T1B

This pretty much sums up Juan Ellis Bush's campaign. Not sure what is better, the begging for applause or the 8 year old sitting behind him who wants to just get the fukk a out of there.



Stick a fork in ole' JEB. He is done. Actually, he was done at the beginning of the campaign, he is dried out and about to burst into flames.

The Trumpster is gonna have fun with this one. Or is JEB even on his radar anymore?

If anybody other than JEB thought he was a viable candidate, they should have their ass kicked.

The fact that the RNC ever considered him speaks volumes about how out of touch they are.

These same dolts want Mitt "Who let the dogs out?" Romney to run for a third time.

Carson wrote:If anybody other than JEB thought he was a viable candidate, they should have their ass kicked.

The fact that the RNC ever considered him speaks volumes about how out of touch they are.

These same dolts want Mitt "Who let the dogs out?" Romney to run for a third time.

There must have been someone that did. He HAD a shit ton of cash. Think of all the coke and hookers all that money could have bought. It's a crying shame, I tell ya.

KC Scott wrote:I'm calling Trump to cakewalk New Hampshire and the first Super Tuesday

I'm calling you a delusional stooge if you think Trump is POTUS material. He's a babbling, incoherent, egotistical maniac who will fold like a cheap tent once his stack of chips dwindle. Supporters will jump off his bandwagon like rats from a sinking ship.

You're right about Cruz though, what a weasel. The smart money is going to flow towards Rubio but don't count out Jeb just yet.

War Wagon wrote:don't count out Jeb just yet.

Screw......now is your chance to take back what you said earlier in this thread.

R-Jack wrote:

War Wagon wrote:don't count out Jeb just yet.

Screw......now is your chance to take back what you said earlier in this thread.

I'm not handicapping the GOP primaries...

I believe he was refering to your statement regarding a certain board members cognitive skills. The fact that it flew a few miles over your head is indicative of yours.

War Wagon wrote:

KC Scott wrote:I'm calling Trump to cakewalk New Hampshire and the first Super Tuesday

I'm calling you a delusional stooge if you think Trump is POTUS material.

he's not POTUS material, but somebody better stop the trump freight train, unless of course he derails it himself....which is highly likely with whining like thiis


welcome to politics donnie.....

War Wagon wrote:

KC Scott wrote:I'm calling Trump to cakewalk New Hampshire and the first Super Tuesday

I'm calling you a delusional stooge if you think Trump is POTUS material. He's a babbling, incoherent, egotistical maniac who will fold like a cheap tent once his stack of chips dwindle. Supporters will jump off his bandwagon like rats from a sinking ship.

You're right about Cruz though, what a weasel. The smart money is going to flow towards Rubio but don't count out Jeb just yet.

One thing Rubio seems to know a lot about...swallowing large dicks.

Goober McTuber wrote:...Iowa has a rather small caucus.

Sincerely, IL2

KC Scott wrote:...you'll see him move center faster than LTS can backtrack from a guitar challenge

Stop exaggerating, Scott.
Even light passing through a black hole doesn't move that fast.

88 wrote:She has less moral fiber than El Chapo.

whoa

KC Scott wrote:All you Trump haters will learn something about politics as this unfolds...

Some of you old timers shouldn't need to have this explained

Being a salesman and apparently good at your craft, I'd expect no more or less from your take. You don't have to explain politics to me. What do you sell anyway? If it's anything like the gibberish you spout about Trump, you must have a very active customer complaint spread sheet. I can't imagine you having many repeat customers but if you do, it's because you have people in the home office backing your bullshit up. They be like, "wtf did -$cotty sell this time at a negative margin"?

I am still on the fence with Trump. I like his attitude. I like some things he has said regarding policy, but I wish to hell he would get a little more specific. I am disappointed that Carson hasn't done better than he has. He is the one guy that has said do away with ALL tax deductions. Unfortunately the rest of them are scared to go that far. Too many people are hung up on their precious home mortgage tax deduction. I am still waiting for someone to explain to me why it is a good idea to subsidize personal debt.

Agree with you on Carson and deductions. Same thing with kids as the mortgage. Why are we offering an incentive to have kids?

Further the sooner we remove all deductions is the day we move closer to a flat tax which is the only fair way to tax citizens.

88 wrote:...there are 535 entrenched assholes who need to be shown the door.

"That door better not be on MY property."

Sincerely, roostard

Left Seater wrote:Agree with you on Carson and deductions. Same thing with kids as the mortgage. Why are we offering an incentive to have kids?

Further the sooner we remove all deductions is the day we move closer to a flat tax which is the only fair way to tax citizens.

I am OK with the kid deduction as it is in the best interest of this country to actually grow new Americans from scratch, rather than farm it out to 3rd world shitholes, the mortgage deduction bugs me. I haven't been able to itemize using the mortgage deduction for about 10 years. Why should the a-hole down the street who is mortgaged up to his ears so he can have a McMansion, get a subsidy? You wanna have a nice big expensive house, good on you. Just don't ask your neighbor to subsidize it.

