The nitpicking republicans do about Bernie or Warren paying for their programs is such hypocrisy

[Andylusion]

Well yes...... that is *MY* point.

A: You claimed that Republicans and Democrats are different, because Democrats tax people to pay for stuff. Then you have an entire state that is on the verge of bankruptcy, and yet has the highest taxes in the country.

That proves your claim false.

B: You claimed that California has one of the largest economies in the world. True. But that makes *MY* point. Mississippi and Alabama do not have massive economies. That's my point. Wouldn't you expect a State with a GDP of barely $230 Billion, to have more debt, than a state that has a GDP of $3.1 Trillion? Yes you would. Certainly with Democraps in control of a state that has $600 Billion in tax revenue a year, compared to Alabama with $40 Billion, they should be able to pay for stuff without going deeply into debt.

Think about it... California collects in one month, more tax revenue than Alabama does in a year. Yet California is over half a trillion dollars in debt.

Remember *YOU* claimed Democraps were better because they proposed ways to pay for spending. I didn't make any claim either way... you did. Evidence is a bit contrary to that claim.

Not only are those red states small economies, they have have big deficits and high poverty rates. Those economic pitfalls could be avoided regardless of how big their economies are.

Which changes nothing of what I said.

Further, to claim that it is just as easy to avoid an economic pitfall, when your economy is only $40 Billion, instead of $3.1 Trillion, is ridiculous.

You dumb democraps, are such partisan bigots. So if I posted a thread "You can just as easily void economic pitfalls on minimum wage at Wendy's, as CEO of Walmart" you would come on there in complete agreement?

Of course not.

And more poor people in poor states with small economies? Brilliant Holmes. Any other words of wisdom, Captain Economist?

Lol their economies are small relatively speaking. You’re basically saying that they should be economic shitholes because they have smaller economies than California. That’s just stupid. Obviously the population size alone of these states makes them qualified to have good economies. They simply don’t because republicans tax cut and spend economic policies do not make any sense.

I never claimed they were sh!tholes. You did that. I don't have any problem with them having a small economy. Have you been to Alabama? I have. There are plenty of people that love that life style. Food is cheap. Rent is cheap. Sure they make very little, but it takes very little to live.

Yeah, they won't have all the flashy houses we have in richer states. My own condo, is like a luxury NYC apartment, compared to what they have. But they are fine with what they have. They don't need the big jobs, with the big pay, and all the bling bling, of the left-wing elitest "we're better than you" mentality.

Only the arrogant left, looks at that, and calls of them sh!tholes. This is why Trump won by the way. You keep putting down everyone that doesn't live like you do, and then scream and whine when someone like Trump, slaps you people around.

Lastly, you are absolutely bonkers, if you think that if only Mississippi jacked up taxes, and spending, that you could turn it into California. You must be a mental patient, if you think that's the case.

There is no example, anywhere in world history, that government came in, and regulated, taxed, and spent their way into prosperity.

In fact, even California itself, isn't an example. California, like all states, started off utterly poor. Government didn't show up, with high taxes, massive regulations, and then spent their way into wealth. They became wealthy from economic growth, the gold rushes, and investment, plus Ocean-port access with trade.

Then after already being wealthy, left-wing government increased tax-spend, and regulation policies, that now have California on the verge of bankruptcy.

Just answer this question. I get that you don’t like the democrat party approach to economics, but are you really going to tell me the GOP does it better? Revenue pays for government spending. You get that right? That is its inherent function. Can taxes be too high? Yeah obviously, but the solution isn’t to cut taxes and spend like normal or more. That’s just stupidity and that is what republicans do.

Better? Yes. I do believe they do it better. Better than Democrats, yes, by far.

Yes revenue pays for spending. The problem is, tax rates do not equal revenue. You can only change the rates, not the revenue. Higher rates, can, and do, often result in less revenue.

Greece is a perfect example of this. They jacked up rates so high, that people stopped paying the tax.

This is why after Reagan cut taxes, the revenue into the government doubled in 10 years. By the way, even Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, said the reason he was cutting tax rates, was specifically to increase revenue.

