Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[KissMy]

A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.

The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.

Hey, Jackwagon... A 5-year old can't cross the kind of wall Trump plans to build. We're probably going to put more people on the border until we get the wall built... but we're building a wall, get used to the idea...(and stop calling it a fence, Jeb and Marco) We'll deal with all other issues when the wall is built.

And hey... it doesn't matter if you want to compare it with the Great Wall of China or Berlin Wall.... that only demonstrates a wall CAN be built. And in our case, it is going to be built.

More Republican Big Government & More Spending Comong Up!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

That would work if you believe in charity, but government shouldn't be treated as a charity organization. The greater role and responsibility of the less fortunate should be left to private organizations like the Salvation Army and various faith based groups or shelters. Government having to force others to give, and pick and choose who best should be coerced into that role is not so much from the fact the rich are selfish. When you begin to believe it's the role of government to take on the role of providing for the poor rather than the individual, and society becomes numb and acclimated to accepting that view, it speaks to the nation as a whole being very self centered. In other words "Let someone else do it, they can spare to give something and the government can see to it they do." - kind of mentality. However, the government of freebies and checks hasn't shown an improvement in helping the poor achieve a better way of life, in fact Billions of unanswered dollars hasn't been shown to put a dent in reducing poverty. Rather it appears to have created more an accustomed "acclimated" mentality without much accountability or self sustained improvement to seek a better way of life, where government soon becomes the enabler rather than the help the poor really need.

Yes, better to have "work" no matter how low a wage (3rd world nations CONServative policy creates!), than be dependent on Gov't like EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED NATION right?

Without the myths and fetishes of the Randian cultist, you Klowns MIGHT have something!

We do have trade schools, as well as grants, the GI Bill,and a few private companies that help you achieve an an advanced skill or degree that pays more. Usually if an administration has to default to raising a minimum wage, it's because families are only able to find part time jobs through retail stores like Target, Starbucks, or a Walmart. You have to have a president who knows how to encourage and bring about a high paying skill industry. There is no revenue found with welfare and dependency on government, it only adds to the trillions of debt we currently have. Have we learned nothing from Greece?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.

The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.

Hey, Jackwagon... A 5-year old can't cross the kind of wall Trump plans to build. We're probably going to put more people on the border until we get the wall built... but we're building a wall, get used to the idea...(and stop calling it a fence, Jeb and Marco) We'll deal with all other issues when the wall is built.

And hey... it doesn't matter if you want to compare it with the Great Wall of China or Berlin Wall.... that only demonstrates a wall CAN be built. And in our case, it is going to be built.

More Republican Big Government Spending Comong Up!

We recently had more big government, it's called Obamacare.

 

[kaz]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

That would work if you believe in charity, but government shouldn't be treated as a charity organization. The greater role and responsibility of the less fortunate should be left to private organizations like the Salvation Army and various faith based groups or shelters. Government having to force others to give, and pick and choose who best should be coerced into that role is not so much from the fact the rich are selfish. When you begin to believe it's the role of government to take on the role of providing for the poor rather than the individual, and society becomes numb and acclimated to accepting that view, it speaks to the nation as a whole being very self centered. In other words "Let someone else do it, they can spare to give something and the government can see to it they do." - kind of mentality. However, the government of freebies and checks hasn't shown an improvement in helping the poor achieve a better way of life, in fact Billions of unanswered dollars hasn't been shown to put a dent in reducing poverty. Rather it appears to have created more an accustomed "acclimated" mentality without much accountability or self sustained improvement to seek a better way of life, where government soon becomes the enabler rather than the help the poor really need.

Yes, better to have "work" no matter how low a wage (3rd world nations CONServative policy creates!), than be dependent on Gov't like EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED NATION right?

Without the myths and fetishes of the Randian cultist, you Klowns MIGHT have something!

Government welfare does not increase wages. We had high wages in this country before we ever had welfare or Social Security.

Sure Bubba, sure



1890–1928
The Progressive Era


In 1900, if a mother had four children, there was a fifty-fifty chance that one would die before the age of 5. At the same time, half of all young people lost a parent before they reached the age of 21.

In 1900, the average family had an annual income of $3,000 (in today's dollars). The family had no indoor plumbing, no phone, and no car. About half of all American children lived in poverty. Most teens did not attend school; instead, they labored in factories or fields.