What we need today is to have every last deduction go away. Yes, even the non-profit ones. Religious ones too. I am OK with a somewhat progressive scale, so long as it tops out at no more than 30%., but even the bottom feeders should pay something. I don't care if it is .5%. Just get some skin in the game.

The Bernie supporters bitch and moan about the influence that money has over politics. But there answer is to give politicians more control. How the fukk do they not see how this makes no sense.

They'll never get rid of the mortgage deduction because sissies like KC Scrote will whine themselves to sleep about it.

Screw_Michigan wrote:They'll never get rid of the mortgage deduction because sissies like KC Scrote will whine themselves to sleep about it.

You are probably right.

Unfortunately, there is a giant industry devoted to finding out ways to pay taxes or trying to figure out ways to collect others tax payments. We need to get rid of these parasites on both sides of the equation.

KC Scott wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote:They'll never get rid of the mortgage deduction because sissies like KC Scrote will whine themselves to sleep about it.

Your lack of knowledge never seems to stop you from putting out stupid opinions - in that regard your a perfect journalist

First, you must be able to itemize in order to deduct mortgage interest, and then you're only able to deduct a % based on your tax bracket

For example, a taxpayer spending $12,000 on mortgage interest and paying taxes at an individual income tax rate of 35% would be permitted to exclude $12,000 from income tax liability, resulting in a savings of $4,200. So, the homeowner paid $12,000 to the bank in interest in order get a third of that amount excluded from taxation.

In other words, it ain't nothing to get excited about, and you're far better off paying off the property as soon as possible

Not that you will ever have to worry about it

The bottom line is that it is still a 4200 dollar subsidy and it should not exist. Get rid of ALL personal deductions. Tax people on their salary, period. The only that makes even the slightest bit of sense to me is the child deduction. And I'm not really all that much in love with it either. Get rid of the lot. It would result in thousands of out of work tax lawyers and CPAs, but so fukking what. Let them find honest work.

Legit business expenses for self-employed people are not what I am talking about. Of course they would still be deductible against your business' gross income. The part where it gets a little blurry would be in areas like home office deductions. Would someone working out of their home office be able to deduct the full cost of commercial office space because they are using their den as their office? I don't think they should. But they should get something.

The den would have to be for business use only.

Toss a beer can into the office wastebasket and you lose the deduction.

No shit.

Carson wrote:The den would have to be for business use only.

Toss a beer can into the office wastebasket and you lose the deduction.

No shit.

Is that why Jason Seaver is on the radio pimping the Fresh Start Initiative these days?

Carson wrote:The den would have to be for business use only.

Toss a beer can into the office wastebasket and you lose the deduction.

No shit.

I don't think it has to be that strict. Besides, how could you prove/disprove 100% bidness use. Mount a video cam with an IRS feed? A reasonable way to calculate it might be what is the difference in mortgage payments between a 3 BR ranch and a 4 BR ranch for a given area.

There is an even easier, and more accurate way. Find your own mortgage payment per sq ft and deduct the sq ft payment * sq feet of office + other expenses for that room.

OK I get it. Let's take away ALL personal deductions, and I mean ALL.

Except of course the ones that I like. And a few exceptions.

It'll make everything so simple and fair. We just have to figure out how to calculate that home office deduction which, of course, won't go away.
After we figure that out...piece of cake.

All deductions need to go away. As a former self imployed person, I would gladly trade all those deductions for a flat tax. Most people taking the home office deduction are in fact doing so incorrectly. Being risk adverse I never claimed part of my home as a home office. But most who do claim that are using the space for other purposes as well.

But Mikey's point is valid. If you want to do away with deductions then we need to do away with them. Not pick and choose. As soon as you start down that road you will get nowhere. Eliminate them all and go with a progressive flat tax that stops at 10%. And as someone else mentioned, the lowest earners should pay something as well.

L45B wrote:For anyone paying close attention, the results from last night should tell you who the big winner really is: Marco Rubio.

I just cannot see how anyone can be behind this guy.

He was easily the worst in the debate on Saturday. Actually glad Christie called him out for saying the same thing multiple times over a short period.

KC Scott wrote:The home office deduction isn't what would suffer if business expenses are eliminated, as many of those really are just a loophole / write off

Think about if you're a Manufacturers Rep on straight commission, for example. Those folks have to pay 100% of their own expenses- hotels, travel, meals. If they make $60K in commissions and spend $30K in expenses is that fair to eliminate those write offs?

Or how about a guy who does HVAC work and had to spend $20K on specialized tools to work on refrigeration systems?

Or someone that owns a limo service where gas, repairs, insurance etc. is 40% of his earnings?

