T1B

That is weak sauce LS, even coming for you.

Enough about Melania.

Am I the only one that looks at The D's younger daughter and thinks someone with that sort of money shouldn't look like a minor league pron star?

trev wrote:I feel bad for her. You could not imagine how difficult doing something like that is.

Yeah, all that gold digging skank signed up for was a life of pampered luxury. Now she has to occasionally say things or do stuff. Words cannot express the level of sympathy I have for this poor, poor woman. :cry:

smackaholic wrote:Am I the only one that looks at The D's younger daughter and thinks someone with that sort of money shouldn't look like a minor league pron star?

With her father, I would be surprised if she didn't.

Moving Sale wrote:That is weak sauce LS, even coming for you.

I guess we are even then given your take on the officer and Ruth.

Moving Sale wrote:She is a thief. Thieves often speak many languages.

Did she steal Mitchell Obama's cock or something?

I'll just say that's fucked up, and leave it at that.

Dinsdale wrote:I'll just say that's fucked up, and leave it at that.

Smart move! Or you may end up dead like Joan Rivers

Like many posts here I'll likely regret the aftermath but here goes anyway...

I've been a life long fiscal conservative who was raised in a Republican family. When I say raised in a Republican family I mean six straight generations descendant from men who founded the party, financially funded it, and directly funded Lincoln's presidential campaign; one of my direct ancestors predating the party was a very well known abolitionist member of the United State's Supreme Court and my cousin was Lincoln's wife. I was an office holder in Young Republican organizations in my youth.

Eleven years ago I left the party after years of deep concern about the direction the party had been taken. Freedom and liberty aren't jingoistic catch phrases to me, they're honest to God foundations of my beliefs centered in conservative fiscal policies. I like to think I'm a reasonable person, I know not all Republicans (or even most) are racists, but I've had to reconcile myself to the fact that a large percentage of them most definitely are. It's only anecdotal but I've literally had more than one self-proclaimed pubster over the years make flippant, or angry, remarks to the effect that they'd happily organize and run concentration camps to curtail minorities.

I watch, and listen, to modern Republicans discuss "conservatism" and it's clear that it is nothing more than a code word for social traditionalism at kindest description, no different than progressive for socialism. There is little to no conservative thought left in the modern Republican party from a fiscal perspective, they're every bit as liberal as their counterparts with simply different pets. Social welfare championed by the Democrats has ballooned to $52B per annum it's true; corporate welfare championed by Republicans has grown at TWICE the pace since 1996 and now accounts for a black hole of $92B per annum. Who are the conservatives supposed to be?

I have multiple degrees in Economic and Political Science disciplines from three different institutions (Oklahoma being the least academically impressive of the three) and I simply can not reconcile my beliefs as a true conservative to the modern Republican political philosophy. I can't even bring myself to consider voting for Republicans after the last eighteen months, whereas I could previously after leaving the party, for fear of empowering the distinguishable minority wings of their party that are clearly fascists and disgusting bigots.

I joined the Libertarian Party. I'm not a strict Libertarian, but am a "common sense" Libertarian because I found that their platform does represent me far closer than either mainstream party.

When I say these things it annoys Democrats but angers Republicans. Pubs blame Obama on me, they'll blame Clinton when she wins on me as well. It simply isn't true. The DNC has never won my vote, the GOP has most certainly lost it for the foreseeable future though. The outcome of these elections aren't on me for voting my conscience (long before nutcase Cruz ever suggested it) but on them for becoming unconscionable.

Anyway, that's my peace, bash away, I'm used to it after more than a decade... it won't change my vote or the outcome those that will fear.

Papa Willie wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Hilarious.

I caught part of Giuliani's speech last night. What a raving lunatic.

Why in the fuck would you watch something filled with people you hate?

That's what is required for an informed electorate for fuck's sake!!! This attitude is what is fucking wrong with our modern democracy.

Mikey wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote:

Mikey wrote: Yeah, it makes me wonder what our Senior Citizens are coming to these days when they watch crap like that. What are you trying to do, anyway - find out what these people are actually saying?

Did you just type that with a straight face? You honestly believe your generation is going to gain some ground breaking insight by watching a national convention?

You people complain about the media being biased one way or the other, but are too fucking lazy to catch the actual events.

I guess it's better to get info from Fox News and MSNBC so, like 'Spray, you just hear what you want to hear.

Rack the fuck out of this!!!