Digital History





In 1900, only 6 in 10 school-aged children in New York were enrolled in school. By 1920, 9 out of every 10 school age children were registered.


The Gordons' Story

March 12, 1907 — West 28th St. Storm water poured from the ceiling of the basement apartment and down its plaster walls, soaking the family’s meager bed, dresser, and table before coming to rest in deep, dirty puddles on the floor. Maria Gordon’s family—her nine-year-old niece, Edith, and six month-old foster child, Perry—had nowhere to sleep, and the workspace where Maria laundered clothes for her clients was unusable.

The Progressive Era | History of Poverty & Homelessness in NYC




From the mid-1800s into the 1900s, reformers pushed for a ban on child labor, arguing that working was bad for child development and that it decreased the wages of working adults. This campaign was successful on the state level—New York created restrictions on child labor in 1903—but there would be no successful national ban on child labor until 1938.

The Progressive Era | History of Poverty & Homelessness in NYC


The Tenement House Act of 1901 was the third in a series of tenement-reform laws passed by the New York State legislature. Like the laws passed in 1867 and 1879, it aimed to improve conditions in the city’s tenements—particularly in terms of ventilation, waste removal, and fire safety. Unlike previous laws, it provided a mechanism for enforcing its regulations.

Although the Tenement House Act of 1879 required a window in each bedroom, in practice most windows still opened onto dark interior airshafts. In an attempt to bring light and fresh air to bedrooms, the 1901 law set a minimum amount of space outside each window and required that the window be accessible for cleaning. As a result, landlords constructed buildings with courtyards rather than airshafts. To add to the increased illumination of tenement interiors that these modifications provided, the law also required all public spaces inside the buildings to be lit by either natural light (through windows and skylights) or artificial light (powered by gas or electricity).

The Progressive Era | History of Poverty & Homelessness in NYC

So government legislation is the reason houses all have indoor plumbing now and childhood diseases were ended?

You're a fucking moron.

Yes, we don't care about ourselves, government cares about us and takes care of us. They are why we have food in the table and a car in the garage. They make the sun shine and the flowers grow.

Yes, he is a fucking moron, but on the other hand... Hmm. That's all I've got, sorry.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol

As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!

You are a batshit crazy losertarin who will NEVER be honest on anything Bubba, why would the Chamber of Commerce oppose making sure the Corps they represent, are here in the US legally (Everify)?

AND YOU RIGHT WINGERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH DISCRIMINATION IN ARIZONA ABOUT ASKING FOR THEIR GAWDDAM PAPERS THERE, WHEN THEY WEREN'T DOING ANYTHING THAT REQUIRED IT!!!

Well I am not any kind of a -tarian but I do know what I support and what I don't.

Yep... asking for papers is totally unnecessary if we can simply apply the newly-PC liberal language test... those who can't speak English are illegals... right?

Hey... I am ALL FOR mandatory e-verify! Let's do it! ...Oh wait, California tried and their liberal Supreme Court ruled they couldn't make it mandatory! Ooops! ...We have a problem here!

ONCE MORE:


I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol

As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!

You are a batshit crazy losertarin who will NEVER be honest on anything Bubba, why would the Chamber of Commerce oppose making sure the Corps they represent, are here in the US legally (Everify)?

AND YOU RIGHT WINGERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH DISCRIMINATION IN ARIZONA ABOUT ASKING FOR THEIR GAWDDAM PAPERS THERE, WHEN THEY WEREN'T DOING ANYTHING THAT REQUIRED IT!!!

Actually, you don't get it. But I understand, you're not a very bright bulb.

I have no problem with E-verify! I've told you repeatedly in the past 5-6 posts that I am all FOR mandatory E-verify! I don't have any problem with punishing "job creators" for illegal aliens! If you are knowingly hiring illegal aliens you need to be punished harshly and severely... and in such a manner that is a clear deterrent. We're at a crucial sticking point on this knowing and unknowing thing... and I am trying to get some clarification from you but you keep indicating one thing then dodging a direct answer to my questions.

If we are going to hold employers accountable for unknowingly hiring illegals then we need to define the parameters by which they can use personal judgement in making an informed decision. You seem to think they can actively discriminate on the basis of whether someone can speak English and I am asking you to clarify if that's what you think the policy should be? So... if we passed a law that you must be able to speak English to be hired in America... you'd be okay with that?

Then, I have some further questions about your policy idea... If we can apply this to employers, can we also apply this to law enforcement? If the cops encounter a Mexican who can't speak English, can they assume he is an illegal alien and deport him?