And There's a whole lot more example than those

There's a lot of examples and unless you're going to require everyone who has a small business incorporate (woo hoo lawyers) you're going to fuck those people pretty hard by eliminating business expenses

The guy spending $30 to make $60 just might decide that it no longer makes sense for him to continue in that line of work. Couple of ten others make that same decision and suddenly they industry changes and they cover more expenses or they don't and no one is repping their widget.

How is the AC repair guy any different than the pilot who had to pay $25K for his type rating? The limo guy sounds like he is doing well if his biggest ticket items are only 40% of his earnings.

Further Incorporating is cheap. Any small business owner that hasn't incorporated is a poor business owner. Why put your personal holdings and your family if you have one at risk over $1500 at most. No way legit lawyers are making serious coin unless they are doing 5+ incorporations a day. Hell, you can incorporate using legal zoom online for a couple hundred at most and do the leg work yourself.

It is time for all deductions to go and for taxes to max out at 10% of income.

Or the gimme free stuff to banks that bankrupt the nation. Two can play that game, idiot.

KC Scott wrote:The home office deduction isn't what would suffer if business expenses are eliminated, as many of those really are just a loophole / write off

Think about if you're a Manufacturers Rep on straight commission, for example. Those folks have to pay 100% of their own expenses- hotels, travel, meals. If they make $60K in commissions and spend $30K in expenses is that fair to eliminate those write offs?

Or how about a guy who does HVAC work and had to spend $20K on specialized tools to work on refrigeration systems?

Or someone that owns a limo service where gas, repairs, insurance etc. is 40% of his earnings?

And There's a whole lot more example than those

There's a lot of examples and unless you're going to require everyone who has a small business incorporate (woo hoo lawyers) you're going to fuck those people pretty hard by eliminating business expenses

Once again, Scott, the things you are talking about are legitimate business expenses. They are used to calculate profit, which is gross income for a small business owner. The home office thing is a little more of a grey area.

And as lefty said, if the top rate was not so fukking confiscatory, we wouldn't need to worry so much about what is/isn't deductible anyway.

Wank Wagon wrote: The smart money is going to flow towards Rubio but don't count out Jeb just yet.

Idiot.

No surprise you'd roll in here now, after hiding out in your bunker lately, to claim 'bode... over New fucking Hampshire.

Storming the gates? Not quite.

War Wagon wrote:No surprise you'd roll in here now, after hiding out in your bunker lately, to claim 'bode... over New fucking Hampshire.

From what or whom? Rubio, apple polishing, CLE stooge that he is has crashed and burned and Jeb Jeb Binks has been reduced to begging for applause from the 3 or 4 people who bother to show up at his events.

MuchoBulls wrote:

L45B wrote:For anyone paying close attention, the results from last night should tell you who the big winner really is: Marco Rubio.

I just cannot see how anyone can be behind this guy.

He was easily the worst in the debate on Saturday. Actually glad Christie called him out for saying the same thing multiple times over a short period.

That exchange may have single-handedly ruined Rubio. Between the lines, Rubio was at least correct in arguing that Obama's prior inexperience has nothing to do with his very deliberate attempts to destroy the country from within.

But his canned wording played right into Christie's stereotyping of him, and probably cost Rubio any chance of challenging in this election.

Just goes to show you how invincible Trump is in this environment, nothing he repeats would ever damage him in the same way. The nomination is all but locked up now.

Jsc810 wrote:Do we accept the massive split in wealth that has occurred in this country as a given, or don’t we?

Electing a socialist regime will not change your diagram, it will only add to the government's chunk of the pie, which is conveniently not shown.

L45B wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Do we accept the massive split in wealth that has occurred in this country as a given, or don’t we?

Electing a socialist regime will not change your diagram, it will only add to the government's chunk of the pie, which is conveniently not shown.

Socialism is all well and good until the government runs out of other people's money.

Uhh yeah, exactly.

I always get a chuckle when I hear a liberal talking about the concept of redistribution of wealth. As in the video just posted, it always appears to be like a swift and seamless computer program that just sweeps up all the money and spreads it nicely into cute separate little piles, so that everyone is happy again.

If only it really worked that way. :grin:

Yup,

Socialism is much like Unions. They both remove the incentive to work hard and to go above and beyond. Why work harder than your coworkers when your pay rate is set on years of service? Why work hard in HS to get a scholarship when Bern is just going to give one to everyone?


What I don't get is why people that are intelligent (JSC being one of them) would support Bern. Why would they want us to move to a system that has failed repeatedly? Venezuela moved to a Bern type of system for exactly the reasons JSC mentions above, it has been an utter failure. The poor are far worse off today. Cuba, same thing. Look at all of the citizens with the means to that have left.

Bern and others will tell us that won't happen here. Why not? Are we better than them? Smarter?