You can even go back farther in time, and in the 1800s, the US government increased tariffs on imports, specifically because they knew it would reduce imports, and lower revenue into the government. They knew it would reduce tax revenue, to increase tax rates on imported goods.

This is exactly why the GOP is better than the DNC. They actually understand this.

Again the Yacht tax actually lowered the amount of taxes from yachts, because it wrecked the yacht building industry.
The high taxes in MD, resulted in fewer millionaires showing up on tax rolls.
Millionaires Go Missing

One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls.​

Amazon was going to build a massive HQ in NY, and AOC and the Democrats made endless demands that they pay for this and pay for that, and they pulled the plug. No tax revenue at all. Zero.

And by the way, why did Amazon even look into getting an HQ outside Seattle? Because of the Seattle head count tax. The head count tax, drove Amazon to have alternative head quarters, in order that if the head count tax hit them hard, they could leave.

Reagan remember, was originally a Democrat. He became a Republican specifically because of his experience with high taxes. He was working in the movie industry, and with 70% tax rates, he found it pointless to work. So he would do movies until his pay reached the top marginal rate, and they he would simply stop, and spend the rest of the year living on his ranch riding horses.

All people are the same way. This is why millionaires disappeared from the MD tax rolls, when they applied the higher top marginal tax. They simply sheltered their money, or left the state, or stopped working.

Regardless, this is why all your taxes usually have a short term gain, traded for a long term pain. The wealth tax was a huge hit in France, until all the wealthy people packed up their jobs, their businesses, their wealth, and left for Luxembourg and Belgium. Same is true of Venezuela. The higher taxes worked wonders until all the wealthy Venezuelans left for Spain, Argentina and even the US.

Again, consistently your system has never worked. Never. Not once. You can say "our plans our better", but the fact is in all human history your plans have been tried and failed. They are not better. You can say "they'll pay for it", but they never do.

Again, if they do... why is California broke? And California is broke... yeah it has the largest GDP, but that doesn't mean anything, one one single state owes over half a trillion dollars. They are broke. There's a reason why in the early 2000s, California sent a delegation to the Federal Government asking all the tax payers of the entire country, to bail out California by guaranteeing California debt.

Mississippi and Alabama, did not send delegations asking the tax payers to guarantee their debt. Only California did that. You system does not work. Period.

 

[Billy000]

Not only are those red states small economies, they have have big deficits and high poverty rates. Those economic pitfalls could be avoided regardless of how big their economies are.

Which changes nothing of what I said.

Further, to claim that it is just as easy to avoid an economic pitfall, when your economy is only $40 Billion, instead of $3.1 Trillion, is ridiculous.

You dumb democraps, are such partisan bigots. So if I posted a thread "You can just as easily void economic pitfalls on minimum wage at Wendy's, as CEO of Walmart" you would come on there in complete agreement?

Of course not.

And more poor people in poor states with small economies? Brilliant Holmes. Any other words of wisdom, Captain Economist?

Lol their economies are small relatively speaking. You’re basically saying that they should be economic shitholes because they have smaller economies than California. That’s just stupid. Obviously the population size alone of these states makes them qualified to have good economies. They simply don’t because republicans tax cut and spend economic policies do not make any sense.

I never claimed they were sh!tholes. You did that. I don't have any problem with them having a small economy. Have you been to Alabama? I have. There are plenty of people that love that life style. Food is cheap. Rent is cheap. Sure they make very little, but it takes very little to live.

Yeah, they won't have all the flashy houses we have in richer states. My own condo, is like a luxury NYC apartment, compared to what they have. But they are fine with what they have. They don't need the big jobs, with the big pay, and all the bling bling, of the left-wing elitest "we're better than you" mentality.

Only the arrogant left, looks at that, and calls of them sh!tholes. This is why Trump won by the way. You keep putting down everyone that doesn't live like you do, and then scream and whine when someone like Trump, slaps you people around.

Lastly, you are absolutely bonkers, if you think that if only Mississippi jacked up taxes, and spending, that you could turn it into California. You must be a mental patient, if you think that's the case.