Federal law prohibits asking the question are you a legal citizen in interviewing a prospective emloyee. I know this because I am hiring at my store and they don't allow us to ask. This is how they get around thier big money backers being able to hire more illegals. Progressives are underhanded

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

BUT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ASK IF THEY HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO WORK IN THE US!!!

Not in places like San Francisco they don't.

 

[kaz]

You mean the rich people who own all the democrats and a bunch of Republicans? Now why ever would they want cheap slave labour?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats

Are America's Richest Families Republicans or Democrats?



This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again


For now, the party still seems glued to the Movement Conservative idea, rooted in a long-standing ideology that business can do little or nothing wrong, that promoting the economic well-being of a few wealthy men will advance American society as a whole. Those few leaders are the “makers,” Paul Ryan explained in 2010; the majority of Americans are “takers.” The more it becomes evident that the “trickle down” theory of wealth has not worked– that rather than trickling down, wealth has rushed upward since 1980– the more leading Republicans insist that the problem is not their theory. The problem, they say, is that it has not been adopted fully enough.

This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again - Salon.com

Lol you are stupid. The richest are progressive scum bags that use morons like you to remain rich

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Sure Bubba, sure

The middle classes wages have been stagnant while the riches have gotten richer. The people who got hurt the most are uneducated workers. Back in the day they went to work for the big 3 or supplier to the big three. That's why the middle class shrunk. You send high paying low education union jobs overseas the middle class goes away and the rich get richer. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way now though. Wages are going up. The economy is getting better. Thanks Obama.

Wages are stagnate because people have to compete with law wage workers from third world countries. You can blame Democrats for that.

Yes, Democrats need to keep them poor, otherwise they'll stop voting for them

 

[kaz]

What part of "mandatory" didn't you understand?

Better talk to the GOP Plutocrats Bubba, including the Chamber who say you are nuts!

You mean the rich people who own all the democrats and a bunch of Republicans? Now why ever would they want cheap slave labour?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats

Are America's Richest Families Republicans or Democrats?



This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again


For now, the party still seems glued to the Movement Conservative idea, rooted in a long-standing ideology that business can do little or nothing wrong, that promoting the economic well-being of a few wealthy men will advance American society as a whole. Those few leaders are the “makers,” Paul Ryan explained in 2010; the majority of Americans are “takers.” The more it becomes evident that the “trickle down” theory of wealth has not worked– that rather than trickling down, wealth has rushed upward since 1980– the more leading Republicans insist that the problem is not their theory. The problem, they say, is that it has not been adopted fully enough.

This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again - Salon.com

Lol you are stupid. The richest are progressive scum bags that use morons like you to remain rich

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Sure Bubba, sure

Yes, Comrade Dad, not taking people's money is giving them money. All money is the people's money.

One question, why does the word Marxist bother you so much again?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Actually, you don't get it. But I understand, you're not a very bright bulb.

I have no problem with E-verify! I've told you repeatedly in the past 5-6 posts that I am all FOR mandatory E-verify! I don't have any problem with punishing "job creators" for illegal aliens! If you are knowingly hiring illegal aliens you need to be punished harshly and severely... and in such a manner that is a clear deterrent. We're at a crucial sticking point on this knowing and unknowing thing... and I am trying to get some clarification from you but you keep indicating one thing then dodging a direct answer to my questions.

If we are going to hold employers accountable for unknowingly hiring illegals then we need to define the parameters by which they can use personal judgement in making an informed decision. You seem to think they can actively discriminate on the basis of whether someone can speak English and I am asking you to clarify if that's what you think the policy should be? So... if we passed a law that you must be able to speak English to be hired in America... you'd be okay with that?

Then, I have some further questions about your policy idea... If we can apply this to employers, can we also apply this to law enforcement? If the cops encounter a Mexican who can't speak English, can they assume he is an illegal alien and deport him?

I thought CONservatives ALREADY decided the "papers please" movement was OK Bubba

Since YOU are NEVER going to get honest, I'm done replying to your nonsense on this

ONCE MORE:

I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol

As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!

What part of "mandatory" didn't you understand?

Better talk to the GOP Plutocrats Bubba, including the Chamber who say you are nuts!

You mean the rich people who own all the democrats and a bunch of Republicans? Now why ever would they want cheap slave labour?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats

Are America's Richest Families Republicans or Democrats?