SunCoastSooner wrote:Social welfare championed by the Democrats has ballooned to $52B per annum it's true; corporate welfare championed by Republicans has grown at TWICE the pace since 1996 and now accounts for a black hole of $92B per annum.

Your numbers are totally fucked. $144 billion wouldn't bore a tiny yellow piss hole in a snow bank. It barely even registers as a rounding error in a $2 trillion dollar "budget" not that we've actually had a budget the last 8 years or anything.

mvscal wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:Social welfare championed by the Democrats has ballooned to $52B per annum it's true; corporate welfare championed by Republicans has grown at TWICE the pace since 1996 and now accounts for a black hole of $92B per annum.

Your numbers are totally fucked. $144 billion wouldn't bore a tiny yellow piss hole in a snow bank. It barely even registers as a rounding error in a $2 trillion dollar "budget" not that we've actually had a budget the last 8 years or anything.

It's the numbers on issues championed (enacted under and by) solely by one or the other party, I prefaced it accordingly as well.

SunCoastSooner wrote:I prefaced it accordingly as well.

Where? I must have missed it. Define "corporate welfare" while you're at it.

The total cost of social welfare is just under a trillion dollars and corporate welfare between $1.4-1.5 Trillion.

I'll just go ahead and call bullshit.

mvscal wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:I prefaced it accordingly as well.

Where? I must have missed it. Define "corporate welfare" while you're at it.

In the post where I said "championed by"... Maybe I could have clarified better but I was being long winded enough as it was.

Tax breaks on CEO bonuses, write offs for corporate jets, O&G exploration write offs and subsidies, pharmaceutical write offs on medications turning profits commercially, capital gains breaks, corporate agriculture subsidies, lower interest rates through FED on loans to Wall Street, export-import bank subsidies, technical assistance programs, congressional and presidential earmarks to reward political friends... are those enough examples?

Of bullshit? Yes, those are enough examples.

mvscal wrote:I'll just go ahead and call bullshit.

Call whatever you like, throw a yellow flag, play the flute for Nero... won't change my vote for a third party or Shilery becoming POTUS while you stick your head in the sand.

mvscal wrote:Of bullshit? Yes, those are enough examples.

Cool story from one of the most likely suspects...

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... -resources

I couldn't give a fuck who you vote for. I'm just pointing out the fact that you're full of shit and, despite your alleged degrees in economics, you quite clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Let me guess...you're an academic.

mvscal wrote:I couldn't give a fuck who you vote for. I'm just pointing out the fact that you're full of shit and, despite your alleged degrees in economics, you quite clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Don't forgive me when I say you're one of the people I'm least concerned about thinking so. For many of the reasons I described above.

You haven't described anything. You know it. I know it. Keep dancing. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Unlike you, I keep an open mind.

Tell me all about these "tax breaks" for CEO bonuses. In specific detail, if you don't mind. That seems like a good place to begin. And how much money which never belonged to the taxpayer in the first place are we talking about?

TIA

Diego in Seattle wrote:Melania Trump needs to produce a copy of her college diploma.

You probably shouldn't vote for her in that case. Which office is she running for again?

mvscal wrote:You haven't described anything. You know it. I know it. Keep dancing. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Unlike you, I keep an open mind.

Tell me all about these "tax breaks" for CEO bonuses. In specific detail, if you don't mind. That seems like a good place to begin. And how much money which never belonged to the taxpayer in the first place are we talking about?

TIA

Yeah, I have a horribly closed mind by switching from a mainstream political party to a third party and you're a bastion of open mindedness who everyone recognizes on the board.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=942667

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... -4-141.pdf

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... d-bonuses/

http://www.interest.com/cd-rates/slide- ... -loophole/

https://www.theguardian.com/money/us-mo ... r-salaries

http://www.epi.org/publication/taxes-ex ... pensation/

https://www.propublica.org/article/reme ... an-we-knew

https://ourfuture.org/fact_sheet/ceos-p ... -economics

mvscal wrote:You haven't described anything. You know it. I know it. Keep dancing. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Unlike you, I keep an open mind.

Tell me all about these "tax breaks" for CEO bonuses. In specific detail, if you don't mind. That seems like a good place to begin. And how much money which never belonged to the taxpayer in the first place are we talking about?

TIA

Bab's, your bizarre denial of the blatant fact of corporate welfare subsuming our economy is as pathetic as your Climate Change denial and your panting fascism.

Here's how the CEO bonus scam works..

