Hey Libs...why do tax cuts for our most productive suck?

[Lewdog]

It is the same because it is one family member paying in and another taking it out.

Funny how you aren't arguing about how productivity can be transferred through the inheritance of money. It's a silly argument the OP is making.

It isn’t the same as I have shown you. What part of your brain isn’t working?

Is Paris Hilton a productive victim of taxes?

Nice deflection from the conversation at hand, however now that you brought it up her family created wealth and deferred in part it to her ( even though she is an idiot), it is the families money and they are allowed to invest and use that money to their and others benefit. There are tax considerations to be made for that. Same follows for Nacy Pelosi’s kids as well as Oprah and all the other rich liberals. That money is direct to the family, undiluted since it is their acvount(s). The money you and I, our parents and grandparents were assessed in welfare tak went into a pool. That pool pays for millions of people so the apology you make between the two is not valid. Please try to follow.

It is not a deflection.. it is the main point! To think the productivity is transferred with money is a freaking ridiculous statement to make!

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

 

[dave p]

It isn’t the same as I have shown you. What part of your brain isn’t working?

Is Paris Hilton a productive victim of taxes?

Nice deflection from the conversation at hand, however now that you brought it up her family created wealth and deferred in part it to her ( even though she is an idiot), it is the families money and they are allowed to invest and use that money to their and others benefit. There are tax considerations to be made for that. Same follows for Nacy Pelosi’s kids as well as Oprah and all the other rich liberals. That money is direct to the family, undiluted since it is their acvount(s). The money you and I, our parents and grandparents were assessed in welfare tak went into a pool. That pool pays for millions of people so the apology you make between the two is not valid. Please try to follow.

It is not a deflection.. it is the main point! To think the productivity is transferred with money is a freaking ridiculous statement to make!

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?

"Prlisi clones"? What is that?

It's time for some honesty on the issue of taxes and their benefits. The R's once claimed the Democratic Party was the party of tax and spend. That talking point is long gone, since neither GW Bush nor Donald Trump were physically responsible.

Obama was an outlier, since he needed to get the country moving again; he used a Keynesian hybrid to get banks to loan and stop the rising unemployment, but also reduced the number of federal government employees by attrition. It worked.

Fat fingers in an iPhone combin d with auto correct. Should be Pelosi clones. But to address your statement. Obama’s legacy is tax and Spend, since when he came into office the deficit was 10.6 trillion and when he left it was 20 trillion..

True, and what did you learn he spent that money on, during those 8 years; 6 of which the Republican's held the purse stings as the majority in both chambers of Congress.

Obama inherited the Great Recession, two wars and a hostile opposition party. Should he have let the US Auto Industry fail, and add much more than a million auto workers and suppliers and sales people and mechanics out of work? Especially when jobs were disappearing overnight all across the country?

 

[BrokeLoser]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

Consult with Dont Taz Me Bro and sealybobo about that. I’m thinking neither are “inheritance kids”.
You people prove just how twisted and lost you really are in nearly every single post. Thanks for that.

Yea I’m making $3000 more but when inflation happens it was a zero gain for me, lots of you took a step back and the billionaires made out best. Total screw job

Explain this inflation theory would you please...I failed Econ 101
Are you saying you’d rather not have that $3k bonus today?

Give everyone a tax break then cost of living goes up always soon after so the only ones who really benefit are the people who are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax breaks or millions.

Further widening the gap between rich and rest of us

The annual inflation rate stays between 2-3% with or without “tax cuts”.
Do you have access to some other data or are we going on CNN’s opinion here?

 

[Lewdog]

Is Paris Hilton a productive victim of taxes?

Nice deflection from the conversation at hand, however now that you brought it up her family created wealth and deferred in part it to her ( even though she is an idiot), it is the families money and they are allowed to invest and use that money to their and others benefit. There are tax considerations to be made for that. Same follows for Nacy Pelosi’s kids as well as Oprah and all the other rich liberals. That money is direct to the family, undiluted since it is their acvount(s). The money you and I, our parents and grandparents were assessed in welfare tak went into a pool. That pool pays for millions of people so the apology you make between the two is not valid. Please try to follow.

It is not a deflection.. it is the main point! To think the productivity is transferred with money is a freaking ridiculous statement to make!

