President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#13,329
#13,329
jwells said:
It's pretty simple:
Decide on what programs we need. Tax based on those.
Stop running on "tax cuts for the rich" so that the rich will fund campaigns at a higher level.
If we have more income than we do spending: tax cuts.
If we have more spending than taxes, cut spending or increase taxes.

For God's sake, stop cutting programs for the poor, increasing spending all over the place, AND cutting taxes for the wealthy. If the budget is in a deficit, we can't afford tax cuts.

If we are running in a deficit, discretionary spending in Congress and the Executive should be cut proportionate to budget cuts. This means less travel for Congress (not like they're holding town halls anyway), cuts to their home offices (it's 2025, they can Zoom), and cuts to Presidential and Cabinet travel. No tax-payer funded vacations back in Delaware or Mar a Lago. No golf trips. No Super Bowls. No more fun trips to warzones for Congress or photo ops here there and everywhere.

If the working class is going to face cuts, let's all cut together. Right now it's this "We're a family. We're in this together...so there's gonna be layoffs and the C-Suite will receive bonuses" Corporate nonsense.
Click to expand...
But good sir, what's the point of obtaining power, if one can't enjoy the trappings of power by having government funds at one's disposal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#13,330
#13,330
midnight orange said:
Thank you. I’m familiar with the letter to the Dansbury Baptist Church and his desire for a “wall of separation”. The Dansbury letter is not part of the constitution and when someone shrieks “separation of church and state” because someone prays within 50 yards of a government building, they are pulling out of their ass.
Click to expand...
The exact words "separation of church and state" or "wall of separation" don't have to be written out for the meaning to be there.
People should be able to pray or not pray as they see fit as long as it doesn't interfere with others' activities or impose their beliefs on others.
 
#13,334
#13,334
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Click to expand...


Imagine, all you have to do is enforce it.

AMAZING-NICK-KROLL-1.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#13,337
#13,337
EasternVol said:
The exact words "separation of church and state" or "wall of separation" don't have to be written out for the meaning to be there.
People should be able to pray or not pray as they see fit as long as it doesn't interfere with others' activities or impose their beliefs on others.
Click to expand...
Problem is people don’t know what it means. It gives no clarity and thus the phrase is worthless. It would be easier to say that the founders didn’t want a federal version of the Church of England. You could have a state version but no national version.
 
#13,341
#13,341
midnight orange said:
Problem is people don’t know what it means. It gives no clarity and thus the phrase is worthless. It would be easier to say that the founders didn’t want a federal version of the Church of England. You could have a state version but no national version.
Click to expand...
Any phrase is worthless if people don't know the meaning. This one's not that difficult to understand so a little effort will bear fruit.
 
#13,342
#13,342
LouderVol said:
you are acting like the millionaire is paying as much as the person living on SS. they simply aren't.

even if you assumed that 100m generated zero dollars in income taxes, there are other dollars earned off of that money. less than 50% of all federal government revenue comes from the income taxes. its the biggest single piece, but it isn't the only piece.

and in reality, even with all the tax breaks, the top 1% already pay more than the bottom 90% combined. its really hard to sell as the greedy rich stealing at the expense of the poor when they are still the largest drivers.

IIRC that percentage paid by the Top 1% is the still near the highest its ever been. basically except for the very start when it was only a tax on the 1%, its never been that high. and its not because they are choking out the poor(er) now from earning potential.

the bottom half made 10.4% of AGI, while the top 1% made 26.3% of AGI. in the 50s it the bottom half making less than 7% while the top 1% made almost 30%. yet despite the rich taking a smaller piece of the pie, relative to the 50s, they are still paying a bigger slice of the pie in taxes than they were in the 50s.
Click to expand...
Of course I'm not. We're talking as a percentage of income. I'm not arguing about actual dollars, but the effective rates. And while the "rich" pay 35%-ish, the mega-rich are paying basically nothing due to loopholes in how they utilize loans leveraged against assets rather than actual income. That's worth fixing.

Re rates: it's like 30% lower than the peak.

 
#13,343
#13,343
McDad said:
I am a little confused now. If taxes and programs are not a zero sum game for you, why post things like "tax cuts for the wealthy mean less for the need" [paraphrased]?
Click to expand...
In this budget. They wanna find "savings" so they cut entitlement programs to provide the "savings" for the needy.

I don't think taxes are a zero-sum game, but I think the GOP is putting on a show of being budget conscious, while really just raising the debt and hurting people who actually need the money to survive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#13,345
#13,345
jwells said:
In this budget. They wanna find "savings" so they cut entitlement programs to provide the "savings" for the needy.

I don't think taxes are a zero-sum game, but I think the GOP is putting on a show of being budget conscious, while really just raising the debt and hurting people who actually need the money to survive.
Click to expand...

The measuring stick will be the budget. They need to deliver a balanced budget.

Spending must be reduced. Some programs are going to have to go. There’s no way around it. Needs to be done now. The longer we wait, the worse it gets for our children. At some point, the bills must be paid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#13,347
#13,347
EasternVol said:
Jefferson's for one. But what did he know, right?
Click to expand...
He knew less about it than Madison.

I don't care about the prayer issue. I pray. I pray along when the prayer being said is consistent with my beliefs. When faced with a public prayer that is inconsistent with my beliefs, I will be respectful, but not reverent. The milquetoast platitudes spoken at most events are frequently so bland as to be void of any substantive meaning anyway.

What I can't abide by is the foolishness of forcing me to pledge allegiance to a flag. Nope! Not me.

I welcome the support of the anti-prayer faction in my efforts to quit forcing me actively participate, or passively witness others, in choosing fealty to a stupid piece of cloth rather than to the Almighty.

I am also against the Pride of the Southland playing the other team's fight song during pregame, classy as that gesture may be. I don't ever want to hear another team's fight song played in our stadium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and midnight orange
#13,349
#13,349
EasternVol said:
Any phrase is worthless if people don't know the meaning. This one's not that difficult to understand so a little effort will bear fruit.
Click to expand...
It’s vague. It’s the kind of phrase a politician loves. It could be interpreted as no religious people in government due to the separation of church and state and make sense. Vague phrases are worthless imo.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top