Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[FlyingVProd]

Kamala Harris announced that she is running for President in 2020. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris

I agree with her on being against building the wall, I agree with her that the USA is a sanctuary nation, I agree with her that we are all equal, I am also against the death penalty, I support green energy, I support a lot of things that she supports. I support debt free education, and healthcare for all. I support the ACLU, etc. But, there are a few things that we disagree on.

I support the NRA, and I believe that we all have a God given right to be able to protect our homes and our children. I always feel safe knowing I have a gun in the house. And when I was living in dive motels and stuff, no matter how bad the neighborhood was I felt safe with a gun. And I can protect the people I love who are in my home. I also carried a gun under the seat of my pick-up truck. And I believe that cops with guns can help to make schools safer. The Constitution guarantees our God given right to own guns.

And I am against abortion. I also believe that the Dad should have the option to raise the baby, if the Mother does not want the baby, then maybe the Father does want the baby. I would want my kid. I want to get married and have kids some day. And many people adopt. Roy Rogers adopted several children, and inspired many other people to consider adoption. In this day and age gay couples want to adopt, they cannot have children of their own, but they can raise a child just like it is their own, they can love the child like it is their own. I am against abortion completely.

Also, I believe that you should be free to become wealthy, guys like Richard Branson and Elon Musk, those are great guys, and they do a lot of good things. You should be free to get wealthy from the fruit of your labor. I do not believe in taking the money away from the rich people. I think rich people naturally rise to the top, and that is as it should be. We should all be allowed to work hard and get wealthy. And we need to receive tax breaks when we do charity work, etc, so that we can do more charity work, we get more bang for the buck if we get tax breaks for feeding the homeless and stuff. If I donate a library, then I should get a tax break. We need to use tax breaks to help to cause more good things to happen. You reward what you support. 

I also support healthy business. I am also pro-union for workers. I believe everyone should benefit from their contribution to society. If you start a business then you should benefit, and if you get up every morning and go work hard all day then you need to benefit. And if I write a book, then I should make money, along with the publisher, and the book-stores, etc, we should all benefit, and that money should not be taken away from us. The same with making movies, etc. We need to be rewarded for our contribution to society. If you want people to do good things, they need to be rewarded. And the Christians will share their rewards with other people, and people get lifted up. It is good to understand business, and economics. Taxes and regulations are fine, but if you crush business then it is not good. 

Those are some of my thoughts.

I would definitely vote for Kamala Harris against Donald Trump. 

Kamala Harris will bring some great ideas into the fight for the election in 2020, and I am glad she is running.

Salute,

Tony V.

[oilcan]

Peter Zeidenberg is a former federal prosecutor and was a deputy special counsel in the prosecution of Scooter Libby.   

https://www.thedailybeast.com/no-escape-for-roger-stone-muellers-case-is-a-slam-dunk-and-hes-too-slimy-to-get-flipped?ref=home

I can see why no one would want to flip him. 

[LarryBnDC]

Peter Zeidenberg is a former federal prosecutor and was a deputy special counsel in the prosecution of Scooter Libby.   

https://www.thedailybeast.com/no-escape-for-roger-stone-muellers-case-is-a-slam-dunk-and-hes-too-slimy-to-get-flipped?ref=home

I can see why no one would want to flip him.

One day this is gonna make one helluva unbelievable movie...

[kidcarter8]

https://nypost.com/2019/01/26/president-trump-is-down-but-not-out/

[whiskeypriest]

I have a billion dollars. I give my kid $15,000,000 and I pay the gift tax.

IOW, you have been taxed twice by the federal government on the same money.

There, there. /pats head/

There is no gift tax to be paid.
But at least you are grasping the idea that taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax.

Is it ignorance or mere cussedness that prevents you from uttering the truth?

"There is no gift tax to be paid."

The IRS begs to differ with you.
https://www.irs.com/articles/7-things-you-should-know-about-gift-tax

"taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax."

No.

INCOME taxes are paid when money is earned.

GIFT taxes are paid when money is given to another person (depending on amount and purpose). This is an example you keep denying, but your denying it doesn't cause it to stop existing. And yes, there are people who pay gift taxes.

ESTATE taxes are not about money's being earned, either.

And the proposed WEALTH tax no more falls afoul of the Constitution than either GIFT taxes or ESTATE taxes, despite your utter misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of the 16th Amendment.