Currently, the biggest corporations are exploiting a 20-year-old loophole that allows them to write off inflated compensation packages for CEOs, billing stock options, and performance-based bonuses to taxpayers. In 2010, the Economic Policy Institute found out that the biggest corporations cost Americans $7 billion by writing off inflated executive pay. Between 2007 and 2010, this loophole accounted for more than $30 billion in corporate welfare. According to The Guardian, fast food industry CEOs cost taxpayers $64 million through this loophole.

Of course corporate tax subsidies are also a prime example..

In 2012, the New York Times did an analysis of every existing tax break in each of the 50 states and learned that 1,874 programs cost taxpayers $80.4 billion every year for corporate welfare in their state. Compare that cost with the cost of providing tuition-free public college to every student, which The Atlantic estimated would be a mere $62.6 billion. As the chart below shows, this is actually way cheaper than what we currently spend on federal student aid.



The Export-Import Bank scam is another..

This week, the House of Representatives voted to revive the Export-Import (Ex-Im) bank, which has been maligned as a slush fund for large, multinational corporations. In its most recent year, the Ex-Im bank had a $112 billion portfolio, of which $90 billion went to multinationals. If that wasn’t bad enough, a huge portion of that money went to just 10 wealthy corporations.

And of course owning the congress helps..

The biggest 200 corporations have an excessively unfair advantage over their competitors due to their influence in Washington. According to the Sunlight Foundation, the top 200 companies spent a combined $5.8 billion on lobbying Congress between 2007 and 2012. And in those same years, those companies received $4.4 trillion in federal contracts. That $4.4 trillion is $100 billion more than what the U.S. government spent on providing a basic income to the nation’s 50 million Social Security recipients.


What are you pretending to support? The slurping of the Koch brothers' scrotums?

SunCoastSooner wrote:Like many posts here I'll likely regret the aftermath but here goes anyway...

I've been a life long fiscal conservative who was raised in a Republican family. When I say raised in a Republican family I mean six straight generations descendant from men who founded the party, financially funded it, and directly funded Lincoln's presidential campaign; one of my direct ancestors predating the party was a very well known abolitionist member of the United State's Supreme Court and my cousin was Lincoln's wife. I was an office holder in Young Republican organizations in my youth.

Eleven years ago I left the party after years of deep concern about the direction the party had been taken. Freedom and liberty aren't jingoistic catch phrases to me, they're honest to God foundations of my beliefs centered in conservative fiscal policies. I like to think I'm a reasonable person, I know not all Republicans (or even most) are racists, but I've had to reconcile myself to the fact that a large percentage of them most definitely are. It's only anecdotal but I've literally had more than one self-proclaimed pubster over the years make flippant, or angry, remarks to the effect that they'd happily organize and run concentration camps to curtail minorities.

I watch, and listen, to modern Republicans discuss "conservatism" and it's clear that it is nothing more than a code word for social traditionalism at kindest description, no different than progressive for socialism. There is little to no conservative thought left in the modern Republican party from a fiscal perspective, they're every bit as liberal as their counterparts with simply different pets. Social welfare championed by the Democrats has ballooned to $52B per annum it's true; corporate welfare championed by Republicans has grown at TWICE the pace since 1996 and now accounts for a black hole of $92B per annum. Who are the conservatives supposed to be?

I have multiple degrees in Economic and Political Science disciplines from three different institutions (Oklahoma being the least academically impressive of the three) and I simply can not reconcile my beliefs as a true conservative to the modern Republican political philosophy. I can't even bring myself to consider voting for Republicans after the last eighteen months, whereas I could previously after leaving the party, for fear of empowering the distinguishable minority wings of their party that are clearly fascists and disgusting bigots.

I joined the Libertarian Party. I'm not a strict Libertarian, but am a "common sense" Libertarian because I found that their platform does represent me far closer than either mainstream party.

When I say these things it annoys Democrats but angers Republicans. Pubs blame Obama on me, they'll blame Clinton when she wins on me as well. It simply isn't true. The DNC has never won my vote, the GOP has most certainly lost it for the foreseeable future though. The outcome of these elections aren't on me for voting my conscience (long before nutcase Cruz ever suggested it) but on them for becoming unconscionable.

Anyway, that's my peace, bash away, I'm used to it after more than a decade... it won't change my vote or the outcome those that will fear.

Rack.

Papa Willie wrote:I'd rather have Goobs suck pop tarts out of my asshole

Good luck with that, you fat, stupid fuck.

SunCoastSooner wrote:

mvscal wrote:You haven't described anything. You know it. I know it. Keep dancing. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Unlike you, I keep an open mind.

