Taxing the wealthy the most isn’t about what’s fair - it’s about what is realistic

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

Sound economic theory doesn't depend on what Republican politicians do

Yes, theory, as I said.
.

 

[bripat9643]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

 

[P@triot]

If you're afraid to hold your party accountable, get in line.

First of all snowflake, the Republican Party is not my party. Second, the Republican not only didn’t create the failed, unconstitutional bullshit that is creating all of the debt (Social Security, SNAP, welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare), they fought hard against all of it.

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

Obama reacted to conditions. If you want to blame him, run with it. I'll leave that game to partisans.

But let's not pretend the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility.
.

 

[pknopp]

Some people make their living off Capital Gains and some people actually have to work for a living. Those who work for a living should not have to pay a higher rate.

Uh, huh? Did you miss the part about the fact that if you make a "rich" amount off capital gains, your cap gains tax rate is 20%. That's way more than the rate paid by those in the second and third tax brackets.

Capital gains tax rates are either 0%, 15% or 20% for most assets held for more than a year. If you make over $430K on cap gains on such assets, you pay 20%.

Furthermore, capital gains tax rates on most assets held for less than a year correspond to ordinary income tax brackets (10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% or 37%).

You didn't address what I said.

I most certainly did. You said those who work for a living should not have to pay a higher rate than those who supposedly don't work but who get income from capital gains. I pointed out that anyone who is rich from capital gains income pays a rate of 20% if the assets are held more than a year, and that if the assets are held less than a year, normal tax rates apply, which would mean they would pay even more than 20%.

What does someone like Warren Buffet do? They pay themselves very little so that they fall into the lowest regular income bracket.

 

[pknopp]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense.

And it makes no “goddamn sense”. None. What your dumb ass doesn’t realize is that we use percentages because it ensures that the more a person makes, the more they pay. 10% of one million dollars is $100,000 while 10% of $50,000 is $5,000. The wealthy is already paying more. A lot more.

This does not take into account the myriad of deductions available.

Which a flat tax eliminates. And yet the idiot OP is fighting against it. Oops.

I'm open to that.

 

[bripat9643]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

Sound economic theory doesn't depend on what Republican politicians do

Yes, theory, as I said.
.

What is that supposed to mean? Unless Republicans walk the plank and cut spending on social programs, we should spend like there is no tomorrow?

That's your conception of rational?

 

[bripat9643]

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

Obama reacted to conditions. If you want to blame him, run with it. I'll leave that game to partisans.

But let's not pretend the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility.
.

In other words, it was someone else's fault. Obama spent like a drunken sailor.

 

[Mac1958]

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

Obama reacted to conditions. If you want to blame him, run with it. I'll leave that game to partisans.

But let's not pretend the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility.
.

In other words, it was someone else's fault. Obama spent like a drunken sailor.

Yikes, big and silly straw man there. I said, blame him if you want. And deflect if you want.

I expect that stuff.
.

 

[Flash]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

You are really off base there Sport. Everything you said was wrong.

Taxes used to redistribute wealth is immoral. It is nothing more than thievery.

Taxes should only be collected to pay for the minimal necessary government functions and we should all pay our equal share. Otherwise it is welfare.

You pay your bills and I pay mine and that way we don't need stupid ass greedy asshole Liberals deciding what is fair and what is not.

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

Sound economic theory doesn't depend on what Republican politicians do

Yes, theory, as I said.
.

What is that supposed to mean? Unless Republicans walk the plank and cut spending on social programs, we should spend like there is no tomorrow?

That's your conception of rational?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Those who lack the ability to communicate, collaborate and innovate will, at some point, be left on the sidelines to scream their shallow platitudes while the rest of us work to move this country along.
.

 

[Flash]

At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use.
.

You mean like that asshole Obama that put this nation $10 trillion in debt, even after taxes were raised?

The only thing that the shithead Democrats do after raising taxes is spend it.

 

[bripat9643]

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

Obama reacted to conditions. If you want to blame him, run with it. I'll leave that game to partisans.

But let's not pretend the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility.
.

In other words, it was someone else's fault. Obama spent like a drunken sailor.

Yikes, big and silly straw man there. I said, blame him if you want. And deflect if you want.

I expect that stuff.
.

I notice that you only blame Republicans. When you start pointing the finger at your side, perhaps I'll pay attention.

 

[LeftofLeft]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump is.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats are like 16 year old girls who max out their daddy’s credit card and cry about fairness because their daddy has cut them off or suggested that they reduce their spending.

The only time Democrats talk about spending cuts is if involves DoD or Intelligence cuts. Republicans do spend but the also propose cuts. One of the best cutting proposals I heard came from the Republican aisle during the Bush era where every program, Defense and Intel included, do an across the board 5 percent cut. Democrats and liberals fought it tooth and nail.

Democrats have no leg to stand on when it comes to “fairness” and they refuse to seriously include cuts as part of the conversation.

Since you immediately and completely changed the subject to the Democrats, I'll assume you don't disagree with my point.

The GOP had the White House, House and Senate, and it's STILL someone's else's fault. The buck always stops elsewhere.
.

It is not a change of subject. You fired off by trying to blame the Country’s budget woes as if this happened over night by the GOP. You blame the GOP solely and imply that Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones. While I agree that the GOP could cut their spending tendencies, AT LEAST the GOP comes up with some spending cuts. What are the Democrats doing in the line of spending cuts, whether they are a majority or minority ?

