit but don't want to be the ones to pay for it. How can that possibly work?
You're missing the point. I'm not saying to give them reparations. I'm saying by doing the homesteading it would get rid of the argument once and for all.
Very well. We give people "land." Now what are they going to do with that land if they don't have money to build on it? The government gives you land 300 miles away from where you live now. Are you going to move there? The liberal argument behind Voter-ID is that black people can't figure out how to get to a facility 5 miles away to obtain a voter-id.
If we give everybody an acre of land, what do we do with the 1/8 acre properties in the city? What advantage is it to give a person an acre of land they can't pay the property tax on?
It just doesn't make sense. Hey......I'm a landlord, and I can tell you the hell we went through during the housing bubble. We couldn't find tenants for anything; everybody was buying their own home with 0% down and no credit check. What would we do if the government just gave away land? It would create too many problems.
It could solve a lot of issues. We need people to move out of the cities and start homesteading elsewhere. Large cities with more people than jobs, is why the country is in the mess it is now. What we need is better infrastructure and lower population density problems.
Most of the jobs are in large cities. Trust me, I'm a truck driver, I know these things. When we discuss getting off of social programs, the liberals constantly bring up those living in rural areas where there are no jobs or transportation.
The rental market today is super red hot and has been the last several years. There aren't enough rental units to go around. This caused a huge increase in apartment prices. Why is that? Because people that purchased their own homes during the bubble and bust found out that home ownership is not for everybody. It only sounds good on paper.
As a home owner, you have many more issues to deal with than a renter. What do you do when your hot water tank dies? What do you do when your ceiling is getting water because you need a new roof? What do you do when the water is coming from a sewer pipe instead of the roof from the second floor?
Many people today (particularly the younger people) just don't want to deal with these problems. They opt to rent because of convenience. They don't want to deal with lawn care, they don't want to deal with snow removal, they don't want to deal with electrical or plumbing issues. They don't want to fight with the city because they insist of a sidewalk replacement.
You can't just give people land and say "here you go, it's your problem now" because there are a lot of people today that don't want to deal with that problem.
No. In large cities there are more people than jobs. That's why there is more crime in large cities. Population density is the cause of most major social problems we face today.
Living in the city I totally disagree. I work in industrial areas all day long. I can't tell you how many companies have HELP WANTED signs in front of their businesses. It's not just one or two places in an industrial complex. Many times it's dozens of places.
Our customers frequently ask me if I know anybody looking for a job? They can't find workers for anything.
In small towns you don't see this as much because there are more people than jobs. This is because few businesses open up in small towns. Transportation costs are too high and they are too far away from their customers.
So I think you have it quite the opposite. If you are in need of a job, your best bet is to look in a city than the country.
Sounds to me like he knowingly broke some laws. If that is the case, and that is his MO, I hope he does go out of business.No excuseThe middle class has been subsidizing corporate wages through the earned income credits for years. Corporations get tax breaks to bring jobs into states that every taxpayer in that state subsidized, the subsidies often meaning that the corporations come out dollars ahead.
The wealthy pay the lowest tax rates as a percentage of income of any taxpayers in the country and that rate is going lower.
Top 20% of Earners Pay 84% of Income Tax
Top 1% pay nearly half of federal income taxes
Top 40% paying ALL income taxes, and leaving a tip
They have most of the wealth
There is no such thing as "the wealth." This is something you on the left have been brainwashed to believe. You have been taught by your puppet masters that we live in a bubble. Within our bubble, there is only so much money. If somebody in our bubble has too much money, that's the reason others don't have enough.
It's a pure lie. I've never been denied a raise because the rich have too much money. I've never been denied a credit card or bank loan because they don't have the money to give me because of rich people. This is America, and in America, you can make as much money as you desire or as little as you desire, and it doesn't matter what others have.
It is you, Ray, who has no understanding of wealth, or equity, and how changes to the tax code have steadily siphoned off the net worth of working Americans in favour of corporations and the wealthy.
Absolutely correct. If we tax the wealthy at 50%, the only effect it has on me is my company may lose some business because of the economical impact. But it doesn't change my life one iota if they tax the wealthy at 20% or 30%.
