Pretty much!

[irosie91]

You people are putting too much into an election result in a socialist loving city. Since when is NYC a mirror of the rest of the country? She’s not the future of this country in reality.

NYC isn’t a mirror of the rest of the country. It is the predictor. What happens in NY first, eventually happens to the rest of the country.

and the world-------a walk around big cities -----OVER THE SEA ------looks like New York City----15 years ago.

So if NYC is backwards compared to the rest of the world, what does that say about the rest of America?

NYC is "backwards compared to the rest of the world"?? ????? in what parameter

Maybe I misunderstood your post. It sounded like you were saying that NYC looks like other overseas cities 15 years ago.

So you were saying that other world cities look like NYC did 15 years ago?

<<< yes----this one.
Tendency to high buildings and lots of vehicular traffic
and same damn consumer stuff all over the place----
but like it USED to be -----a few years ago. ALL OVER
THE DAMNED PLANET

 

[Mac1958]

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

I understand the premise, I'm pro-business, I'm pro-capitalism.

What I think is being ignored is the fact that, within a capitalist system, there are simply people who are better-equipped to create wealth than others. Within this particular system, they simply have the skillsets and motivations and temperaments that are required to make more money for themselves and for others. That's just a fact of human nature.

So, those who have those skillsets and motivations and temperaments have to decide, for purely selfish reasons - are they willing to risk even higher redistribution of their assets by fighting to keep more? Because that's where we are right now. If wealth distribution gets much more out of balance, we're going to see it reflected in elections.

So, it's a pretty clear choice. It's not about simplistic platitudes or shouting SOCIALISM any more.
.

 

[irosie91]

Not everyone who is rich got their wealth served to them on a silver platter. Some worked very very hard for their money and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the kind of life their parents couldn’t afford to give them. All I’ve got to say to the lefties who lament “Pay your fair share!” Is FUCK YOU. There are ways to fight poverty without resorting to extremes. You want to be lazy and get paid for it then get the hell out of the US.

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

 

[BookShaka]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

 

[Penelope]

The GOP had better start re-learning how to communicate pretty soon.

Avoiding it and throwing around platitudes isn't going to work.

Sanders tried the same BS in 2016....how did that work out?

If the DNC had not stopped him, well my guess we would have him as President...

America will add another S to her initials when she become the United Socialist States of America...

Believe me it will happen and not because I want it to but because most Americans want free stuff they do not pay for or work for...

Marxism can never work because of Greed, Envy and Sloth but as history explains humans never learn...

Actually neither can straight capitalism for the very same reasons.

 

[ricechickie]

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

I understand the premise, I'm pro-business, I'm pro-capitalism.

What I think is being ignored is the fact that, within a capitalist system, there are simply people who are better-equipped to create wealth than others. Within this particular system, they simply have the skillsets and motivations and temperaments that are required to make more money for themselves and for others. That's just a fact of human nature.

So, those who have those skillsets and motivations and temperaments have to decide, for purely selfish reasons - are they willing to risk even higher redistribution of their assets by fighting to keep more? Because that's where we are right now. If wealth distribution gets much more out of balance, we're going to see it reflected in elections.

So, it's a pretty clear choice. It's not about simplistic platitudes or shouting SOCIALISM any more.
.

When capitalism is utilized by indivuals and small companies, it’s great. When you have mega-corporations, who also lobby for their own bailouts and tax cuts and rely on government to pay assistance to their own employees to keep their own costs down, then there’s a problem.

 

[Penelope]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

Meanwhile we are bailing out the farmers once again due to the trade war. Trump threatens any country that wants to move , like HD, that is what communist countries do, they also take away security clearances from those who disagree with them (the admin) and threaten to lock them up. We are a plutocracy, run by the wealthy for the wealthy and now run by a dictator.

 

[sartre play]

Good stuff all that...who the fuck pays for it?

Anyone buying her BS needs their head examined

We are spending all the money & borrowing more any way, so why not for advantage of the majority of the population.

 

[Mac1958]

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

I understand the premise, I'm pro-business, I'm pro-capitalism.

What I think is being ignored is the fact that, within a capitalist system, there are simply people who are better-equipped to create wealth than others. Within this particular system, they simply have the skillsets and motivations and temperaments that are required to make more money for themselves and for others. That's just a fact of human nature.

So, those who have those skillsets and motivations and temperaments have to decide, for purely selfish reasons - are they willing to risk even higher redistribution of their assets by fighting to keep more? Because that's where we are right now. If wealth distribution gets much more out of balance, we're going to see it reflected in elections.

So, it's a pretty clear choice. It's not about simplistic platitudes or shouting SOCIALISM any more.
.

When capitalism is utilized by indivuals and small companies, it’s great. When you have mega-corporations, who also lobby for their own bailouts and tax cuts and rely on government to pay assistance to their own employees to keep their own costs down, then there’s a problem.

That's where smart, efficient, effective, flexible regulation comes into play.

The kind that wasn't in effect in 2007/2008.
.

 

[ricechickie]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

 

[PredFan]

Not everyone who is rich got their wealth served to them on a silver platter. Some worked very very hard for their money and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the kind of life their parents couldn’t afford to give them. All I’ve got to say to the lefties who lament “Pay your fair share!” Is FUCK YOU. There are ways to fight poverty without resorting to extremes. You want to be lazy and get paid for it then get the hell out of the US.

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

Irrelevant really. Because the left uses that to call his business acumen into question. If it’s part of business then their argument is invalid. If you are one of the rare lefties here who is not arguing that then fine. He may have inhereted his family money, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also earned quite a lot.

