Philosophical differences...GOP vs. DNC

[eagle1462010]

Pony the fuck up Mr. so called Moderate.........Mr. Self Righteous...........

Did the left use dirty tactics and pay protesters to riot........and have they done this before.

Do they promote Racism and then after inflaming the situation back off and say.........we didn't do this.......as cities burn.....

Did Federal Agencies under Obama attack Tea Party Groups and Conservative Groups for their views......

Is the Clinton Foundation a money laundering operation...........

Explain how to control MANDATORY spending...........SPECIFICS.......... I challenged you on this.........you go give me SPECIFICS........when I responded YOU FIRST ......you tried to play MR. NOBLE MAN........

No dice...................I've seen this tactic since the 90's...........You offer NOTHING but demand we answer your questions..........

You are a tool.........and nothing more trying to play off as a moderate........

Throw some liberals under the bus and prove me wrong..........Feinstien.........for starters........easy one.............choo choo.

 

[Seawytch]

He donates his income to charity, moron.

Show me his tax return to prove it

You show us his tax return to prove your claim.

Not my job

If Crooked Donnie wants to prove it......SHOW YOUR TAXES

So you are telling us that the Hussein IRS let the Donald get away with not paying taxes.....and you have no proof.

Sure, Corky.

Crooked Donnie admits he is a freeloader

I thought he admitted to being a traitor...

 

[eagle1462010]

You claim to be moderate...........I don't agree...........

Another lie. I have never claimed to be moderate. I also address that lie, specifically, in the second line of my sig.

Those of us who can think for ourselves expose people like you for what you are, and I understand that would trigger you.

Not my problem. When you lie like this, it illustrates my point.

I do hope the young lady for whom this thread is intended is reading this.
.

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

 

[Norman]

My youngest continues to ask questions about the ‘Parties” and their distinct differences. She’s gonna follow this thread...help me explain things to a 15 year old.
I’ll get things started.
GOP:
“Let’s get the lower 50% whom contribute very little to do better and contribute more.”
DNC:
“Let’s get the the people already paying our way to pay more.”

GOP:
“Let’s lockdown our borders and focus on taking care of Americans.”
DNC:
“Let’s allow Mexicans, Central and South Americans in to mooch off taxpayers...WE’RE RICH!”

It's all about putting Americans first and unfortunately illegals come second.

And the politicians who have bought some votes at expense of your child's future should of course become last.

 

[Mac1958]

You claim to be moderate...........I don't agree...........

Another lie. I have never claimed to be moderate. I also address that lie, specifically, in the second line of my sig.

Those of us who can think for ourselves expose people like you for what you are, and I understand that would trigger you.

Not my problem. When you lie like this, it illustrates my point.

I do hope the young lady for whom this thread is intended is reading this.
.

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

I'll assume you now realize that I'm neither a moderate nor a fence-sitter nor "never render a real opinion". Good.

Like pretty much everyone else, I don't have a specific plan for balancing the budget, but it would require at least a decade to get there, so the Amendment would have be set up for incremental balancing. There is no doubt that personal income taxes would have to be increased dramatically, and I suggest adding four new, higher margins, up to 59.9%. It would require cuts to the military, and probably spending freezes. We'll need to increase Social Security funding by eliminating the payroll cap, which is currently $128,400. Certainly a departmental freeze would be needed.

Several parts, open for discussion.
.

 

[eagle1462010]

Ten Thousand Commandments

Excellent place to see regulations and why they need to be cut.

Dr. Tom Coburn’s Legacy

For years......Coburn documented wasteful spending.

2017 Prime Cuts
Federal Grants, Government Grants and Loans Index - Federal Grants Wire

Grants for anything you can think of

Agricultural Subsidies

General Electric | Subsidy Tracker

just some examples

 

[eagle1462010]

You claim to be moderate...........I don't agree...........

Another lie. I have never claimed to be moderate. I also address that lie, specifically, in the second line of my sig.

Those of us who can think for ourselves expose people like you for what you are, and I understand that would trigger you.

Not my problem. When you lie like this, it illustrates my point.

I do hope the young lady for whom this thread is intended is reading this.
.

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

I'll assume you now realize that I'm neither a moderate nor a fence-sitter nor "never render a real opinion". Good.