Except for property taxes, we tax the transfer of wealth. Technically all of it has been taxed before, even the money we pay in sales tax. We tax the transfer of wealth with gift and estate taxes. Warren's proposal is different from either of those. It is closer to property tax, which taxes accumulated property.

Warren  is proposing only one thing. A tax based on wealth  targeted to the very wealthy.  That tax violates the 16th amendment. The 16th allows taxing income but not your bank account.  (unless your bank account generates new income)
Someone who wins $100 million(after paying all taxes) in a lottery and invests it will pay yearly income taxes on the amount of money earned off the original investment. ( @5% That amounts to $5 Million)  The original $100 million is not taxed.
Warren,however, proposes  a one per cent tax every year on $49 million of the principal in addition to the taxes on the new income.

I understand her proposal. I just.think from interacting with you for years you are not smart enough to think around the right wing smoke job that.gave you your argument.

[josh]

We've had our first official candidate withdrawal from the race!

Richard Ojeda of WV has dropped out.

Many more to go.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I have a billion dollars. I give my kid $15,000,000 and I pay the gift tax.

IOW, you have been taxed twice by the federal government on the same money.

There, there. /pats head/

There is no gift tax to be paid.
But at least you are grasping the idea that taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax.

Is it ignorance or mere cussedness that prevents you from uttering the truth?

"There is no gift tax to be paid."

The IRS begs to differ with you.
https://www.irs.com/articles/7-things-you-should-know-about-gift-tax

"taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax."

No.

INCOME taxes are paid when money is earned.

GIFT taxes are paid when money is given to another person (depending on amount and purpose). This is an example you keep denying, but your denying it doesn't cause it to stop existing. And yes, there are people who pay gift taxes.

ESTATE taxes are not about money's being earned, either.

And the proposed WEALTH tax no more falls afoul of the Constitution than either GIFT taxes or ESTATE taxes, despite your utter misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of the 16th Amendment.

Except for property taxes, we tax the transfer of wealth. Technically all of it has been taxed before, even the money we pay in sales tax. We tax the transfer of wealth with gift and estate taxes. Warren's proposal is different from either of those. It is closer to property tax, which taxes accumulated property.

Warren  is proposing only one thing. A tax based on wealth  targeted to the very wealthy.  That tax violates the 16th amendment. The 16th allows taxing income but not your bank account.  (unless your bank account generates new income)
Someone who wins $100 million(after paying all taxes) in a lottery and invests it will pay yearly income taxes on the amount of money earned off the original investment. ( @5% That amounts to $5 Million)  The original $100 million is not taxed.
Warren,however, proposes  a one per cent tax every year on $49 million of the principal in addition to the taxes on the new income.

I understand her proposal. I just.think from interacting with you for years you are not smart enough to think around the right wing smoke job that.gave you your argument.

What is it you "understand" about her proposal?

[josh]

I have a billion dollars. I give my kid $15,000,000 and I pay the gift tax.

IOW, you have been taxed twice by the federal government on the same money.

There, there. /pats head/

There is no gift tax to be paid.
But at least you are grasping the idea that taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax.

Is it ignorance or mere cussedness that prevents you from uttering the truth?

"There is no gift tax to be paid."

The IRS begs to differ with you.
https://www.irs.com/articles/7-things-you-should-know-about-gift-tax

"taxes are paid when money is earned, not when it is saved or invested. Income from accumulated wealth is subject to the income tax."

No.

INCOME taxes are paid when money is earned.

GIFT taxes are paid when money is given to another person (depending on amount and purpose). This is an example you keep denying, but your denying it doesn't cause it to stop existing. And yes, there are people who pay gift taxes.

ESTATE taxes are not about money's being earned, either.

And the proposed WEALTH tax no more falls afoul of the Constitution than either GIFT taxes or ESTATE taxes, despite your utter misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of the 16th Amendment.

Except for property taxes, we tax the transfer of wealth. Technically all of it has been taxed before, even the money we pay in sales tax. We tax the transfer of wealth with gift and estate taxes. Warren's proposal is different from either of those. It is closer to property tax, which taxes accumulated property.

Warren  is proposing only one thing. A tax based on wealth  targeted to the very wealthy.  That tax violates the 16th amendment. The 16th allows taxing income but not your bank account.  (unless your bank account generates new income)
Someone who wins $100 million(after paying all taxes) in a lottery and invests it will pay yearly income taxes on the amount of money earned off the original investment. ( @5% That amounts to $5 Million)  The original $100 million is not taxed.
Warren,however, proposes  a one per cent tax every year on $49 million of the principal in addition to the taxes on the new income.

