(09-14-2024, 12:21 PM)sally Wrote: Well there are no hospital beds here because the dickweeds from blue states have all moved here. I don't have anything against illegals working here and never said I did so I dont know what your point is. I do have a problem, however, with dumping them by the thousands into cities with no resources to take care of them and we already have our own citizens that are struggling.

You keep saying "illegals"

They are migrants and they are legal.

They're only here legally because they were granted it temporarily and didn't have to go through the expensive and lengthy process millions of other immigrants had to. Also thousands are here illegally without going through a vetting system, were you born yesterday?

(09-14-2024, 04:06 AM)BigMark Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 11:47 PM)username Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 07:28 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 06:17 PM)username Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 02:29 PM)sally Wrote: So you know nothing other than that you hate Trump? You dont know her tax plans, what she has done in California, none of that? You only know what the mainstream media tells you, correct?

...And Trump’s (possibly bloody) mass deportation ideas? IIRC they tried to crack down on illegal immigrants in Georgia once and they couldn’t get any fat ass white people willing to go off welfare to pick the fucking peaches. Our economy relies on that labor (I’m sure his resorts employ many immigrants). 

When did Trump say he wants to deport legal migrants, and do we need an influx of new immigrants at this point in time, given that our economy is contracting?

What our economy absolutely depends on is capital inflow and demand for US Treasuries, both of which are declining. Dollar hegemony is over and the consequences are going to entail severe austerity. A new World War could buy some time but the writing is on the wall -- the party is over.

It’s late but what I typed was Trump plans a mass deportation of “illegal” immigrants. We can get back to how that (by itself) would cost billions of dollars just to execute if he were to attempt it on the scale that he’s talking about and the effects on the economy.
I don’t have a problem with border control. Reminder: Trump killed the strongest bi-partisan border control legislation in decades just so he could keep harping about the border for his own reelection campaign. Biden finally crumbled and signed an executive order that has significantly slowed border crossings but Trump wanted this to be a campaign issue and that’s why he’s raving like a lunatic about Haitian’s eating pets in Ohio.

Maybe that's true re Trump, but when you say our economy depends on immigrant labor, what we're really talking about is cheap labor. Would you be willing to pick peaches for the wages the growers are willing to pay? Neither would I. If the US economy depends on cheap labor to maintain the economic growth that chronic deficit spending necessitates, it is clearly not an economy that serves the interests of the 99%. It's a Ponzi Scheme that has the mandate of the federal gov't. Care to guess what the reserve requirements are right now? I think you'd be shocked. The primary purpose of our banking system is the facilitation of indebtedness. It's obvious if you're paying attention. Every time the "business cycle" reaches the inevitable contraction of the money supply the result is a massive uptick in defaults, i.e., a massive transfer of wealth to the 1%.

Let's not pretend that the Democratic Party cares about downtrodden immigrants. Flooding the nation with new "immigrants" or "refugees", or whatever you want to call them, increases the hardships of the ones that are already here, and of the poor in general. The resources available are not infinite. Poor blacks understand this very well at this point. So much for "black lives matter".

The answer to this mess, IMO, is fairly obvious. If we took the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been diverted to the cause of defending Ukrainian "democracy" and had instead invested it into modernizing the US infrastructure, America's prospects would be excellent. There would be good paying jobs for all and we could dispense with our dependency on foreign manufacturing, which is a serious threat to US national security.

This could have been done decades ago, but it goes against the interests of neoliberalism, championed by people like Milton Friedman, George Bush, and Bill Clinton. It's not "all about the economy", it's all about investor rights.

So here we are, Donald Trump vs Kamala Harris, and there is zero chance that either of them will address these fundamental inequalities that are destructive to the interests of the 99%. Millionaires who identify with the 1% are foolish because extreme economic disparity is antithetical to a healthy and vibrant economy, without which we are plagued by unnecessarily high levels of crime, poor mental health, and a host of other ailments.