There is no example, anywhere in world history, that government came in, and regulated, taxed, and spent their way into prosperity.

In fact, even California itself, isn't an example. California, like all states, started off utterly poor. Government didn't show up, with high taxes, massive regulations, and then spent their way into wealth. They became wealthy from economic growth, the gold rushes, and investment, plus Ocean-port access with trade.

Then after already being wealthy, left-wing government increased tax-spend, and regulation policies, that now have California on the verge of bankruptcy.

Just answer this question. I get that you don’t like the democrat party approach to economics, but are you really going to tell me the GOP does it better? Revenue pays for government spending. You get that right? That is its inherent function. Can taxes be too high? Yeah obviously, but the solution isn’t to cut taxes and spend like normal or more. That’s just stupidity and that is what republicans do.

Better? Yes. I do believe they do it better. Better than Democrats, yes, by far.

Yes revenue pays for spending. The problem is, tax rates do not equal revenue. You can only change the rates, not the revenue. Higher rates, can, and do, often result in less revenue.

Greece is a perfect example of this. They jacked up rates so high, that people stopped paying the tax.

This is why after Reagan cut taxes, the revenue into the government doubled in 10 years. By the way, even Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, said the reason he was cutting tax rates, was specifically to increase revenue.

You can even go back farther in time, and in the 1800s, the US government increased tariffs on imports, specifically because they knew it would reduce imports, and lower revenue into the government. They knew it would reduce tax revenue, to increase tax rates on imported goods.

This is exactly why the GOP is better than the DNC. They actually understand this.

Again the Yacht tax actually lowered the amount of taxes from yachts, because it wrecked the yacht building industry.
The high taxes in MD, resulted in fewer millionaires showing up on tax rolls.
Millionaires Go Missing

One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls.​

Amazon was going to build a massive HQ in NY, and AOC and the Democrats made endless demands that they pay for this and pay for that, and they pulled the plug. No tax revenue at all. Zero.

And by the way, why did Amazon even look into getting an HQ outside Seattle? Because of the Seattle head count tax. The head count tax, drove Amazon to have alternative head quarters, in order that if the head count tax hit them hard, they could leave.

Reagan remember, was originally a Democrat. He became a Republican specifically because of his experience with high taxes. He was working in the movie industry, and with 70% tax rates, he found it pointless to work. So he would do movies until his pay reached the top marginal rate, and they he would simply stop, and spend the rest of the year living on his ranch riding horses.

All people are the same way. This is why millionaires disappeared from the MD tax rolls, when they applied the higher top marginal tax. They simply sheltered their money, or left the state, or stopped working.

Regardless, this is why all your taxes usually have a short term gain, traded for a long term pain. The wealth tax was a huge hit in France, until all the wealthy people packed up their jobs, their businesses, their wealth, and left for Luxembourg and Belgium. Same is true of Venezuela. The higher taxes worked wonders until all the wealthy Venezuelans left for Spain, Argentina and even the US.

Again, consistently your system has never worked. Never. Not once. You can say "our plans our better", but the fact is in all human history your plans have been tried and failed. They are not better. You can say "they'll pay for it", but they never do.

Again, if they do... why is California broke? And California is broke... yeah it has the largest GDP, but that doesn't mean anything, one one single state owes over half a trillion dollars. They are broke. There's a reason why in the early 2000s, California sent a delegation to the Federal Government asking all the tax payers of the entire country, to bail out California by guaranteeing California debt.

Mississippi and Alabama, did not send delegations asking the tax payers to guarantee their debt. Only California did that. You system does not work. Period.

Good god. Absolutely none of this explains why the GOP policies make more sense. Literally none of it. Yes, you made it clear how you feel about dem policies. Now explain why the GOP’s policies make more sense. This isn’t hard.

oh and Reagan raised taxes several times.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[Andylusion]

Which changes nothing of what I said.

Further, to claim that it is just as easy to avoid an economic pitfall, when your economy is only $40 Billion, instead of $3.1 Trillion, is ridiculous.