Tell me all about these "tax breaks" for CEO bonuses. In specific detail, if you don't mind. That seems like a good place to begin. And how much money which never belonged to the taxpayer in the first place are we talking about?

TIA

Yeah, I have a horribly closed mind by switching from a mainstream political party to a third party and you're a bastion of open mindedness who everyone recognizes on the board.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=942667

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... -4-141.pdf

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... d-bonuses/

http://www.interest.com/cd-rates/slide- ... -loophole/

https://www.theguardian.com/money/us-mo ... r-salaries

http://www.epi.org/publication/taxes-ex ... pensation/

https://www.propublica.org/article/reme ... an-we-knew

https://ourfuture.org/fact_sheet/ceos-p ... -economics

Deferred comp IS taxable, you fucking moron. The CEO takes the hit not the corporation which is as it should be if you knew the first fucking thing about accounting...which you don't.

mvscal wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:

mvscal wrote:You haven't described anything. You know it. I know it. Keep dancing. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Unlike you, I keep an open mind.

Tell me all about these "tax breaks" for CEO bonuses. In specific detail, if you don't mind. That seems like a good place to begin. And how much money which never belonged to the taxpayer in the first place are we talking about?

TIA

Yeah, I have a horribly closed mind by switching from a mainstream political party to a third party and you're a bastion of open mindedness who everyone recognizes on the board.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=942667

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... -4-141.pdf

http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/ ... d-bonuses/

http://www.interest.com/cd-rates/slide- ... -loophole/

https://www.theguardian.com/money/us-mo ... r-salaries

http://www.epi.org/publication/taxes-ex ... pensation/

https://www.propublica.org/article/reme ... an-we-knew

https://ourfuture.org/fact_sheet/ceos-p ... -economics

Deferred comp IS taxable, you fucking moron. The CEO takes the hit not the corporation which is as it should be if you knew the first fucking thing about accounting...which you don't.

It's a smaller hit on the individual, you fucking moron, and can be written off other ways when attached to individuals.

As far as your quip about accounting... the proper term your were searching for is accountancy, not accounting. I have multiple degrees in economics, my father is both an attorney and a CPA, my uncle is the dean of accountancy at a major university (also holds a Juris Doctorate), and my aunt is THE Tax Director for one of the nation's largest corporations whose employers were mentioned in this very fucking thread, you fucking tool bag.

STFU, go try and regale more of the mouth breathers with your Civil War prose.

It's a smaller hit on the individual, you fucking moron, and can be written off other ways when attached to individuals.

And? It's isn't corporate income, dumbfuck. Why should it be taxed as corporate income?


Yeah, we're all very impressed with your (alleged) multiple degrees. Your logical fallacies and abject stupidity not so much.

Tell me more about "accountancy," fucktard. As I thought, you're an academic with absolutely ZERO real world experience.

mvscal wrote:

It's a smaller hit on the individual, you fucking moron, and can be written off other ways when attached to individuals.

And? It's isn't corporate income, dumbfuck. Why should it be taxed as corporate income?


Yeah, we're all very impressed with your (alleged) multiple degrees. Your logical fallacies and abject stupidity not so much.

Tell me more about "accountancy," fucktard. As I thought, you're an academic with absolutely ZERO real world experience.

You keep saying "we're" and I don't think you understand the definition of the word, I only see you posting otherwise, you're an individual you dumb ass.

Everyone on this board with slightest ability to retain information in a pea brain already knew the disciplines I have degrees in for many years from previous posts and from when I was posting on these boards while I was still in school!!!

You need a shovel, Babs?

Sun Coast I am a bit confused. I think somewhere you stated your views were more in line with the libertarian party.

If I misread that my mistake. But then you take a very liberal stand here with "Corporate Welfare." In one of your examples you list Capital Gains tax breaks as "Corporate Welfare." Most libertarians are all about reducing the taxes and having a smaller Fed Govt. Capital Gains taxes are nothing but double taxation so any reduction of them would be a good thing, no? Further, how are deferred payouts to a "C" level executive "Corporate Welfare?" The corporation paid taxes on the income when it came in the door. How they choose to pay it back out should be their business and if the individual has to pay taxes on that money then so be it.

Left Seater wrote:Sun Coast I am a bit confused. I think somewhere you stated your views were more in line with the libertarian party.