 

[Mac1958]

At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use.

You mean like that asshole Obama that put this nation $10 trillion in debt, even after taxes were raised?
The only thing that the shithead Democrats do after raising taxes is spend it.

I notice you guys keep leaving out a lot of that post.

Weird!
.

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump is.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats are like 16 year old girls who max out their daddy’s credit card and cry about fairness because their daddy has cut them off or suggested that they reduce their spending.

The only time Democrats talk about spending cuts is if involves DoD or Intelligence cuts. Republicans do spend but the also propose cuts. One of the best cutting proposals I heard came from the Republican aisle during the Bush era where every program, Defense and Intel included, do an across the board 5 percent cut. Democrats and liberals fought it tooth and nail.

Democrats have no leg to stand on when it comes to “fairness” and they refuse to seriously include cuts as part of the conversation.

Since you immediately and completely changed the subject to the Democrats, I'll assume you don't disagree with my point.

The GOP had the White House, House and Senate, and it's STILL someone's else's fault. The buck always stops elsewhere.
.

It is not a change of subject. You fired off by trying to blame the Country’s budget woes as if this happened over night by the GOP. You blame the GOP solely and imply that Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones. While I agree that the GOP could cut their spending tendencies, AT LEAST the GOP comes up with some spending cuts. What are the Democrats doing in the line of spending cuts, whether they are a majority or minority ?

I enjoy using wingers' words against them, although sometimes it does get a bit too easy.

If you're going to blame the Dems for something, then you have to take responsibility for the same thing.

Of course, neither party ever does, and I don't expect it.
.

 

[Mac1958]

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

Whose fault was it when Obama was in office?

Obama reacted to conditions. If you want to blame him, run with it. I'll leave that game to partisans.

But let's not pretend the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility.
.

In other words, it was someone else's fault. Obama spent like a drunken sailor.

Yikes, big and silly straw man there. I said, blame him if you want. And deflect if you want.

I expect that stuff.
.

I notice that you only blame Republicans. When you start pointing the finger at your side, perhaps I'll pay attention.

I do all the time, and the Regressive Left bitches at me as vociferously as does the Talk Radio Right.

Independent, honest thinking really ain't that tough. I swear.
.

 

[DGS49]

A FAIR income tax system would include a maximum tax. Not a percentage, a MAXIMUM tax.

Whether it is a hundred thousand or a million doesn't matter, but at some point the taxing authority MUST say, "This fukker has paid ENOUGH!"

I have never heard any justification for NOT having a maximum tax. If "fairness" is the objective, it is mandatory.

 

[bripat9643]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump is.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats are like 16 year old girls who max out their daddy’s credit card and cry about fairness because their daddy has cut them off or suggested that they reduce their spending.

The only time Democrats talk about spending cuts is if involves DoD or Intelligence cuts. Republicans do spend but the also propose cuts. One of the best cutting proposals I heard came from the Republican aisle during the Bush era where every program, Defense and Intel included, do an across the board 5 percent cut. Democrats and liberals fought it tooth and nail.

Democrats have no leg to stand on when it comes to “fairness” and they refuse to seriously include cuts as part of the conversation.

Since you immediately and completely changed the subject to the Democrats, I'll assume you don't disagree with my point.

The GOP had the White House, House and Senate, and it's STILL someone's else's fault. The buck always stops elsewhere.
.

It is not a change of subject. You fired off by trying to blame the Country’s budget woes as if this happened over night by the GOP. You blame the GOP solely and imply that Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones. While I agree that the GOP could cut their spending tendencies, AT LEAST the GOP comes up with some spending cuts. What are the Democrats doing in the line of spending cuts, whether they are a majority or minority ?

I enjoy using wingers' words against them, although sometimes it does get a bit too easy.

If you're going to blame the Dems for something, then you have to take responsibility for the same thing.

Of course, neither party ever does, and I don't expect it.
.

Republican politicians and rank-and-file Republicans are two separate things. All politicians have huge incentives to spend money. That fact corrodes the resolve of any Republican who gets elected to control spending. It's the fundamental conundrum of being against big government.

 

[Flash]

At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use.

You mean like that asshole Obama that put this nation $10 trillion in debt, even after taxes were raised?
The only thing that the shithead Democrats do after raising taxes is spend it.

I notice you guys keep leaving out a lot of that post.

Weird!
.

That is because most of the post is too silly to be worth responding to.

You have never studied Economics, have you? That is understandable because all you Moon Bats are just as ignorant of Economics as you are of History, Biology, Ethics, Climate Science and the Constitution.

There are three ways to deal with debt.

1. The most responsible way is simply not spend more money than you take in. No party has ever really adopted that sane approach.

2. The Conservative way (when #1 is always rejected) is lower taxes to stimulate the economy to bring in more tax revenue. That has worked great in bringing in more tax revenue but just like the stupid Democrats when the Republicans do it they also use the money for bigger government.

3. The stupid Liberal way is raising taxes to pay for the welfare shit and useless government programs,. That is fucked up because taking more money out of the productive economy and transferring it to government bueracrats always hurts the economy. That even fails more because the economy really suffers. Democrats love to fail that way. Obama is a great case in point. He increased government spending and increased taxes. All he got for that was increased poverty, decreased family income, $10 trillion in debt and dismal economic growth.

Take a course in Economic Moon Bat. You may learn something useful and you won't sound like an idiot when you post your silly partisan dribble.