You dumb democraps, are such partisan bigots. So if I posted a thread "You can just as easily void economic pitfalls on minimum wage at Wendy's, as CEO of Walmart" you would come on there in complete agreement?

Of course not.

And more poor people in poor states with small economies? Brilliant Holmes. Any other words of wisdom, Captain Economist?

Lol their economies are small relatively speaking. You’re basically saying that they should be economic shitholes because they have smaller economies than California. That’s just stupid. Obviously the population size alone of these states makes them qualified to have good economies. They simply don’t because republicans tax cut and spend economic policies do not make any sense.

I never claimed they were sh!tholes. You did that. I don't have any problem with them having a small economy. Have you been to Alabama? I have. There are plenty of people that love that life style. Food is cheap. Rent is cheap. Sure they make very little, but it takes very little to live.

Yeah, they won't have all the flashy houses we have in richer states. My own condo, is like a luxury NYC apartment, compared to what they have. But they are fine with what they have. They don't need the big jobs, with the big pay, and all the bling bling, of the left-wing elitest "we're better than you" mentality.

Only the arrogant left, looks at that, and calls of them sh!tholes. This is why Trump won by the way. You keep putting down everyone that doesn't live like you do, and then scream and whine when someone like Trump, slaps you people around.

Lastly, you are absolutely bonkers, if you think that if only Mississippi jacked up taxes, and spending, that you could turn it into California. You must be a mental patient, if you think that's the case.

There is no example, anywhere in world history, that government came in, and regulated, taxed, and spent their way into prosperity.

In fact, even California itself, isn't an example. California, like all states, started off utterly poor. Government didn't show up, with high taxes, massive regulations, and then spent their way into wealth. They became wealthy from economic growth, the gold rushes, and investment, plus Ocean-port access with trade.

Then after already being wealthy, left-wing government increased tax-spend, and regulation policies, that now have California on the verge of bankruptcy.

Just answer this question. I get that you don’t like the democrat party approach to economics, but are you really going to tell me the GOP does it better? Revenue pays for government spending. You get that right? That is its inherent function. Can taxes be too high? Yeah obviously, but the solution isn’t to cut taxes and spend like normal or more. That’s just stupidity and that is what republicans do.

Better? Yes. I do believe they do it better. Better than Democrats, yes, by far.

Yes revenue pays for spending. The problem is, tax rates do not equal revenue. You can only change the rates, not the revenue. Higher rates, can, and do, often result in less revenue.

Greece is a perfect example of this. They jacked up rates so high, that people stopped paying the tax.

This is why after Reagan cut taxes, the revenue into the government doubled in 10 years. By the way, even Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, said the reason he was cutting tax rates, was specifically to increase revenue.

You can even go back farther in time, and in the 1800s, the US government increased tariffs on imports, specifically because they knew it would reduce imports, and lower revenue into the government. They knew it would reduce tax revenue, to increase tax rates on imported goods.

This is exactly why the GOP is better than the DNC. They actually understand this.

Again the Yacht tax actually lowered the amount of taxes from yachts, because it wrecked the yacht building industry.
The high taxes in MD, resulted in fewer millionaires showing up on tax rolls.
Millionaires Go Missing

One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls.​

Amazon was going to build a massive HQ in NY, and AOC and the Democrats made endless demands that they pay for this and pay for that, and they pulled the plug. No tax revenue at all. Zero.

And by the way, why did Amazon even look into getting an HQ outside Seattle? Because of the Seattle head count tax. The head count tax, drove Amazon to have alternative head quarters, in order that if the head count tax hit them hard, they could leave.

Reagan remember, was originally a Democrat. He became a Republican specifically because of his experience with high taxes. He was working in the movie industry, and with 70% tax rates, he found it pointless to work. So he would do movies until his pay reached the top marginal rate, and they he would simply stop, and spend the rest of the year living on his ranch riding horses.

All people are the same way. This is why millionaires disappeared from the MD tax rolls, when they applied the higher top marginal tax. They simply sheltered their money, or left the state, or stopped working.