This is the danger of falling into the trap of thinking it's acceptable to have to vote for candidates that are a "lesser evil". It's a downward spiral to the bottom, and it looks like we're about to arrive at our final destination. Ignorance is only bliss until you reach the point where you can no longer avoid the consequences of making poor choices. Pain is the teacher of last recourse. Adapt, or perish. Choose wisely.

So if you’re in the 1% group and paying ur full share of taxes (35%+) of ur income ur not contributing to society? Should those individuals contribute more than the 6 figures that they already pay? Or just refuse some of their pay and embrace a socialist or communist society? Pffttt. We’re moving to a more socialist society and I don’t think that’s entirely bad but the tax burden should be shared among everyone (including corporations).
There’s something wrong with this:
“In 2021, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.4 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 26.3 percent of total AGI and paid 45.8 percent of all federal income taxes”.
Mind u, that’s only Federal Income Tax.

(09-14-2024, 03:54 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 11:47 PM)username Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 07:28 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 06:17 PM)username Wrote:

(09-13-2024, 02:29 PM)sally Wrote: So you know nothing other than that you hate Trump? You dont know her tax plans, what she has done in California, none of that? You only know what the mainstream media tells you, correct?

...And Trump’s (possibly bloody) mass deportation ideas? IIRC they tried to crack down on illegal immigrants in Georgia once and they couldn’t get any fat ass white people willing to go off welfare to pick the fucking peaches. Our economy relies on that labor (I’m sure his resorts employ many immigrants). 

When did Trump say he wants to deport legal migrants, and do we need an influx of new immigrants at this point in time, given that our economy is contracting?

What our economy absolutely depends on is capital inflow and demand for US Treasuries, both of which are declining. Dollar hegemony is over and the consequences are going to entail severe austerity. A new World War could buy some time but the writing is on the wall -- the party is over.

It’s late but what I typed was Trump plans a mass deportation of “illegal” immigrants. We can get back to how that (by itself) would cost billions of dollars just to execute if he were to attempt it on the scale that he’s talking about and the effects on the economy.
I don’t have a problem with border control. Reminder: Trump killed the strongest bi-partisan border control legislation in decades just so he could keep harping about the border for his own reelection campaign. Biden finally crumbled and signed an executive order that has significantly slowed border crossings but Trump wanted this to be a campaign issue and that’s why he’s raving like a lunatic about Haitian’s eating pets in Ohio.

Maybe that's true re Trump, but when you say our economy depends on immigrant labor, what we're really talking about is cheap labor. Would you be willing to pick peaches for the wages the growers are willing to pay? Neither would I. If the US economy depends on cheap labor to maintain the economic growth that chronic deficit spending necessitates, it is clearly not an economy that serves the interests of the 99%. It's a Ponzi Scheme that has the mandate of the federal gov't. Care  to guess what the reserve requirements are right now? I think you'd be shocked. The primary purpose of our banking system is the facilitation of indebtedness. It's obvious if you're paying attention. Every time the "business cycle" reaches the inevitable contraction of the money supply the result is a massive uptick in defaults, i.e., a massive transfer of wealth to the 1%.

Let's not pretend that the Democratic Party cares about downtrodden immigrants. Flooding the nation with new "immigrants" or "refugees", or whatever you want to call them, increases the hardships of the ones that are already here, and of the poor in general. The resources available are not infinite. Poor blacks understand this very well at this point. So much for "black lives matter".

The answer to this mess, IMO, is fairly obvious. If we took the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been diverted to the cause of defending Ukrainian  "democracy" and had instead invested it into modernizing the US infrastructure, America's prospects would be excellent. There would be good paying jobs for all and we could dispense with our dependency on foreign manufacturing, which is a serious threat to US national security.

This could have been done decades ago, but it goes against the interests of neoliberalism, championed by people like Milton Friedman, George Bush, and Bill Clinton. It's not "all about the economy", it's all about investor rights.