This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again


For now, the party still seems glued to the Movement Conservative idea, rooted in a long-standing ideology that business can do little or nothing wrong, that promoting the economic well-being of a few wealthy men will advance American society as a whole. Those few leaders are the “makers,” Paul Ryan explained in 2010; the majority of Americans are “takers.” The more it becomes evident that the “trickle down” theory of wealth has not worked– that rather than trickling down, wealth has rushed upward since 1980– the more leading Republicans insist that the problem is not their theory. The problem, they say, is that it has not been adopted fully enough.

This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again - Salon.com

Yes we see how much the liberal belief of government spending, and spreading the wealth, has created such a booming economy under President Obama. Trust me, O'Malley tried that in Maryland, as it also resulted in fewer skilled jobs from higher taxes under an exploding debt.

 

[thanatos144]

I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol

As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!

You are a batshit crazy losertarin who will NEVER be honest on anything Bubba, why would the Chamber of Commerce oppose making sure the Corps they represent, are here in the US legally (Everify)?

AND YOU RIGHT WINGERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH DISCRIMINATION IN ARIZONA ABOUT ASKING FOR THEIR GAWDDAM PAPERS THERE, WHEN THEY WEREN'T DOING ANYTHING THAT REQUIRED IT!!!

Well I am not any kind of a -tarian but I do know what I support and what I don't.

Yep... asking for papers is totally unnecessary if we can simply apply the newly-PC liberal language test... those who can't speak English are illegals... right?

Hey... I am ALL FOR mandatory e-verify! Let's do it! ...Oh wait, California tried and their liberal Supreme Court ruled they couldn't make it mandatory! Ooops! ...We have a problem here!

ONCE MORE:


I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol

As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!

You are a batshit crazy losertarin who will NEVER be honest on anything Bubba, why would the Chamber of Commerce oppose making sure the Corps they represent, are here in the US legally (Everify)?

AND YOU RIGHT WINGERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH DISCRIMINATION IN ARIZONA ABOUT ASKING FOR THEIR GAWDDAM PAPERS THERE, WHEN THEY WEREN'T DOING ANYTHING THAT REQUIRED IT!!!

Actually, you don't get it. But I understand, you're not a very bright bulb.

I have no problem with E-verify! I've told you repeatedly in the past 5-6 posts that I am all FOR mandatory E-verify! I don't have any problem with punishing "job creators" for illegal aliens! If you are knowingly hiring illegal aliens you need to be punished harshly and severely... and in such a manner that is a clear deterrent. We're at a crucial sticking point on this knowing and unknowing thing... and I am trying to get some clarification from you but you keep indicating one thing then dodging a direct answer to my questions.

If we are going to hold employers accountable for unknowingly hiring illegals then we need to define the parameters by which they can use personal judgement in making an informed decision. You seem to think they can actively discriminate on the basis of whether someone can speak English and I am asking you to clarify if that's what you think the policy should be? So... if we passed a law that you must be able to speak English to be hired in America... you'd be okay with that?

Then, I have some further questions about your policy idea... If we can apply this to employers, can we also apply this to law enforcement? If the cops encounter a Mexican who can't speak English, can they assume he is an illegal alien and deport him?

Federal law prohibits asking the question are you a legal citizen in interviewing a prospective emloyee. I know this because I am hiring at my store and they don't allow us to ask. This is how they get around thier big money backers being able to hire more illegals. Progressives are underhanded

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

That's funny, because I had to provide documents that proved I was a legal citizen. All you have to do is require that they fill out an I-9, which needs to be accompanied by two forms of documentation, bot of which prove you are a citizen.

Do none of you read what it written? You do that after you have the job but you are not required to. When I am interviewing I am not allowed to ask it they are legal citizens . Nor can I do a back ground check till after given consent or hiring. Oh and the back ground check can not be to verify citizenship unless they are all ready employed and consent

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Boss]

When I am interviewing I am not allowed to ask it they are legal citizens .

It's all okay though... apparently, according to Dumb2Three, you can just see if they speak English and that determines if they are illegal aliens or not. I am not sure how his policy works for more intelligent illegals who may have learned some English before they came across but since he wants you thrown in jail even if you unknowingly hire an illegal, it might just be best to avoid Latino applicants altogether. Of course, you didn't hear that from ME, I'm a right-winger who isn't allowed to propose such things... it has to come from a liberal to be PC, you see?