Regardless, this is why all your taxes usually have a short term gain, traded for a long term pain. The wealth tax was a huge hit in France, until all the wealthy people packed up their jobs, their businesses, their wealth, and left for Luxembourg and Belgium. Same is true of Venezuela. The higher taxes worked wonders until all the wealthy Venezuelans left for Spain, Argentina and even the US.

Again, consistently your system has never worked. Never. Not once. You can say "our plans our better", but the fact is in all human history your plans have been tried and failed. They are not better. You can say "they'll pay for it", but they never do.

Again, if they do... why is California broke? And California is broke... yeah it has the largest GDP, but that doesn't mean anything, one one single state owes over half a trillion dollars. They are broke. There's a reason why in the early 2000s, California sent a delegation to the Federal Government asking all the tax payers of the entire country, to bail out California by guaranteeing California debt.

Mississippi and Alabama, did not send delegations asking the tax payers to guarantee their debt. Only California did that. You system does not work. Period.

Good god. Absolutely none of this explains why the GOP policies make more sense. Literally none of it. Yes, you made it clear how you feel about dem policies. Now explain why the GOP’s policies make more sense. This isn’t hard.

oh and Reagan raised taxes several times.

The amount Reagan raised taxes, was by a vast measure, much smaller than he cut taxes. It would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Moreover, Reagan really didn't raise taxes honestly. It was congress that pushed through tax hikes. Reagan opposed them. Do you know why taxes were raised? Because Social Security was going broke. Bob Dole admitted that during his run for President, which I guarantee is why he lost.

So Social Security, the great wonderful, perfect system that Left-wingers have said was a brilliant system, is exactly why taxes were raised on the lower and middle class in the 1980s. It wasn't because of Reagan, it was because of Democrats.

And by the way, just as people said in the 80s, the higher taxes wouldn't fix Socialist Security, and we now know it is still going broke, even taking 13% of our income in taxes.

Absolutely none of this explains why the GOP policies make more sense.

How does it not? Under your system, we would be spending more.... haven't heard a Democrat yet saying they want to cut spending. Under your system we would be taxed more... haven't heard a Democrat yet saying they want to cut taxes. And under your system we would still be going even deeper into debt, because as I have pointed out numerous times, historically there is endless evidence from the US history, and from countries around the world that your system consistently, 100%, fails every single time.

Since we already know from every single possible perspective, that everything your side stands for, has ruined every country it has ever been tried in.... then almost by default the alternative is better.

By default if Republicans do not support, government funded education, government funded Medicare for all, government funded housing, government funded living wage, and so on.... then automatically their policies make more sense, no matter what they are.

Now I would personally like to see a more Republic based, de-centralized policies. Cut taxes, and let the states make their own choices. Eliminate medicare and Medicaid, and put the power back in the hands of the states... you know... what the constitution says.

But naturally even if the Republicans do not propose that, whatever they purpose that isn't Medicare for all, and banning fossil fuels and fartless cows, and other Green New Deal crap.... again... by default all of their policies are better than the Democrats. All of them are. Haven't heard a policy yet, no matter how bad it might be, that was still not better than the nation destroying nonsense the Democrats push.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Our debt doubled on Bush's watch to 10T. Wholly shit it doubled again on O'bummer's watch to approaching 20T. At the rate we're going we may not see another 10T ending Trump's tenure 2024, and that's with paying interest on Obama/Bush debt, PLUS a much greater GDP.

So awesome the bleeding has slowed under our great father, POTUS Donald J. Trump. All he does is win.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Again, when an Illegal Immigrant with their kids claim Asylum we have laws we must obey, so yes those kids will stay in detention until the courts can clear the matter up if the family is eligible for asylum or not.

What you want is to close down the system and toss those kids out on the street while ignoring the legal process that must be followed!

Lol the courts aren’t clearing up the matter. You do get that right? Either way, doesn’t it make more sense to deport them ASAP? That is how the process always worked.

WTF!

WHAT PART OF ASYLUM SEEKERS CAN NOT BE DEPORTED UNTIL THEIR COURT HEARING?