 

[PredFan]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

Meanwhile we are bailing out the farmers once again due to the trade war. Trump threatens any country that wants to move , like HD, that is what communist countries do, they also take away security clearances from those who disagree with them (the admin) and threaten to lock them up. We are a plutocracy, run by the wealthy for the wealthy and now run by a dictator.

Garbage. Trump is right to force the other countries to rethink their unfair trade practices, and he’s trying to ease the burden on the farmers. That’s reasonable. Those people who no longer work in intel, SHOULD have their clearances revoked immediately upon leaving the job. That’s just common sense.

 

[BULLDOG]

Not everyone who is rich got their wealth served to them on a silver platter. Some worked very very hard for their money and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the kind of life their parents couldn’t afford to give them. All I’ve got to say to the lefties who lament “Pay your fair share!” Is FUCK YOU. There are ways to fight poverty without resorting to extremes. You want to be lazy and get paid for it then get the hell out of the US.

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

Irrelevant really. Because the left uses that to call his business acumen into question. If it’s part of business then their argument is invalid. If you are one of the rare lefties here who is not arguing that then fine. He may have inhereted his family money, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also earned quite a lot.

Anyone who has gone bankrupt that many times doesn't have much business acumen. Probably a pretty good scam artist though.

 

[PredFan]

Not everyone who is rich got their wealth served to them on a silver platter. Some worked very very hard for their money and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the kind of life their parents couldn’t afford to give them. All I’ve got to say to the lefties who lament “Pay your fair share!” Is FUCK YOU. There are ways to fight poverty without resorting to extremes. You want to be lazy and get paid for it then get the hell out of the US.

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

Irrelevant really. Because the left uses that to call his business acumen into question. If it’s part of business then their argument is invalid. If you are one of the rare lefties here who is not arguing that then fine. He may have inhereted his family money, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also earned quite a lot.

Anyone who has gone bankrupt that many times doesn't have much business acumen. Probably a pretty good scam artist though.

You say that because you don’t know jack shit about it.

 

[dave p]

Good stuff all that...who the fuck pays for it?

Anyone buying her BS needs their head examined

Well let see we can do lots of things like raise the top tax bracket.

We can also raise yours. Then again, I suppose you’d actually have to pay them first

I'm not in the top tax bracket and after a few hundred million they can pay, since most of them pay peanuts as it is.

They already pay. The top 1% pay almost 50% of the federal taxes.

It is a commonly held belief amongst the barely
literate------that "RICH FOLK" do not pay taxes

There once was a time when Democrats were smart.

" an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough jobs or enough profits"
John F. Kennedy

 

[rightwinger]

So FOX sent an intrepid conservative to an Alexandria Ocasio Cortez rally and the conservative ended up getting kind of excited:

‘Fox & Friends’ Falls Face-First Into Ocasio-Cortez ‘Trap’

Kruta told the Fox & Friends hosts that she went to the rally to “see what the fuss was about” and “why the message was resonating.” Asked why voters might be drawn to a Democratic Socialist message, she added, “They talk about things that everybody wants, especially if you’re a parent. They talk about education for your kids, health care for your kids, the things that you want.”

Then Hannity tried to scare his audience and Ocasio Cortez thanked him:

The GOP can keep laughing, or it can start paying attention. Which would be smarter?
.

Education and healthcare for children?

Commie Bastards!

 

[Maxdeath]

Since you are unable to use google the rest fall between 45.6 and 45%.
You are still talking almost 10% increase when Americans are complaining about the national debt, infrastructure and not having enough of a tax cut.

You think the poor will be taxed that much, or the rich?

That is the average.

Of course you can't even begin to use that 45% bracket since the U.S. has higher drug prices, easier access to healthcare. The U.S. Also has things called insurance companies that will increase the cost or they will lose one of the most lucriative part of their business.

Considering that above 45% median tax rate does nothing to address the debt problem or our infrastructure problems. Then you add in the simple fact that companies and millionaires will just keep their profits and money offshore you are talking even less to tax at a higher tax it is not very viable in the current American culture.

The idea that the world owes someone simply because they were born does not sit well with those that put in the work and sweat to make more of themselves.

 

[BULLDOG]

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

Irrelevant really. Because the left uses that to call his business acumen into question. If it’s part of business then their argument is invalid. If you are one of the rare lefties here who is not arguing that then fine. He may have inhereted his family money, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also earned quite a lot.

Anyone who has gone bankrupt that many times doesn't have much business acumen. Probably a pretty good scam artist though.

You say that because you don’t know jack shit about it.

You're right. I never went bankrupt.

 

[BookShaka]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

 

[irosie91]

Not everyone who is rich got their wealth served to them on a silver platter. Some worked very very hard for their money and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the kind of life their parents couldn’t afford to give them. All I’ve got to say to the lefties who lament “Pay your fair share!” Is FUCK YOU. There are ways to fight poverty without resorting to extremes. You want to be lazy and get paid for it then get the hell out of the US.

Why does the idea of everyone being poor and lack of motive to strive for success (bc why aspire to thrive when there’s nothing to thrive for, when you have to hand over all your hard-earned money to those who didn’t even come close to working as hard as you) sound like a utopia to some?

Our president got his money the old fashioned way. He inherited it.

You liars can’t have it both ways. According to you idiots, Trump bankrupted multiple times. But each time he rebuilt himself. Either he is rich because of his inheritance or he lost it and rebuilt it. You can’t have it both ways liar.

bankruptcy in business-------seems to be part and parcel of "business"

Irrelevant really. Because the left uses that to call his business acumen into question. If it’s part of business then their argument is invalid. If you are one of the rare lefties here who is not arguing that then fine. He may have inhereted his family money, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also earned quite a lot.

what is "THE LEFT" ?? a giant fungus from outerspace?