Like pretty much everyone else, I don't have a specific plan for balancing the budget, but it would require at least a decade to get there, so the Amendment would have be set up for incremental balancing. There is no doubt that personal income taxes would have to be increased dramatically, and I suggest adding four new, higher margins, up to 59.9%. It would require cuts to the military, and probably spending freezes. We'll need to increase Social Security funding by eliminating the payroll cap, which is currently $128,400. Certainly a departmental freeze would be needed.

Several parts, open for discussion.
.

60% taxation............you just lifted your skirt............for what you really are..............thank you.........

What is the AVERAGE FEDERAL REVENUE historical REGARDLESS of tax rate.........in the United States.............

Show me..............

 

[Mac1958]

Another lie. I have never claimed to be moderate. I also address that lie, specifically, in the second line of my sig.

Those of us who can think for ourselves expose people like you for what you are, and I understand that would trigger you.

Not my problem. When you lie like this, it illustrates my point.

I do hope the young lady for whom this thread is intended is reading this.
.

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

I'll assume you now realize that I'm neither a moderate nor a fence-sitter nor "never render a real opinion". Good.

Like pretty much everyone else, I don't have a specific plan for balancing the budget, but it would require at least a decade to get there, so the Amendment would have be set up for incremental balancing. There is no doubt that personal income taxes would have to be increased dramatically, and I suggest adding four new, higher margins, up to 59.9%. It would require cuts to the military, and probably spending freezes. We'll need to increase Social Security funding by eliminating the payroll cap, which is currently $128,400. Certainly a departmental freeze would be needed.

Several parts, open for discussion.
.

60% taxation............you just lifted your skirt............for what you really are..............thank you.........

What is the AVERAGE FEDERAL REVENUE historical REGARDLESS of tax rate.........in the United States.............

Show me..............

You see one thing and off you go. I'm a left-leaning independent. All you had to do was ask.

I don't have that figure, and I don't care enough to look it up.

Make a point.
.

 

[eagle1462010]

I suggested the penny plan..........1% reduction of Federal Spending per year for 6 years......in a thread a while back......while you flamed me and called me a liar...........

You demanded specifics..........and in my quote.............I said Freeze federal spending at current levels.............and you flamed me for not being specific................all you said is CUT CUT CUT..............I called you out for being Hypocrite...........put you in the nose bleed section for it...........

and now..........as I see.........you want HIGHER TAXES.............which is EXACTLY what the DEMS want...........HIGHER TAXES..........

To save you the trouble.......18% is the historical average versus GDP on revenues......REGARDLESS OF TAX RATES............yet we spend at roughly 23%............You WILL NEVER BALANCE THE BUDGET by raising taxes..................Japan has tried that and no matter what they did........they fell into the liquidity trap..............20 year history on it..............check it out........

IT DOESN'T WORK...........

 

[eagle1462010]

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

I'll assume you now realize that I'm neither a moderate nor a fence-sitter nor "never render a real opinion". Good.

Like pretty much everyone else, I don't have a specific plan for balancing the budget, but it would require at least a decade to get there, so the Amendment would have be set up for incremental balancing. There is no doubt that personal income taxes would have to be increased dramatically, and I suggest adding four new, higher margins, up to 59.9%. It would require cuts to the military, and probably spending freezes. We'll need to increase Social Security funding by eliminating the payroll cap, which is currently $128,400. Certainly a departmental freeze would be needed.

Several parts, open for discussion.
.

60% taxation............you just lifted your skirt............for what you really are..............thank you.........

What is the AVERAGE FEDERAL REVENUE historical REGARDLESS of tax rate.........in the United States.............

Show me..............

You see one thing and off you go. I'm a left-leaning independent. All you had to do was ask.

I don't have that figure, and I don't care enough to look it up.

Make a point.
.

60% tax rate............you made the point exactly where you stand..............

Tax rate............historical average of Federal Revenue versus tax rate..............FAIL..................

 

[Seawytch]

You claim to be moderate...........I don't agree...........

Another lie. I have never claimed to be moderate. I also address that lie, specifically, in the second line of my sig.

Those of us who can think for ourselves expose people like you for what you are, and I understand that would trigger you.

Not my problem. When you lie like this, it illustrates my point.

I do hope the young lady for whom this thread is intended is reading this.
.

For you to refer to me as a liar in the same aspect of Jake the Fake is a Joke.........

I've seen your threads trying BS social experiments..........trying to act all righteous while YOU NEVER RENDER A REAL OPINION..........