That's besides the fact the job producers seldom pay taxes. They simply increase the cost of their product or service to us in order to offset the loss. Either that or they cut benefits and salary increases for their employees.
It's the same way with environmental regulations. Think businesses pay that? I work for a transportation company and although a small family operation, we've been hit with hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses because of the environmentalists. My boss doesn't have that money. The only thing he can do is increase the cost of our services, and then we the consumers eventually pay for those hundreds of thousands of dollars when we buy the products our company delivers.
Well then, we simply increase the rate of taxation on dividend income, and capital gains. Or we can simply say from now on they count as income, same as you and I get. That would be the simplest.Well now, when Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher percentage of her income in taxes than does Buffet, then something is seriously wrong with tax system. The very wealthy should be paying the actual tax rate.Why does a tax plan have to benefit anyone to be acceptable? The middle class wants new roads, healthcare etc.Just like everyone else. Why would they think they shouldn't pay for it but the rich should?More lies and dishonesty from the reprehensible right.
The Republican plan is in fact bad for middle class Americans:
‘Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)…explained, accurately, that the Senate GOP tax plan isn’t intended to help the middle class; it’s written to benefit the richest Americans.
[…]
Brown’s argument was, at its core, substantive: non-partisan analyses of the Senate Republican tax plan make clear that it would disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans, and raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. That’s not some lazy “political play”; it’s an argument backed up by evidence.’
A senatorial clash that explains what's wrong with the tax fight
I've never got this part of the liberal mind set. We want all of this free government shit but don't want to be the ones to pay for it. How can that possibly work?
Buffett (like so many in his league) don't pay income taxes because their money is made through investments. So they are all behind an income tax hike because they are not going to pay it. They are at the top of the hill trying to prevent others from reaching that point.
Well now, Ray Grinch, so happy to make your aquintance.You asked, "What do you want me to do shoot the kids?"
YOU made that jump from me saying you need to handle it on your own instead of calling the cops, to shooting them... FOR PLAYING BASKETBALL.
When they come to your house that puts them at YOUR location... so what if they get a call that is on the other side of town? Your inability to handle a situation like an adult, puts other people's lives in danger.
I just don't know how to get you to understand, you would save yourself, your cops, your neighbors, and the kids a whole lot of stress and trouble if you would approach the situation with a more open mind and try to be nice to the kids and be creative about the situation.
If you weren't so dense, you would have realized I did try. And as I explained, the lowlifes just got smart with me. Then I called the cops. But you seem to have selective reading comprehension. There is only so much anybody can do. Tell them nice, and if they give you the finger, call the cops. That's what the cops are there for. Thats' why we pay them.
Yeah I'm sure you went up to them with your happy go lucky attitude you share with the forum here... and it went over like a load of bricks.
Just kindly told them to cut it out for the night because people are going to sleep. We put up with the noise all afternoon and early evening. Fair is fair. But when you have kids who's parents don't care, they don't have any respect for adults like when we were kids.
See... you "put up with" their noise all afternoon? Why even bring that up? They are kids playing basketball and you treat them like they are a nuisance.
Why bring that up? To show we were trying to meet half-way, that's why. Our way would have been no basketball at all, but we didn't say anything so the kids could get some exercise instead of sitting around with video games. But when night time comes and we want to read a paper, watch a television show, get ready for bed, it's time to stop and let us have our way for the rest of the night. It was an attempt to show them what compromise means.
Not very bright, Mikey. The very wealthy pay a lesser percentage of their income as taxes. That is personal income, not business income. And if they raise the prices of their product because now they may pay another 10%, then their competitors will eat their lunch.First of all, all taxes are paid by the middle class and lower class far more than the rich. The rich own the companies that make the products and provide the services the poor and middle class purchase. When you raise the taxes on people for just having more money they increase the price of their goods and services to cover it. Whenever you decide to tax business more it can only end in two ways. The prices go up or the company goes broke trying to keep prices down.So we should have a limit to how much money you can have. Well then, how much should that be?Why does a tax plan have to benefit anyone to be acceptable? The middle class wants new roads, healthcare etc.Just like everyone else. Why would they think they shouldn't pay for it but the rich should?More lies and dishonesty from the reprehensible right.