 

[KissMy]

A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.

The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.

Hey, Jackwagon... A 5-year old can't cross the kind of wall Trump plans to build. We're probably going to put more people on the border until we get the wall built... but we're building a wall, get used to the idea...(and stop calling it a fence, Jeb and Marco) We'll deal with all other issues when the wall is built.

And hey... it doesn't matter if you want to compare it with the Great Wall of China or Berlin Wall.... that only demonstrates a wall CAN be built. And in our case, it is going to be built.

More Republican Big Government Spending Comong Up!

We recently had more big government, it's called Obamacare.

So BIG GOVERNMENT is great when it's for what you want???

What do you think Reagan's EMTALA was if it wasn't Very Expensive BIG GOV Healthcare???

 

[danielpalos]

Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats

Are America's Richest Families Republicans or Democrats?



This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again


For now, the party still seems glued to the Movement Conservative idea, rooted in a long-standing ideology that business can do little or nothing wrong, that promoting the economic well-being of a few wealthy men will advance American society as a whole. Those few leaders are the “makers,” Paul Ryan explained in 2010; the majority of Americans are “takers.” The more it becomes evident that the “trickle down” theory of wealth has not worked– that rather than trickling down, wealth has rushed upward since 1980– the more leading Republicans insist that the problem is not their theory. The problem, they say, is that it has not been adopted fully enough.

This is how the right wing dies: The GOP has rigged the game for the rich, again - Salon.com

Lol you are stupid. The richest are progressive scum bags that use morons like you to remain rich

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Sure Bubba, sure

The middle classes wages have been stagnant while the riches have gotten richer. The people who got hurt the most are uneducated workers. Back in the day they went to work for the big 3 or supplier to the big three. That's why the middle class shrunk. You send high paying low education union jobs overseas the middle class goes away and the rich get richer. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way now though. Wages are going up. The economy is getting better. Thanks Obama.

Wages are stagnate because people have to compete with law wage workers from third world countries. You can blame Democrats for that.

Yes, Democrats need to keep them poor, otherwise they'll stop voting for them

no way; some on the left are trying to convince women to practice more equality, for pay purposes, and let us vote for the chic politicians with the cutest snatch. it can't be any worse a "market based metric" in our modern political-economy.

 

[danielpalos]

When I am interviewing I am not allowed to ask it they are legal citizens .

It's all okay though... apparently, according to Dumb2Three, you can just see if they speak English and that determines if they are illegal aliens or not. I am not sure how his policy works for more intelligent illegals who may have learned some English before they came across but since he wants you thrown in jail even if you unknowingly hire an illegal, it might just be best to avoid Latino applicants altogether. Of course, you didn't hear that from ME, I'm a right-winger who isn't allowed to propose such things... it has to come from a liberal to be PC, you see?

in my case; Only the general government of the Union is delegated the social Power over lawful entry into the Union since 1808-and, is no longer a State power since then and has never been an Individual power.

we also enjoy our natural rights such as freedom of association and contract which may result in obligations.

We have a Commerce Clause in our supreme law of the land; why are we losing money on Commerce well regulated at our borders instead of the interior?

 

[Boss]

When I am interviewing I am not allowed to ask it they are legal citizens .

It's all okay though... apparently, according to Dumb2Three, you can just see if they speak English and that determines if they are illegal aliens or not. I am not sure how his policy works for more intelligent illegals who may have learned some English before they came across but since he wants you thrown in jail even if you unknowingly hire an illegal, it might just be best to avoid Latino applicants altogether. Of course, you didn't hear that from ME, I'm a right-winger who isn't allowed to propose such things... it has to come from a liberal to be PC, you see?

in my case; Only the general government of the Union is delegated the social Power over lawful entry into the Union since 1808-and, is no longer a State power since then and has never been an Individual power.

we also enjoy our natural rights such as freedom of association and contract which may result in obligations.

We have a Commerce Clause in our supreme law of the land; why are we losing money on Commerce well regulated at our borders instead of the interior?

When you start drinking heavily this early in the morning it can lead to alcoholism.

 

[sealybobo]

A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.

The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.

Hey, Jackwagon... A 5-year old can't cross the kind of wall Trump plans to build. We're probably going to put more people on the border until we get the wall built... but we're building a wall, get used to the idea...(and stop calling it a fence, Jeb and Marco) We'll deal with all other issues when the wall is built.