Which is exactly why I place you in the NOSE BLEED SECTION of the bleachers..........

What is your position on career politicians who GET PAID by LOBBIES.........to do their bidding..............

NAME SOME.........SPECIFICS........I call the ones on the right RINO'S.......McCain being a prime example.........now name some on the left for me........plenty there and plenty on the right still there.

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Term limits take away the voter's power. Also, I want experienced people making policy decisions and to mentor new members. Term limits have hurt California.

https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Time-to-end-term-limits-in-California-2389046.php

A balanced budget amendment would never work. Congress would just declare things outside the budgetary process or exclude military spending. We need accounting reform, not budget reform.

If I ran the world all but individual donations of no more than oh $500 to $1000 per candidate. No PACs, no committees, no special interest groups, only individuals.

There would be no political ads allowed on television. Candidates would each get a set number of time on public airwaves to plead their case.

Lobbyists would be banned from giving any money to anyone for anything. They lobby with the strength of their voting supporters, that's it.

I'd make Primaries happen on a rotating regional basis so nobody always gets to be first all the time and everybody else fights for the rest.

Redistricting would be removed as a function of the legislature.

 

[eagle1462010]

US Government 20th Century Revenue History with Charts - a www.usgovernmentrevenue.com briefing

This is decent site to learn.....

FLAT LINED AT THE AVERAGE I POSTED......18%.....

During that time........rates have been very high and very low........His ideology of higher taxes to pay for it.........DON'T WORK..........History is completely against him.

 

[eagle1462010]

U.S. companies will pay billions in tax on offshore cash piles

Repatriating offshore money.......lower rate........money is returning to the United States......Tax bill under Trump

Apple, Capitalizing on New Tax Law, Plans to Bring Billions in Cash Back to U.S.

Apple to invest 350 billion over the next 5 years.......pay about 35 billion in taxes for bringing the money home.

Terms of Service Violation


I used left leaning sites to make a point............Trumps tax cuts are bringing back offshore money....and with it tax revenues...........roughly 360 Billion over 10 years...............

36 billion a year........not counting the investments possible.........and jobs as a result...............MORE PEOPLE WORKING............LESS ENTITLEMENTS..............

less spending................more revenue...........................

Is that correct MAC...............Under the new tax plan .............are companies bringing home offshore money and is it increasing tax revenues...........GOOD OR BAD...........????

 

[Mac1958]

Happy to! I would take the following specific steps:

1. Short, strict term limits
2. Publicly-funded elections
3. Far stricter limits on lobbyist spending, all the way down to zero if needed
4. Balanced Budget Amendment

This combination of requirements would immediately change the landscape of private political spending.

There is no one on this board who offers more specific, independent ideas than me.

You're welcome to continue asking for examples.
.

Ok............this is better .........

I'm for term limits.....
Against tax payers paying for elections....
Lobbyist are a serious problem.......smaller gov't and power to the states is the answer.....not more gov't
And yes to a Balanced budget.

Now.........BALANCE IT FOR ME......SPECIFICS...........

BTW......Your asking for specifics on this subject of cut cut cut.........and calling me a liar is where we started this argument.

I'll assume you now realize that I'm neither a moderate nor a fence-sitter nor "never render a real opinion". Good.

Like pretty much everyone else, I don't have a specific plan for balancing the budget, but it would require at least a decade to get there, so the Amendment would have be set up for incremental balancing. There is no doubt that personal income taxes would have to be increased dramatically, and I suggest adding four new, higher margins, up to 59.9%. It would require cuts to the military, and probably spending freezes. We'll need to increase Social Security funding by eliminating the payroll cap, which is currently $128,400. Certainly a departmental freeze would be needed.

Several parts, open for discussion.
.

60% taxation............you just lifted your skirt............for what you really are..............thank you.........

What is the AVERAGE FEDERAL REVENUE historical REGARDLESS of tax rate.........in the United States.............

Show me..............

You see one thing and off you go. I'm a left-leaning independent. All you had to do was ask.

I don't have that figure, and I don't care enough to look it up.

Make a point.
.

60% tax rate............you made the point exactly where you stand..............

Tax rate............historical average of Federal Revenue versus tax rate..............FAIL..................

That's a very compelling argument, thanks.
.

 

[eagle1462010]

To the daughter..............look at history.........study history........and learn where NOT TO FAIL AGAIN..........History has a way of repeating itself...........so you look to it to avoid the mistakes of the past..............