The Republican plan is in fact bad for middle class Americans:
‘Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)…explained, accurately, that the Senate GOP tax plan isn’t intended to help the middle class; it’s written to benefit the richest Americans.
[…]
Brown’s argument was, at its core, substantive: non-partisan analyses of the Senate Republican tax plan make clear that it would disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans, and raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. That’s not some lazy “political play”; it’s an argument backed up by evidence.’
A senatorial clash that explains what's wrong with the tax fight
I've never got this part of the liberal mind set. We want all of this free government shit but don't want to be the ones to pay for it. How can that possibly work?
On the other hand, why does Trump and his pals benefit from this plan, don't they drive the same roads Mike?... I mean how much money does someone need .. Many of these fat cats got rich off of the backs of the middle class.. So your point fails..
.
No, of course not .. but I just don't understand why you think that it is ok to give the mega rich such a huge tax break off of the working classes back.
They ride off into the sunset with their 5 million dollar yachts while the working class picks up another job to pay the taxes.
Why is the GOP fighting for these taxes for the super rich? Because they line the pockets of these Senators..Take a look at who funded Hatch's campaign?
.
.
Second, why do I care if someone has a 5 million dollar yacht? It's not mine. I didn't pay for it. I may wish I had one but I don't so it doesn't bother me in the least.
Third, the answer to why politicians get bought off is easy. When you have a tax code like ours it pays for them to get special cut outs for themselves which are more valuable than what they spent to get them passed. It's an expenditure that pays off. If you want that to end.And I do. Then you put in a flat tax everyone pays equally with no exceptions. You have taken away the sole reason for donating to politicians for tax favors.
In their back yard? Then you don't own that land? So you are bitching about what someone else is doing on their property? LOL Buy a noise reducing window, ScroogeSee... you "put up with" their noise all afternoon? Why even bring that up? They are kids playing basketball and you treat them like they are a nuisance.
Why bring that up? To show we were trying to meet half-way, that's why. Our way would have been no basketball at all, but we didn't say anything so the kids could get some exercise instead of sitting around with video games. But when night time comes and we want to read a paper, watch a television show, get ready for bed, it's time to stop and let us have our way for the rest of the night. It was an attempt to show them what compromise means.
How is it your right to tell kids they can't play in the middle of the afternoon?
Disturbing the peace applies to day and night time. It's one thing for kids to be playing basketball and another when there are 20 kids in the yard.
I thought you said it was one of those portable basketball hoops in the street?
I'm done arguing this crap with you. You complain constantly that everyone is stealing your tax money, and everyone else is at fault for everything bad going on... yet you've proven you are the source of a lot of your own problems.
Yes, it was portable basketball hoop that they put in their backyard. We are on a main street so it's impossible to put it out there. In fact, the hoop was no less than 30 feet from my bedroom window.
While I disagree with you on many things, you are correct on the land issue. Yes, the government has millions of acres in the West. And the reason it does is that the climate, rainfall, heat, cold, ect. is such that people either never tried to homestead it, or could not make it for those reasons. You cannot make it on 320 acres, let alone a 1/2 acre. And there are few jobs in those areas, and getting to be even fewer.The government still owns tons of land.
My grandparents who raised me had an outhouse when I was a kid... so yeah I know all about poverty.
Okay then. The point I'm making is that poverty of our ancestors doesn't reflect on your plight today. So I don't buy into this notion that blacks are entitled to any reparations. Black communities fail because of their own actions today--not of actions many years before they were born. After all, over 70% of black children born today are out of wedlock, and many of them in single-family homes.
Walter Williams: Black Self-Sabotage
You're missing the point. I'm not saying to give them reparations. I'm saying by doing the homesteading it would get rid of the argument once and for all.
Very well. We give people "land." Now what are they going to do with that land if they don't have money to build on it? The government gives you land 300 miles away from where you live now. Are you going to move there? The liberal argument behind Voter-ID is that black people can't figure out how to get to a facility 5 miles away to obtain a voter-id.
If we give everybody an acre of land, what do we do with the 1/8 acre properties in the city? What advantage is it to give a person an acre of land they can't pay the property tax on?
It just doesn't make sense. Hey......I'm a landlord, and I can tell you the hell we went through during the housing bubble. We couldn't find tenants for anything; everybody was buying their own home with 0% down and no credit check. What would we do if the government just gave away land? It would create too many problems.