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

 

[sealybobo]

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

Consult with Dont Taz Me Bro and sealybobo about that. I’m thinking neither are “inheritance kids”.
You people prove just how twisted and lost you really are in nearly every single post. Thanks for that.

Yea I’m making $3000 more but when inflation happens it was a zero gain for me, lots of you took a step back and the billionaires made out best. Total screw job

Explain this inflation theory would you please...I failed Econ 101
Are you saying you’d rather not have that $3k bonus today?

Give everyone a tax break then cost of living goes up always soon after so the only ones who really benefit are the people who are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax breaks or millions.

Further widening the gap between rich and rest of us

The annual inflation rate stays between 2-3% with or without “tax cuts”.
Do you have access to some other data or are we going on CNN’s opinion here?

Common sense and my lyin eyes

 

[dave p]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?

"Prlisi clones"? What is that?

It's time for some honesty on the issue of taxes and their benefits. The R's once claimed the Democratic Party was the party of tax and spend. That talking point is long gone, since neither GW Bush nor Donald Trump were physically responsible.

Obama was an outlier, since he needed to get the country moving again; he used a Keynesian hybrid to get banks to loan and stop the rising unemployment, but also reduced the number of federal government employees by attrition. It worked.

Fat fingers in an iPhone combin d with auto correct. Should be Pelosi clones. But to address your statement. Obama’s legacy is tax and Spend, since when he came into office the deficit was 10.6 trillion and when he left it was 20 trillion..

True, and what did you learn he spent that money on, during those 8 years; 6 of which the Republican's held the purse stings as the majority in both chambers of Congress.

Obama inherited the Great Recession, two wars and a hostile opposition party. Should he have let the US Auto Industry fail, and add much more than a million auto workers and suppliers and sales people and mechanics out of work? Especially when jobs were disappearing overnight all across the country?

The auto industries wouldn’t have failed. There are bancruptcy laws that allow co pansies to reorganize and stil keep going forward. Debtor in possession laws are set up that way. Obama by the way kept the two wars going even though he said he would end them and pretty much followed Bushes policies to a tee. The two years that they were in place created the platform of spending. Do you really think spending stops as soon as a party gets control?

 

[dave p]

Nice deflection from the conversation at hand, however now that you brought it up her family created wealth and deferred in part it to her ( even though she is an idiot), it is the families money and they are allowed to invest and use that money to their and others benefit. There are tax considerations to be made for that. Same follows for Nacy Pelosi’s kids as well as Oprah and all the other rich liberals. That money is direct to the family, undiluted since it is their acvount(s). The money you and I, our parents and grandparents were assessed in welfare tak went into a pool. That pool pays for millions of people so the apology you make between the two is not valid. Please try to follow.

It is not a deflection.. it is the main point! To think the productivity is transferred with money is a freaking ridiculous statement to make!

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

 

[Lewdog]

It is not a deflection.. it is the main point! To think the productivity is transferred with money is a freaking ridiculous statement to make!

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

 

[dave p]

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

You supported nothing. If you look back through the posts I already addressed that but since you are learning impaired I will do it one more time. The average welfare person gets $300 per month the average worker pays $40 per year into welfare. If one would assume that 100% of that pay in goes to your heirs ( which it doesn’t ) it would take 90 years to pay for one year. I will do the math for you since your calculator seems to be broken. $300 per month equals $3,600 per year. That is what the average recipient receives. $40 per year multiplied by 90 years equals ( drum roll please ) $3,600. People receive welfare on average 1 year. I don’t think people live like kings on welfare. When you loons make statements like that it shows how removed from reality you really are. Please educate yourself, you will be much better off.

 

[dave p]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?

Only the upper 1% and large corporations benefit from the great tax cut scam. The lowest 20% actually get a tax hike, and the next 40% will being paying more taxes starting next year, and everyone but the upper income bracket will be paying higher taxes in 5 years.

The only people in America who are productive take a shower after work, and are the working class Americans, that carry a lunch box to work every day.

Every one else is a parasite that was born on third base and think they hit a triple.

Those are the only productive people? You can’t really believe that. If you do you are completely beyond help.