So here we are, Donald Trump vs Kamala Harris, and there is zero chance that either of them will address these fundamental inequalities that are destructive to the interests of the 99%. Millionaires who identify with the 1% are foolish because extreme economic disparity is antithetical to a healthy and vibrant economy, without which we are plagued by unnecessarily high levels of crime, poor mental health, and a host of other ailments.

This is the danger of falling into the trap of thinking it's acceptable to have to vote for candidates that are a "lesser evil". It's a downward spiral to the bottom, and  it looks like we're about to arrive at our final destination. Ignorance is only bliss until you reach the point where you can no longer avoid the consequences of making poor choices. Pain is the teacher of last recourse. Adapt, or perish. Choose wisely.

TL;DR. Trump bad, Democrats bad. Let's all ride the crazy train into oblivion and try to enjoy the ride.

(09-15-2024, 12:43 AM)username Wrote: So if you’re in the 1% group and paying ur full share of taxes (35%+) of ur income ur not contributing to society? Should those individuals contribute more than the 6 figures that they already pay? Or just refuse some of their pay and embrace a socialist or communist society? Pffttt. We’re moving to a more socialist society and I don’t think that’s entirely bad but the tax burden should be shared among everyone (including corporations).
There’s something wrong with this:
“In 2021, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.4 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 26.3 percent of total AGI and paid 45.8 percent of all federal income taxes”.
Mind u, that’s only Federal Income Tax.

We're talking about a group of people who have no national loyalty. They suck wealth out of communities like a Hoover vacuum. Do local economies matter? They do as far as I'm concerned. Small business is the engine that drives a healthy economy, not the corporate sector, which is predatory in nature. Furthermore, it's very difficult to calculate the wealth of this class due to it's ability to hide assets. Want to stop drug trafficking? The only way to do it is to eliminate offshore banking. Interdiction is a futile policy that wastes obscene amounts of public money. What do you think the chances are that the people at the top of the food chain are involved in trafficking. Close to 100%, IMO, because that's where the greatest profit margins are, all tax free. Dirty money is a huge chunk of capital inflow to the US. We're dependent on it, and the banking and finance sector is very happy to launder it, as is the case in the UK, and plenty of other nations, no doubt. The US is number one according to the UN, though, or was ten or so years ago.

What's paid in taxes does not begin to offset the damage that's done to the US economy. As for the poor paying a negligible amount of federal tax, they pay via currency debasement and price fixing. And as Adam Smith noted quite a few years ago, the wealthy benefit most, and I think that holds true today, even after factoring in welfare expenditures, because federal policy and legislation facilitates the consolidation of wealth and power in the top percentile. It's the federal gov't that bears the burden, not the 1%, which is also the case when it comes to empires: Governments go broke while the rich and powerful make out like bandits. When you talk about securing foreign interests, it isn't *our* interests that our being secured, it's the people that get rich via OPM (other people's money). The profits of those with great wealth and influence are subsidized while the costs are socialized, which is inverted socialism. Eventually the federal gov't will be forced into default and the balancing of accounts will be brutal, but not for those whose interests were secured. Having sucked the wealth out of this nation they will pack up and move to greener pastures. Eventually they will be forced to settle their own karmic account imbalances, but not before having harmed the whole of humanity with their looting and pillaging.

This is the cost of tolerating corruption. society collapses, and the many are left to wither and die in a manner that is most unpleasant. It's happening in many places in this world, and has happened throughout human history. Many think it couldn't possibly happen here, in spite of it already having begun. Such is denial.

We are never going to have all that we want in a president and there will always be one choice that is better than the other. That's just the way it is.

I couldn't possibly know this of course, but I get the impression that trump thinks he is going to lose and he is setting the stage to do the same damn thing he did the last time. The only difference this time is that DC will be prepared for it.

If trump wins, he intends to pardon the J6 offenders, he calls them patriots, nothing could be further from the truth. At a recent rally he boasted that Viktor Orban supports him! It is sickening. There is a reason that lifelong republicans are publicly supporting VP Harris.