It could solve a lot of issues. We need people to move out of the cities and start homesteading elsewhere. Large cities with more people than jobs, is why the country is in the mess it is now. What we need is better infrastructure and lower population density problems.
Most of the jobs are in large cities. Trust me, I'm a truck driver, I know these things. When we discuss getting off of social programs, the liberals constantly bring up those living in rural areas where there are no jobs or transportation.
The rental market today is super red hot and has been the last several years. There aren't enough rental units to go around. This caused a huge increase in apartment prices. Why is that? Because people that purchased their own homes during the bubble and bust found out that home ownership is not for everybody. It only sounds good on paper.
As a home owner, you have many more issues to deal with than a renter. What do you do when your hot water tank dies? What do you do when your ceiling is getting water because you need a new roof? What do you do when the water is coming from a sewer pipe instead of the roof from the second floor?
Many people today (particularly the younger people) just don't want to deal with these problems. They opt to rent because of convenience. They don't want to deal with lawn care, they don't want to deal with snow removal, they don't want to deal with electrical or plumbing issues. They don't want to fight with the city because they insist of a sidewalk replacement.
You can't just give people land and say "here you go, it's your problem now" because there are a lot of people today that don't want to deal with that problem.
You are correct in that there are more people that are not qualified for the jobs in the cities. Where I work, we have billboards along the major highways advertising that we are hiring tradesmen at high wages. And we still cannot get enough millwrights, electricians, and automation people. So we have the paradox of having people that need work, and jobs that are going begging. Unless you can get into a apprentice program, it costs about $100 a credit to get training, and that does not include books and other equipment.Very well. We give people "land." Now what are they going to do with that land if they don't have money to build on it? The government gives you land 300 miles away from where you live now. Are you going to move there? The liberal argument behind Voter-ID is that black people can't figure out how to get to a facility 5 miles away to obtain a voter-id.
If we give everybody an acre of land, what do we do with the 1/8 acre properties in the city? What advantage is it to give a person an acre of land they can't pay the property tax on?
It just doesn't make sense. Hey......I'm a landlord, and I can tell you the hell we went through during the housing bubble. We couldn't find tenants for anything; everybody was buying their own home with 0% down and no credit check. What would we do if the government just gave away land? It would create too many problems.
It could solve a lot of issues. We need people to move out of the cities and start homesteading elsewhere. Large cities with more people than jobs, is why the country is in the mess it is now. What we need is better infrastructure and lower population density problems.
Most of the jobs are in large cities. Trust me, I'm a truck driver, I know these things. When we discuss getting off of social programs, the liberals constantly bring up those living in rural areas where there are no jobs or transportation.
The rental market today is super red hot and has been the last several years. There aren't enough rental units to go around. This caused a huge increase in apartment prices. Why is that? Because people that purchased their own homes during the bubble and bust found out that home ownership is not for everybody. It only sounds good on paper.
As a home owner, you have many more issues to deal with than a renter. What do you do when your hot water tank dies? What do you do when your ceiling is getting water because you need a new roof? What do you do when the water is coming from a sewer pipe instead of the roof from the second floor?
Many people today (particularly the younger people) just don't want to deal with these problems. They opt to rent because of convenience. They don't want to deal with lawn care, they don't want to deal with snow removal, they don't want to deal with electrical or plumbing issues. They don't want to fight with the city because they insist of a sidewalk replacement.
You can't just give people land and say "here you go, it's your problem now" because there are a lot of people today that don't want to deal with that problem.
No. In large cities there are more people than jobs. That's why there is more crime in large cities. Population density is the cause of most major social problems we face today.
Living in the city I totally disagree. I work in industrial areas all day long. I can't tell you how many companies have HELP WANTED signs in front of their businesses. It's not just one or two places in an industrial complex. Many times it's dozens of places.
Our customers frequently ask me if I know anybody looking for a job? They can't find workers for anything.
In small towns you don't see this as much because there are more people than jobs. This is because few businesses open up in small towns. Transportation costs are too high and they are too far away from their customers.
So I think you have it quite the opposite. If you are in need of a job, your best bet is to look in a city than the country.