Even if they are truly no eligible they must be seen by a court first before being rejected and that is the requirement.

So now you do not care about the law either?

Illegals are deported!

Lol you’re so stupid. Asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are being treated the same. Those kids are in cages INDEFINITELY either way.

If the Asylum seeker is entering the country illegally, then yes.

If the Asylum seeker is being processed at a port of entry where they wait outside the border for processing of their claim, or if they apply at the US embassy in Mexico, or any other country, where they wait for processing outside the country....

then no, they are not being treated the same.

Okay but that obviously isn’t what is happening. They get here, trying to seek asylum, and then they get thrown in cages. This isn’t hard to figure out.

They were held when Obama was President and not one damn complaint but individuals like you, so no you do not have the right to complain now hypocrite!

People were being held in detention centers, deported and seek asylum way before Trump but you ignored it until the MSM felt it was time to weaponize it!

So before you even try to play this game you better know you are just another lying hypocrite trying to play a stupid game!

You are a Sanders supporter that believe ICE is evil and we should not have borders or laws on Immigration!

Now do you want Trump to break the law and deny people their right to a fair trial?

Wait, you are a Sanders voter so you would refuse anyone who think opposite of you a fair trial!

 

[Zorro!]

Let me start off by saying that I don’t think Bernie’s tax plan to pay for his programs is sound. I do think his programs can be paid for by both new revenue and cutting our bloated defense budget, but that’s a topic for another time.

What I find so petty is republicans nitpicking these policies while blatantly supporting tax cuts and new spending. Trump is set to explode the debt and deficit because of his spending and tax cuts but repubs pretend like children that won’t happen.

Tell me: how exactly is Trump’a useless wall going to be paid for? How are we paying for the THOUSANDS of migrant kids being detained here indefinitely on the tax payer’s dime? It is impossible to take republicans seriously.

After Trump's taxcuts, Federal Receipts are at all time records.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=q4PB[img]

I'm for cutting every line item in the Federal budget by 1%, are you with me?

And of course questions have to be asked about the vast $T's in additional spending that both are proposing.

They are both well known hypocrites.

[URL='https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/02/elizabeth-warren-transferred-oil-and-gas-investments-to-her-children-to-protect-her-green-political-profile/']Elizabeth Warren Transferred Oil-and-Gas Investments to Her Children To Protect Her ‘Green’ Political Profile[/URL].

Of course, even her “green” political profile [URL='https://twitter.com/mikhaelsmits/status/1224466007508561921']has its limits[/URL]:

[IMG]https://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/sanders_warren_private_planes_2-3-20.jpg

As is often the case with Warren, what she says and what she does are very different things. The Wall Street Journal reports that Warren received income from oil and gas royalties in Oklahoma and that she transferred her holdings to her children before announcing her run for the Senate.

Warren latched on to the Green New Deal almost immediately. She did not care that it was concocted originally as a means of restructuring “the entire economy,” with its socialist Justice Democrats creators only later slapping the green wash of “climate change” on it to make it more appealing to the left.

Back in August of 2018, investigative journalist Andrew Kerr reported that “Elizabeth Warren Earned Royalties From Natural Gas Producer With Long Rap Sheet Of Environmental Violations, Tax Returns Reveal.”

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren received royalty payments in 2017 from one of the largest natural gas producers in the nation, according to tax return documents her campaign released Wednesday.​

Warren received royalty payments in 2017 from Chesapeake Operating, LLC, a subsidiary company of Chesapeake Energy, according to her tax return. Chesapeake is the second-largest natural gas producer in the nation behind Exxon Mobil and is the most active driller of new gas wells in the country.​

Chesapeake has been hit with over $17 million in fines relating to environmental and leasing violations since 2007, the largest being a $3.2 million fine levied in 2013 after one of its subsidiary companies dumped unauthorized materials into dozens of streams and wetlands in West Virginia.​

But that’s not the whole story of Warren’s ties to and profiting from oil and gas companies.

It appears that as her political profile rose, she sold and/or transferred her interest in various oil and gas interests to her children.