 

[Lewdog]

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

You supported nothing. If you look back through the posts I already addressed that but since you are learning impaired I will do it one more time. The average welfare person gets $300 per month the average worker pays $40 per year into welfare. If one would assume that 100% of that pay in goes to your heirs ( which it doesn’t ) it would take 90 years to pay for one year. I will do the math for you since your calculator seems to be broken. $300 per month equals $3,600 per year. That is what the average recipient receives. $40 per year multiplied by 90 years equals ( drum roll please ) $3,600. People receive welfare on average 1 year. I don’t think people live like kings on welfare. When you loons make statements like that it shows how removed from reality you really are. Please educate yourself, you will be much better off.

No it wouldn't. $40 at 80 years interest... are you kidding? And $40 on average per year for a worker? Right.... and yet here we sit listening to all the Conservatives on this forum complaining over $40 a year like it is breaking their banks? GTFO... do you understand you are arguing against yourself?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Consult with Dont Taz Me Bro and sealybobo about that. I’m thinking neither are “inheritance kids”.
You people prove just how twisted and lost you really are in nearly every single post. Thanks for that.

Yea I’m making $3000 more but when inflation happens it was a zero gain for me, lots of you took a step back and the billionaires made out best. Total screw job

Explain this inflation theory would you please...I failed Econ 101
Are you saying you’d rather not have that $3k bonus today?

Give everyone a tax break then cost of living goes up always soon after so the only ones who really benefit are the people who are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax breaks or millions.

Further widening the gap between rich and rest of us

The annual inflation rate stays between 2-3% with or without “tax cuts”.
Do you have access to some other data or are we going on CNN’s opinion here?

Common sense and my lyin eyes

Common sense would suggest the trade war will benefit good Americans in the long run...no?

 

[dave p]

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

You supported nothing. If you look back through the posts I already addressed that but since you are learning impaired I will do it one more time. The average welfare person gets $300 per month the average worker pays $40 per year into welfare. If one would assume that 100% of that pay in goes to your heirs ( which it doesn’t ) it would take 90 years to pay for one year. I will do the math for you since your calculator seems to be broken. $300 per month equals $3,600 per year. That is what the average recipient receives. $40 per year multiplied by 90 years equals ( drum roll please ) $3,600. People receive welfare on average 1 year. I don’t think people live like kings on welfare. When you loons make statements like that it shows how removed from reality you really are. Please educate yourself, you will be much better off.

No it wouldn't. $40 at 80 years interest... are you kidding? And $40 on average per year for a worker? Right.... and yet here we sit listening to all the Conservatives on this forum complaining over $40 a year like it is breaking their banks? GTFO... do you understand you are arguing against yourself?

I’m not arguing against myself. I am trying to show you with math and facts that your position is wrong. And no $40 bucks doesn’t break me. Again you are deflecting. You are the idiot that says 100% of the money is put into an account for your offspring and that it collects interest. If you are to ignorant to realize that the money paid into a community pot doesn’t go directly to a single relative, I can’t help you. The $40 came directly form the tax law. There is no interest since the pot has been raided. Communicating with you is like talking to a cardboard box. I’m done with you.

 

[Lewdog]

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

You supported nothing. If you look back through the posts I already addressed that but since you are learning impaired I will do it one more time. The average welfare person gets $300 per month the average worker pays $40 per year into welfare. If one would assume that 100% of that pay in goes to your heirs ( which it doesn’t ) it would take 90 years to pay for one year. I will do the math for you since your calculator seems to be broken. $300 per month equals $3,600 per year. That is what the average recipient receives. $40 per year multiplied by 90 years equals ( drum roll please ) $3,600. People receive welfare on average 1 year. I don’t think people live like kings on welfare. When you loons make statements like that it shows how removed from reality you really are. Please educate yourself, you will be much better off.

No it wouldn't. $40 at 80 years interest... are you kidding? And $40 on average per year for a worker? Right.... and yet here we sit listening to all the Conservatives on this forum complaining over $40 a year like it is breaking their banks? GTFO... do you understand you are arguing against yourself?