Once again you think your personal experience overrides facts. It doesn't. In large cities, the population outnumbers jobs. Do a search on population density causing social problems. You can read thousands of articles about it.
She is wrong, they are separate issues. She can try and make the association, but it's no more fair to do that than to suggest that Obamacare was directly funded by cuts to the military.
In the end, I prefer Rand Pauls version of taxation, and I bet Trump does too. Noone can support such a plan because they want heavy government spending and intervention. You guys will be Canada soon if you don't get your taxes and expenses downs significantly. If some on the alt-left had their way, your Constitution would already be null and void.
I've said it a thousand times and will repeat it a thousand times more, I don't understand why so many want to stifle the innovation engine of the American economy. LOW taxes, LESS regulations and government intervention and allow the PRIVATE sector to flourish. You didn't become such a powerful economy over the last 200 years of effort by socialist policies. Does this not dawn on people?
In their back yard? Then you don't own that land? So you are bitching about what someone else is doing on their property? LOL Buy a noise reducing window, ScroogeWhy bring that up? To show we were trying to meet half-way, that's why. Our way would have been no basketball at all, but we didn't say anything so the kids could get some exercise instead of sitting around with video games. But when night time comes and we want to read a paper, watch a television show, get ready for bed, it's time to stop and let us have our way for the rest of the night. It was an attempt to show them what compromise means.
How is it your right to tell kids they can't play in the middle of the afternoon?
Disturbing the peace applies to day and night time. It's one thing for kids to be playing basketball and another when there are 20 kids in the yard.
I thought you said it was one of those portable basketball hoops in the street?
I'm done arguing this crap with you. You complain constantly that everyone is stealing your tax money, and everyone else is at fault for everything bad going on... yet you've proven you are the source of a lot of your own problems.
Yes, it was portable basketball hoop that they put in their backyard. We are on a main street so it's impossible to put it out there. In fact, the hoop was no less than 30 feet from my bedroom window.
Well then, we simply increase the rate of taxation on dividend income, and capital gains. Or we can simply say from now on they count as income, same as you and I get. That would be the simplest.Well now, when Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher percentage of her income in taxes than does Buffet, then something is seriously wrong with tax system. The very wealthy should be paying the actual tax rate.Why does a tax plan have to benefit anyone to be acceptable? The middle class wants new roads, healthcare etc.Just like everyone else. Why would they think they shouldn't pay for it but the rich should?More lies and dishonesty from the reprehensible right.
The Republican plan is in fact bad for middle class Americans:
‘Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)…explained, accurately, that the Senate GOP tax plan isn’t intended to help the middle class; it’s written to benefit the richest Americans.
[…]
Brown’s argument was, at its core, substantive: non-partisan analyses of the Senate Republican tax plan make clear that it would disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans, and raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. That’s not some lazy “political play”; it’s an argument backed up by evidence.’
A senatorial clash that explains what's wrong with the tax fight
I've never got this part of the liberal mind set. We want all of this free government shit but don't want to be the ones to pay for it. How can that possibly work?
Buffett (like so many in his league) don't pay income taxes because their money is made through investments. So they are all behind an income tax hike because they are not going to pay it. They are at the top of the hill trying to prevent others from reaching that point.
Sounds to me like he knowingly broke some laws. If that is the case, and that is his MO, I hope he does go out of business.
There is no such thing as "the wealth." This is something you on the left have been brainwashed to believe. You have been taught by your puppet masters that we live in a bubble. Within our bubble, there is only so much money. If somebody in our bubble has too much money, that's the reason others don't have enough.
It's a pure lie. I've never been denied a raise because the rich have too much money. I've never been denied a credit card or bank loan because they don't have the money to give me because of rich people. This is America, and in America, you can make as much money as you desire or as little as you desire, and it doesn't matter what others have.
It is you, Ray, who has no understanding of wealth, or equity, and how changes to the tax code have steadily siphoned off the net worth of working Americans in favour of corporations and the wealthy.
Absolutely correct. If we tax the wealthy at 50%, the only effect it has on me is my company may lose some business because of the economical impact. But it doesn't change my life one iota if they tax the wealthy at 20% or 30%.