The Dems have always favored higher taxes...........and as I've shown..........the rates of taxation have been very high and low........but the revenues have stayed roughly the same.............historically............we can afford to spend only 18% of the GDP in gov't..........anything more than that......and it's a cycle of debt........that never ends..........

Japan's trap

Raise taxes.......lose jobs..........

lower taxes too much...........lose revenue......

There is a balance.............and the sword cuts both ways...........understanding that balance is the key..........NOT arbitrary tax rates...........

We have a spending problem...........not a tax problem.

 

[Rustic]

Dems: Healthcare is a basic human right
GOP: Let em die

Lol
Fuck face, I have no right to healthcare but I do have a right to earn my health care. So quit pushing that shit on us.

 

[Rustic]

My youngest continues to ask questions about the ‘Parties” and their distinct differences. She’s gonna follow this thread...help me explain things to a 15 year old.
I’ll get things started.
GOP:
“Let’s get the lower 50% whom contribute very little to do better and contribute more.”
DNC:
“Let’s get the the people already paying our way to pay more.”

GOP:
“Let’s lockdown our borders and focus on taking care of Americans.”
DNC:
“Let’s allow Mexicans, Central and South Americans in to mooch off taxpayers...WE’RE RICH!”

Dems: let’s help people who need helping
GOP: Let’s help billionaires

Can anyone point to Republican legislation in the last 40 years that doesn’t favor the wealthy over everyone else?

Point to a Dim who doesn't favor the wealthy.

The Great Obama

Lol
You would eat the shit out of his ass if he asked you to...

 

[eagle1462010]

The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR

The cost of illegal immigration to the Federal Gov't and the States............is YUGE..............and it's real........

And it adds to mandatory spending............IT MUST END...........We can't pay the bills already..............and this debate is both FISCAL and about CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS..................

Fiscal........they are costing us a fortune....

Constitutional.........a Republic is a nation of laws..........people don't have the right to pick and choose which laws they will enforce or not enforce......

Human rights.............under the law.............Immigrant workers are actually protected from abuse WHEN THEY WORK LEGALLY.........did you know that the Dept of Labor has a program for farm workers that REQUIRES employers to ........

Provide transportation.....to and from work.......
Must feed them..........
Must provide housing for them while they work.........

Yet......in places like California ............25% of farm workers are illegal........the most in the United States and it is run primarily by Democrats.........

Refusing to OBEY the LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC...........

Why..........because OBEYING THE LAW COST MONEY.

Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) - Wage and Hour Division (WHD) - U.S. Department of Labor

Recently the Kock Brothers went for Amnesty for illegals.........they have always lobbied for the GOP......but only when the GOP DOES their bidding.....

They lifted their skirts here lately........showed their true colors and wanted amnesty for illegals........

Why...........they want cheap labor and nothing more.

 

[Rustic]

My youngest continues to ask questions about the ‘Parties” and their distinct differences. She’s gonna follow this thread...help me explain things to a 15 year old.
I’ll get things started.
GOP:
“Let’s get the lower 50% whom contribute very little to do better and contribute more.”
DNC:
“Let’s get the the people already paying our way to pay more.”

GOP:
“Let’s lockdown our borders and focus on taking care of Americans.”
DNC:
“Let’s allow Mexicans, Central and South Americans in to mooch off taxpayers...WE’RE RICH!”

Show her the platforms of each and let her make her own conclusions.

There’s a flaw in that methodology...like Liberals / Lefties children don’t have a firm grasp of the economic side of things...they translate the emotional feel good “stuff’ quite easily which works in the DNC’s favor. Children are naive and they fall for the feels...the problem is, if we all disregard the economics who’s gonna pay us to feel good?

No, not really. At 15 she can think and research for herself. (I have a 16 year old daughter) If the platforms favor Democrats, that's not the fault of their platform, but the Republicans. It's not the Democrats fault that a majority of Americans favor their policies over Republican policies on just about every issue you can name.

Lol
Are you stupid in the head?
The divide in this country is rural and urban, the two will NEVER agree... as the way it should be.
So shut the fuck up

 

[eagle1462010]

You backed up yet..................MAC...........

I've gotta go cut the grass..............school is out of session for bit..............

I've been posting off and on for 3 decades..............this isn't my first rodeo..............