And hey... it doesn't matter if you want to compare it with the Great Wall of China or Berlin Wall.... that only demonstrates a wall CAN be built. And in our case, it is going to be built.

More Republican Big Government Spending Comong Up!

We recently had more big government, it's called Obamacare.

So BIG GOVERNMENT is great when it's for what you want???

What do you think Reagan's EMTALA was if it wasn't Very Expensive BIG GOV Healthcare???

That's our government you are talking about. How do we get companies to not gouge us? Our government regulates the market. Government is the referee.

Trust me the government isn't hurting the rich to win our votes. In fact we know corporations now serve lobbyists 80% of the time. So stfu dummy

 

[sealybobo]

Lol you are stupid. The richest are progressive scum bags that use morons like you to remain rich

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Sure Bubba, sure

The middle classes wages have been stagnant while the riches have gotten richer. The people who got hurt the most are uneducated workers. Back in the day they went to work for the big 3 or supplier to the big three. That's why the middle class shrunk. You send high paying low education union jobs overseas the middle class goes away and the rich get richer. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way now though. Wages are going up. The economy is getting better. Thanks Obama.

Wages are stagnate because people have to compete with law wage workers from third world countries. You can blame Democrats for that.

Yes, Democrats need to keep them poor, otherwise they'll stop voting for them

no way; some on the left are trying to convince women to practice more equality, for pay purposes, and let us vote for the chic politicians with the cutest snatch. it can't be any worse a "market based metric" in our modern political-economy.

Are you Greek? Because I am and I know many stupid Greeks who are Republicans. Are you one of them?

 

[bripat9643]

You really are a fucking moron. Do you think they could get over the Israeli wall, especially when there is a guard tower every half mile?

They all know their precious Democrat voters won't be able to get over a wall... why do you think they are whining and moaning about it so much?

That's exactly it. Whenever Democrats start whining about what something will cost, you know that isn't the real reason for their whining. Money is never an obstacle whenever it comes to one their boondoggle social programs.

 

[danielpalos]

Sure Bubba, sure

The middle classes wages have been stagnant while the riches have gotten richer. The people who got hurt the most are uneducated workers. Back in the day they went to work for the big 3 or supplier to the big three. That's why the middle class shrunk. You send high paying low education union jobs overseas the middle class goes away and the rich get richer. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way now though. Wages are going up. The economy is getting better. Thanks Obama.

Wages are stagnate because people have to compete with law wage workers from third world countries. You can blame Democrats for that.

Yes, Democrats need to keep them poor, otherwise they'll stop voting for them

no way; some on the left are trying to convince women to practice more equality, for pay purposes, and let us vote for the chic politicians with the cutest snatch. it can't be any worse a "market based metric" in our modern political-economy.

Are you Greek? Because I am and I know many stupid Greeks who are Republicans. Are you one of them?

don't get me started with the "class warfare" thing. i believe real capitalists should purchase their own cruisers and enforce their own private foreign policies; like they used to in a Greek Golden Age.

 

[bripat9643]

Sure Bubba, sure

The middle classes wages have been stagnant while the riches have gotten richer. The people who got hurt the most are uneducated workers. Back in the day they went to work for the big 3 or supplier to the big three. That's why the middle class shrunk. You send high paying low education union jobs overseas the middle class goes away and the rich get richer. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging the other way now though. Wages are going up. The economy is getting better. Thanks Obama.

Wages are stagnate because people have to compete with law wage workers from third world countries. You can blame Democrats for that.

Yes, Democrats need to keep them poor, otherwise they'll stop voting for them

no way; some on the left are trying to convince women to practice more equality, for pay purposes, and let us vote for the chic politicians with the cutest snatch. it can't be any worse a "market based metric" in our modern political-economy.

Are you Greek? Because I am and I know many stupid Greeks who are Republicans. Are you one of them?

There wouldn't be a Democrat party if it wasn't for stupid Americans.

 

[danielpalos]

You really are a fucking moron. Do you think they could get over the Israeli wall, especially when there is a guard tower every half mile?

They all know their precious Democrat voters won't be able to get over a wall... why do you think they are whining and moaning about it so much?

That's exactly it. Whenever Democrats start whining about what something will cost, you know that isn't the real reason for their whining. Money is never an obstacle whenever it comes to one their boondoggle social programs.

because we recognize social programs when we see them; when is the right going to dazzle us with capital programs.