You expanded your failed grasp of the 16th Amendment since I first responded to it.

Let's try again, in an attempt at pretending you are actually willing to think, rather than to parrot obstinately.

Someone who is given $150 million by a rich friend or relative will pay no taxes on it at all, but would pay taxes on investment income (if any).

The person who gave them that money would pay taxes on it, because of the gift tax - a tax which is not illegal, even though it is not on income, because the 16th Amendment does not preclude non-income based taxes.

On the gift tax: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/465/330/

Sometimes, one is taxed on income that one has not received: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft_v._Bowers - In which Ms. Taft's father stock at $1,000. When it was worth $2,000 he gave it to Ms. Taft, who then sold it later that year for $5,000. The IRS wanted her to pay tax on all $4,000 of gain. She felt that was unfair, as she didn't even have it until $2,000!

SCOTUS agreed with the IRS.

If you were right, then there would be no gasoline tax. There would be no diesel fuel tax. These are not income taxes.

The federal government collects 10% on tanning fees, from the customer, not from the salon. This is not an income tax, either.

Your beer? That's taxed by the feds, too. And your smokes.

The Social Security and Medicare taxes paid by the employer are not income taxes, either.

And, again, gifts are taxed. Indeed, a gift tax is probably the most analogous to the wealth tax, as it generally applies to the same people.

Isn't amazing how all these taxes exists despite your certainty that the 16th Amendment forbids them!

That's because it doesn't.

[josh]

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-10-17.pdf

"History and Purpose of the Amendment" - meaning the 16th Amendment.

This is the Government Printing Office.

I trust their judgment more than I trust yours.

So far, you have provided zero substantiation for your misinterpretation of the 16th Amendment, in a vain effort to have the words speak for you, even though they do not say what you have tried to torture then into saying.

[kidcarter8]

Interesting

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/27/politics/howard-schultz-starbucks-2020-president/index.html

[josh]

Interesting

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/27/politics/howard-schultz-starbucks-2020-president/index.html

I think Castro is right.

I wish I thought that would have any meaningul influence on Schultz's decision making.

[REDSTATEWARD]

The person who gave them that money would pay taxes on it, because of the gift tax - a tax which is not illegal, even though it is not on income, because the 16th Amendment does not preclude non-income based taxes.

  I have no idea what you are trying to argue.  The gift tax exists to prevent rich people from giving money to (mostly)relatives to avoid paying estate taxes. But there is a lifetime exemption of $11 million dollars. According to IRS figures only about 5% of gift tax donors pay taxes on the gifts.
What this has to do with the 16th amendment is a mystery.

If you were right, then there would be no gasoline tax. There would be no diesel fuel tax. These are not income taxes.

They are excise taxes, taxes on the production of fuel, cigarettes, alcohol,for example. Excise taxes have been around since the government was created in 1789 . What is your point?

The federal government collects 10% on tanning fees, from the customer, not from the salon. This is not an income tax, either.

It is a tax used to help pay for Obama Care  and it under delivered(by a mile) the expected revenue.

Isn't amazing how all these taxes exists despite your certainty that the 16th Amendment forbids them!

No, the 16th amendment only created the INCOME tax, it did not negate other forms of taxation.

[josh]

No, the 16th amendment only created the INCOME tax, it did not negate other forms of taxation.

Yes, I know.

That is what I have been arguing all the way along.

You have been arguing that the proposed tax by Warren was unconstitutional because it was not an income tax.

Of course, you also argued that "nobody pays a gift tax."

I imagine you will deny both of those, now.

Lie, deny, and obfuscate.

[josh]

Meanwhile, the Texas GOP continues to prove they have no couth, until and unless called out for their outrageous behavior:

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/Harris-County-GOP-draws-fire-for-post-blaming-13566040.php?utm_campaign=CMS+Sharing+Tools+%28Desktop%29&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

[REDSTATEWARD]

No, the 16th amendment only created the INCOME tax, it did not negate other forms of taxation.

Yes, I know.

That is what I have been arguing all the way along.

You have been arguing that the proposed tax by Warren was unconstitutional because it was not an income tax.

I said Warren's proposal is unconstitutional since it fails as an income tax and as an unapportioned direct tax.
Perhaps you were not paying attention.