I’m not arguing against myself. I am trying to show you with math and facts that your position is wrong. And no $40 bucks doesn’t break me. Again you are deflecting. You are the idiot that says 100% of the money is put into an account for your offspring and that it collects interest. If you are to ignorant to realize that the money paid into a community pot doesn’t go directly to a single relative, I can’t help you. The $40 came directly form the tax law. There is no interest since the pot has been raided. Communicating with you is like talking to a cardboard box. I’m done with you.

Did I say it breaks just you?

Do Conservatives on this forum complain or not about how paying into welfare breaks their paycheck?

 

[Rustic]

It is a deflection. You spoke about direct input into a system vs direct input into an investment into a family. I never stated that productivity is transferred with wealth. You can put all the little laughing dogs you want into the thread, it doesn’t change the illogical statements you have made. If you want to stay on subject I wil, talk if you want to change, I am not interested. You can’t substantiate your foolish statements and now you want to change the subject.

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

Welfare has no place in civilized society

 

[Lewdog]

It's not a deflection because it is specifically what I asked the OP... if inheritance of money also means inheritance of the productivity it took the previous generation of the family to make the money. For example is Anderson Cooper a highly productive member of society because he is a decedent of the Vanderbuilt family?

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

Welfare has no place in civilized society

You're right... because in a civilized society we wouldn't have poor people, homelessness, and starving kids, much less people care more about what kind of car they drive is more important than a kid that goes hungry.

 

[BrokeLoser]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

The most productive didn't get tax cuts.

Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.

Trump being one of them.

But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.

Nice thread you got here though.

My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?

Only the upper 1% and large corporations benefit from the great tax cut scam. The lowest 20% actually get a tax hike, and the next 40% will being paying more taxes starting next year, and everyone but the upper income bracket will be paying higher taxes in 5 years.

The only people in America who are productive take a shower after work, and are the working class Americans, that carry a lunch box to work every day.

Every one else is a parasite that was born on third base and think they hit a triple.

In LibTardia the most productive are those individuals stacking bricks in the sweltering heat...not highly educated, high iQ executives sitting at desks in air conditioned offices delegating work out.
I can’t make this shit up people.

 

[Rustic]

It wasn’t our discussion, you pivoted. However if that was indeed your question to the op it was a straw an question at best and not in any way cohearant to the op. If you want to keep with that defense then you were deflecting from the offset.

You lost the argument on all sides. Leave the ring with a little dignity.

He's the one that tried to argue that even with those that inherited their money instead of earning it... that they inherited the productivity. Do you even read the thread?

Try to stay on track. That wasn’t the discussion that we were having. You pivoted and ran away when you couldn’t support your position.

I've supported my position many times. If my great grandparent paid taxes 80 years ago every year without drawing any, and my grandparent did the same... and my parents did the same... if I were to get some kind of welfare like food stamps or other assistance, they would have more than paid for it. Do you know how much it is for a year of food stamps for a single person? How much per year do you think people get in welfare? How long do you think people stay on welfare? Good grief some of you people think the average person lives like a king on welfare... hint, they don't.

Welfare has no place in civilized society

You're right... because in a civilized society we wouldn't have poor people, homelessness, and starving kids, much less people care more about what kind of car they drive is more important than a kid that goes hungry.

Have you ever heard of the saying, it’s better to teach a man to fish than give a man a fish?
Socialism can never work because it forces everybody into it

 

[hadit]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

You ought to study and learn the facts on issues before you post. Your ignorance continues to amaze.

You are echoing the meme income tax cannot be cut for those who earn too little, and the Callous Conservative set complains that the working poor are scofflaws. The working poor do pay taxes:

"In 2017 for example, if you are under age 65 and single, you must file a tax return if you earn $10,400 or more, which is the sum of the 2017 standard deduction for a single taxpayer plus one exemption."

Of course the working poor work must pay for gas - federal and state taxes apply - or public transportation if they don't live close enough to walk. they may not be able to afford housing close to their work place, or they may work two or three jobs, adding to their transportation needs. The may not have enough income to buy health insurance or enough food, and thus must rely on local government to provide aid.

Yet people like you think they have it easy and are too lazy to improve their skills to get a good paying job with benefits. Hence I've coined the phrase Callous Conservative, which describes every person who votes for a Republican.

The fact that you equate Republicans with conservatives reveals a vast ignorance in you.