That's besides the fact the job producers seldom pay taxes. They simply increase the cost of their product or service to us in order to offset the loss. Either that or they cut benefits and salary increases for their employees.
It's the same way with environmental regulations. Think businesses pay that? I work for a transportation company and although a small family operation, we've been hit with hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses because of the environmentalists. My boss doesn't have that money. The only thing he can do is increase the cost of our services, and then we the consumers eventually pay for those hundreds of thousands of dollars when we buy the products our company delivers.
Very well. We give people "land." Now what are they going to do with that land if they don't have money to build on it? The government gives you land 300 miles away from where you live now. Are you going to move there? The liberal argument behind Voter-ID is that black people can't figure out how to get to a facility 5 miles away to obtain a voter-id.
If we give everybody an acre of land, what do we do with the 1/8 acre properties in the city? What advantage is it to give a person an acre of land they can't pay the property tax on?
It just doesn't make sense. Hey......I'm a landlord, and I can tell you the hell we went through during the housing bubble. We couldn't find tenants for anything; everybody was buying their own home with 0% down and no credit check. What would we do if the government just gave away land? It would create too many problems.
It could solve a lot of issues. We need people to move out of the cities and start homesteading elsewhere. Large cities with more people than jobs, is why the country is in the mess it is now. What we need is better infrastructure and lower population density problems.
Most of the jobs are in large cities. Trust me, I'm a truck driver, I know these things. When we discuss getting off of social programs, the liberals constantly bring up those living in rural areas where there are no jobs or transportation.
The rental market today is super red hot and has been the last several years. There aren't enough rental units to go around. This caused a huge increase in apartment prices. Why is that? Because people that purchased their own homes during the bubble and bust found out that home ownership is not for everybody. It only sounds good on paper.
As a home owner, you have many more issues to deal with than a renter. What do you do when your hot water tank dies? What do you do when your ceiling is getting water because you need a new roof? What do you do when the water is coming from a sewer pipe instead of the roof from the second floor?
Many people today (particularly the younger people) just don't want to deal with these problems. They opt to rent because of convenience. They don't want to deal with lawn care, they don't want to deal with snow removal, they don't want to deal with electrical or plumbing issues. They don't want to fight with the city because they insist of a sidewalk replacement.
You can't just give people land and say "here you go, it's your problem now" because there are a lot of people today that don't want to deal with that problem.
No. In large cities there are more people than jobs. That's why there is more crime in large cities. Population density is the cause of most major social problems we face today.
Living in the city I totally disagree. I work in industrial areas all day long. I can't tell you how many companies have HELP WANTED signs in front of their businesses. It's not just one or two places in an industrial complex. Many times it's dozens of places.
Our customers frequently ask me if I know anybody looking for a job? They can't find workers for anything.
In small towns you don't see this as much because there are more people than jobs. This is because few businesses open up in small towns. Transportation costs are too high and they are too far away from their customers.
So I think you have it quite the opposite. If you are in need of a job, your best bet is to look in a city than the country.
Once again you think your personal experience overrides facts. It doesn't. In large cities, the population outnumbers jobs. Do a search on population density causing social problems. You can read thousands of articles about it.
That bimbo is still citing the CBO score? Does she get how wrong the CBO score was on obummercare?
She is wrong, they are separate issues. She can try and make the association, but it's no more fair to do that than to suggest that Obamacare was directly funded by cuts to the military.
In the end, I prefer Rand Pauls version of taxation, and I bet Trump does too. Noone can support such a plan because they want heavy government spending and intervention. You guys will be Canada soon if you don't get your taxes and expenses downs significantly. If some on the alt-left had their way, your Constitution would already be null and void.
I've said it a thousand times and will repeat it a thousand times more, I don't understand why so many want to stifle the innovation engine of the American economy. LOW taxes, LESS regulations and government intervention and allow the PRIVATE sector to flourish. You didn't become such a powerful economy over the last 200 years of effort by socialist policies. Does this not dawn on people?
She is wrong, they are separate issues.
Ill wait here for someone to explain how the middle class is getting a tax increase.
I would love to know. People keep saying i am getting fucked, i ask, and they run away
Good Video Folks.. These sneaky corrupt snakes hiding shit//
Unbelievable.. You go Girl!
Short Video:
