I don't understand why republicans reject both a minimum wage hike and welfare for the poor

[Jarhead]

vizo is owned by a tiwan company circle jerk

wiki VIZIO is an American privately held producer of consumer electronics, based in Irvine, California. It was founded in October 2002 as V Inc. and is best known as a producer of affordable flat screen televisions.[2]


Suck my dick bear and shut the fuck up. You again don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

And AmTran Technology is exactly what?

When citing something, it is always best you read the entire text before using it to support your position.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

 

[kaz]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not concerned with truth so whatever.

 

[Royce99]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not cuuhhoncerned with truth so whatever.

d

Damn strange that the debt followed massive tax cuts for the rich

DUUHH

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor then between he and Bush41 they quadrupled the national debt.

Clinton balanced the budget, generated nearly $400 billion of surplus in fy's 1997-2001 and then along came slow walking, slow talkin' George. He cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003, increased spending and doubled the national debt again. Since Obama took over over $2 trillion of borrowed money has gone to pay the annual interest on the Reagan/Bushes debt:

Lies and bullshit. The Republicans were responsible for the economic restraint during Clinton's years. It wasn't his idea. And Reagan did not get the reduced spending from Democrats during his term in office. obama and the senate spent way more than anybody, especially before Republicans got the House.

Questions.....Did the Democrats cut taxes

No

[Did the Democrats witness taxes being cut] and keep on spending?

Yes.

Did they [Democrats] quadruple then double again the national debt?

Yes... and at the least. Such is the consistent consequence of the Ideological Left, the natural purpose of which is economic and cultural destruction.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not cuuhhoncerned with truth so whatever.

d

Damn strange that the debt followed massive tax cuts for the rich

DUUHH

(The Reader should realize that when a Leftist uses the word "Rich", they are referring to "Middle Class Jews".

Nothing changes with these would-be 'people'.)

 

[Ame®icano]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And how those likely voters actually did on elections?

What about will of the people thru ballot box? 34 states voted on defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

No, that doesn't count. Polls are better.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And how those likely voters actually did on elections?

What about will of the people thru ballot box? 34 states voted on defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

No, that doesn't count. Polls are better.

Elections actually are polls... that's what they call the places where people vote: Polls.

The difference is that when people VOTE they are not just issuing an opinion, they're stating in unambiguous terms their preferences on the rules by which they consent to be governed. When the Judiciary comes along and decides that those preferences are invalid, they are deciding that the consent of the governed, is irrelevant.

And THAT is the formula for civil war. As that is government failing to govern objectively.

 

[kaz]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not cuuhhoncerned with truth so whatever.

d

Damn strange that the debt followed massive tax cuts for the rich

DUUHH

Actually, the deficit did not grow as a percent of the economy despite Tip O'Neill's spending orgy

 

[Jarhead]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And what percentage will not allow a candidates stance on gay marriage sway their vote?

I bet over 50% of those that support gay marriage will not look at that position when choosing a candidate.

 

[Dana7360]

Because they want the super rich to have it all.

That's not possible, inheritance tax heard of it? Duh! Even with the trillions in wealth redistribution already going on you leftist socialist pukes want to steal even more from the people worked to earn it.

It's impossible to tax a dead person. The government has never done that.

What can and is done is tax the people who receive that inheritance.

The person who inherited that money and assets didn't work one second for it and never paid one penny in tax.

So your post is nothing but lies.

I have to ask, what does your post have to do with raising the minimum wage?

The answer is it has nothing to do with raising the minimum wage. You just want to either change the subject or you have nothing intelligent to say about raising the minimum wage.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because they want the super rich to have it all.

That's not possible, inheritance tax heard of it? Duh! Even with the trillions in wealth redistribution already going on you leftist socialist pukes want to steal even more from the people worked to earn it.

It's impossible to tax a dead person. The government has never done that.

What can and is done is tax the people who receive that inheritance.

The person who inherited that money and assets didn't work one second for it and never paid one penny in tax.

So your post is nothing but lies.

I have to ask, what does your post have to do with raising the minimum wage?

The answer is it has nothing to do with raising the minimum wage. You just want to either change the subject or you have nothing intelligent to say about raising the minimum wage.

You truly descend to the depths of stupidity and ignorance. When you first showed up I had some inkling you might be an intelligent liberal. That was dashed after you lied about being some kind of artist and has gone downhill since.
Taxes are levied on estates. The estate pays death duties. The heirs do not pay death duties.
It is irrelevant whether the heirs worked for the money or not. It is their money, not the government's.
Both the estate tax and minimum wage are similar in that government is taking frm one group to redistribute to another. In both cases the results are total failure. The super rich hire accountants adn lawyers to skirt the inheritance taxes, leaving middle class people who have built a business for example to take it in the shorts. The inheritance tax costs more to administer than it brings in.
Similarly min wage laws do not help the poor. Min wage laws cause poverty, taking the possibility of work away from low skilled people.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It's impossible to tax a dead person. The government has never done that.

Nonsense... .

What can and is done is tax the people who receive that inheritance.

The person who inherited that money and assets didn't work one second for it and never paid one penny in tax.

Which in no way, changes the FACT that the MONEY HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED AND TAXED REPEATEDLY. Which, given that THAT is all that is at issue, that demonstrates theDeceit, FRAUD and Ignorance relevant to the drivel you're pushin'.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not concerned with truth so whatever.

How does congress spend when the Pres has to sign off on it ?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And how those likely voters actually did on elections?

What about will of the people thru ballot box? 34 states voted on defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

No, that doesn't count. Polls are better.

We don't vote on civil rights.
Repubs as recently as last month tried to enact a very unpopular law in Indiana. The backlash was significant. With poll numbers like I showed, Repubs should choose their battles more wisely in the run up to 16'.

 

[The Rabbi]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not concerned with truth so whatever.

How does congress spend when the Pres has to sign off on it ?

Congress passes spending bills. Or did you forget that part?

 

[The Rabbi]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And how those likely voters actually did on elections?

What about will of the people thru ballot box? 34 states voted on defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

No, that doesn't count. Polls are better.

We don't vote on civil rights.
Repubs as recently as last month tried to enact a very unpopular law in Indiana. The backlash was significant. With poll numbers like I showed, Repubs should choose their battles more wisely in the run up to 16'.

Bullshit. We vote on voter indentification, we vote on voter requirements, we vote on rights to keep and bear arms, we vote on citizenship requirements.
Indiana's law was the exact same as any number of states. The "backlash" was fauxrage from the LEft.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No doubt it's going to be one of the key issues. There is a strong majority support for a MW increase. The demographics don't support the Repub position( on other issues as well), and allow for a win in 16'.

Now does matter what Americans want? Americans also want for example to present ID when voting, they also want traditional marriage, etc.

Poll: 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage
Read more: Poll 60 percent of likely voters back gay marriage - Steven Shepard - POLITICO

And how those likely voters actually did on elections?

What about will of the people thru ballot box? 34 states voted on defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

No, that doesn't count. Polls are better.

Elections actually are polls... that's what they call the places where people vote: Polls.

The difference is that when people VOTE they are not just issuing an opinion, they're stating in unambiguous terms their preferences on the rules by which they consent to be governed. When the Judiciary comes along and decides that those preferences are invalid, they are deciding that the consent of the governed, is irrelevant.

And THAT is the formula for civil war. As that is government failing to govern objectively.

No.
That's the formula for interpreting law and assuring it's consistent with the constitution.
Just as the founders intended.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So, why are Dems asking for minimum to be raised to $10 if that's not enough?!

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not concerned with truth so whatever.

How does congress spend when the Pres has to sign off on it ?

Congress passes spending bills. Or did you forget that part?

Who signs the bill to make it a law Dr. Dumble?

 

[The Rabbi]

They want phased in lifetime unemployment for the lowest skilled and least experienced workers so it's not so obviously they are responsible for their inability to get any job.

Maybe they can move to Mexico and get work

Things worked just fine before Ronald Reagan....the big tax cutter. He slashed tax rates to 50 year lows, continued to spend like a drunk sailor

When you re-write history you lose my interest. Tip O'Neill and the Democratic congress were the spenders, but you're obviously not concerned with truth so whatever.

How does congress spend when the Pres has to sign off on it ?

Congress passes spending bills. Or did you forget that part?

Who signs the bill to make it a law Dr. Dumble?

Typically the president signs the bill, but a bil can become law without it as well.
Was there some point you are trying to make? You watched Schoolhouse Rock How Bills Become Law and you're trying to show off?
Or are you forgetting that the Left likes to tell us how Bill Clinton balanced the budget (with a GOP Congress) but Ronald Reagan increased spending (with a Democrat Congress)? Or that Obama increased the deficit in his first term (with a Democrat Congress) but decreased it his second term (wth a GOP House)?
You are rapidly losing any worth in engaging.