Rob Rue, mayor of Springfield, Ohio--"All these federal politicians that have negatively spun our city, they need to know they are hurting our city, it was their words that did it".

The federal politicians he referred to have continued their lying bullshit. Rational, well-adjusted people don't do shit like this.

JD went on CNN this morning and said him & trump have to "create stories" about migrants eating cats and dogs so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people". Creating stories. Jesus Christ. That's what some of you are voting for. Own it.

(09-15-2024, 02:45 AM)rothschild Wrote:

(09-15-2024, 12:43 AM)username Wrote: So if you’re in the 1% group and paying ur full share of taxes (35%+) of ur income ur not contributing to society? Should those individuals contribute more than the 6 figures that they already pay? Or just refuse some of their pay and embrace a socialist or communist society? Pffttt. We’re moving to a more socialist society and I don’t think that’s entirely bad but the tax burden should be shared among everyone (including corporations).
There’s something wrong with this:
“In 2021, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.4 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 26.3 percent of total AGI and paid 45.8 percent of all federal income taxes”.
Mind u, that’s only Federal Income Tax.

We're talking about a group of people who have no national loyalty. They suck wealth out of communities like a Hoover vacuum. Do local economies matter? They do as far as I'm concerned. Small business is the engine that drives a healthy economy, not the corporate sector, which is predatory in nature. Furthermore, it's very difficult to calculate the wealth of this class due to it's ability to hide assets. Want to stop drug trafficking? The only way to do it is to eliminate offshore banking. Interdiction is a futile policy that wastes obscene amounts of public money. What do you think the chances are that the people at the top of the food chain are involved in trafficking. Close to 100%, IMO, because that's where the greatest profit margins are, all tax free. Dirty money is a huge chunk of capital inflow to the US. We're dependent on it, and the banking and finance sector is very happy to launder it, as is the case in the UK, and plenty of other nations, no doubt. The US is number one according to the UN, though, or was ten or so years ago.

What's paid in taxes does not begin to offset the damage that's done to the US economy. As for the poor paying a negligible amount of federal tax, they pay via currency debasement and price fixing. And as Adam Smith noted quite a few years ago, the wealthy benefit most, and I think that holds true today, even after factoring in welfare expenditures, because federal policy and legislation facilitates the consolidation of wealth and power in the top percentile. It's the federal gov't that bears the burden, not the 1%, which is also the case when it comes to empires: Governments go broke while the rich and powerful make out like bandits. When you talk about securing foreign interests, it isn't *our* interests that our being secured, it's the people that get rich via OPM (other people's money). The profits of those with great wealth and influence are subsidized while the costs are socialized, which is inverted socialism. Eventually the federal gov't will be forced into default and the balancing of accounts will be brutal, but not for those whose interests were secured. Having sucked the wealth out of this nation they will pack up and move to greener pastures. Eventually they will be forced to settle their own karmic account imbalances, but not before having harmed the whole of humanity with their looting and pillaging.

This is the cost of tolerating corruption. society collapses, and the many are left to wither and die in a manner that is most unpleasant. It's happening in many places in this world, and has happened throughout human history. Many think it couldn't possibly happen here, in spite of it already having begun. Such is denial.

No time to address point by point but I at least agree with u that everyone should pay their fair share of taxes and the loopholes available to the wealthiest ought to be closed. Entirely. And that’s just one reason (of many) I wouldn’t vote for Trump. He certainly doesn’t pay his share and for several years paid zero (and said that made him “smart”). So I don’t see him as an advocate for the poor or middle class—just the opposite.

(09-15-2024, 07:19 AM)Duchess Wrote: We are never going to have all that we want in a president and there will always be one choice that is better than the other. That's just the way it is.

Solid, well-formed turds are indeed preferable to diarrhea. Thank goodness you have the good sense to go with the well-formed turd, rather than the bucket of diarrhea. A very solid choice.

A week later...

He's referring to normal people, Duchess.

Stop being obtuse. 

You're only supposed to be that way when trying to get out of things you don't want to do.