If I misread that my mistake. But then you take a very liberal stand here with "Corporate Welfare." In one of your examples you list Capital Gains tax breaks as "Corporate Welfare." Most libertarians are all about reducing the taxes and having a smaller Fed Govt. Capital Gains taxes are nothing but double taxation so any reduction of them would be a good thing, no? Further, how are deferred payouts to a "C" level executive "Corporate Welfare?" The corporation paid taxes on the income when it came in the door. How they choose to pay it back out should be their business and if the individual has to pay taxes on that money then so be it.

I'm actually for less taxation in general, which is very libertarian (and a smaller federal government as you mentioned). I was simply pointing out the fallacy of thought that Republicans are "conservatives" in modern times with the information I provided. I can understand you drawing the conclusion you did, or being confused, from the tone of posting after Babs joined in. I hope this response clarifies my personal position better.

I pointed out that it's easier for individuals to write it off in personal taxes than their corporate employers. As I said, I'm for less taxation in general on principle, but also believe in fair taxation for what taxes are necessary to operate a government. I'm a "common sense" Libertarian, not a strict Libertarian.

SunCoastSooner wrote:
I'm actually for less taxation in general, which is very libertarian (and a smaller federal government as you mentioned). I was simply pointing out the fallacy of thought that Republicans are "conservatives" in modern times with the information I provided. I can understand you drawing the conclusion you did, or being confused, from the tone of posting after Babs joined in. I hope this response clarifies my personal position better.

I pointed out that it's easier for individuals to write it off in personal taxes than their corporate employers. As I said, I'm for less taxation in general on principle, but also believe in fair taxation for what taxes are necessary to operate a government. I'm a "common sense" Libertarian, not a strict Libertarian.

Yeah, that makes sense. I just saw some of the examples of Capital Gains Taxes, and exec comp and didn't follow. I think we generally agree on most of this stuff. I agree that some taxes are necessary but would like to see us remove all deductions while dropping Capital Gains, inheritance, alternative minimum, etc, etc. On the social side if you want to marry someone of the same sex go ahead. You want to dress as the opposite sex cool. Where I start to struggle with things is letting HS boys use the girls locker room because they decide they want to. I also struggle with some who want to legalize hard drugs.

Anywho thanks for the clarification.

Left Seater wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:
I'm actually for less taxation in general, which is very libertarian (and a smaller federal government as you mentioned). I was simply pointing out the fallacy of thought that Republicans are "conservatives" in modern times with the information I provided. I can understand you drawing the conclusion you did, or being confused, from the tone of posting after Babs joined in. I hope this response clarifies my personal position better.

I pointed out that it's easier for individuals to write it off in personal taxes than their corporate employers. As I said, I'm for less taxation in general on principle, but also believe in fair taxation for what taxes are necessary to operate a government. I'm a "common sense" Libertarian, not a strict Libertarian.

Yeah, that makes sense. I just saw some of the examples of Capital Gains Taxes, and exec comp and didn't follow. I think we generally agree on most of this stuff. I agree that some taxes are necessary but would like to see us remove all deductions while dropping Capital Gains, inheritance, alternative minimum, etc, etc. On the social side if you want to marry someone of the same sex go ahead. You want to dress as the opposite sex cool. Where I start to struggle with things is letting HS boys use the girls locker room because they decide they want to. I also struggle with some who want to legalize hard drugs.

Anywho thanks for the clarification.

I agree with most of what you said as well. I do feel we have to reform our drug policy considerably; if for no other reason than that what we're doing now, and have been for generations, is obviously not working. I struggle with complete legalization for harder drugs like you but the system of punishment for addicts, simply put, only exacerbates the issue further. I think I've mentioned we've been the ones raising my nieces and nephews mostly the last few years and drug addiction, and how screwed up the privatized system for child welfare here, is the root of that issue for us personally. That's been resolved permanently for the most part but... I speaketh too much on this board I fear.

SunCoastSooner wrote:
Everyone on this board with slightest ability to retain information in a pea brain already knew the disciplines I have degrees in for many years from previous posts and from when I was posting on these boards while I was still in school!!!

I recall you as some sort of real estate mogul. And you're related to every veteran of every war on the planet. And every professor on the planet. And having every ailment known to man.

Oh and the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has officially changed their name, too much hate on social media. True story.

Dr_Phibes wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:
Everyone on this board with slightest ability to retain information in a pea brain already knew the disciplines I have degrees in for many years from previous posts and from when I was posting on these boards while I was still in school!!!

I recall you as some sort of real estate mogul. And you're related to every veteran of every war on the planet. And every professor on the planet. And having every ailment known to man.

Not a mogul, an appraiser, and I still am though only part time now. Valuation of real property and economics go hand in hand...