Politics, Politics, Politics

the 92% was on biz.... either put it back into the economy... or pay uncle sam!

No it wasn't. The 90+% tax rate only applied to people who made over 3.4mil and then it only applied to anything OVER that first 3.4mil.

And speaking of putting it back into the economy - the best way to do that is to pay your employees more - HOWEVER! it is Democratic legislation the PREVENTS businesses from doing so. It is better for me and my company to buy stuff for my company (tools, advertising, paint, etc) than it is to pay my employees more. In fact, the more I pay my employees - the more tax I have to pay! So what do you think big business are going to do? Don't you think it would be best to encourage companies to pay more? Taxes, red tape, and BS regulations promote lower wages.
 
And speaking of putting it back into the economy - the best way to do that is to pay your employees more

hey we agree on something! and you are very right on that...pay more and they spend more and it all comes back around!

No it wasn't. The 90+% tax rate only applied to people who made over 3.4mil and then it only applied to anything OVER that first 3.4mil.

I posted "ikes" plan on that... he did want to cut taxes... but would not do it until the debit was back in line...so he taxed..mostly big biz or employers....it they didn't re-invest into the economy
 
In fact, the more I pay my employees - the more tax I have to pay! So what do you think big business are going to do? Don't you think it would be best to encourage companies to pay more? Taxes, red tape, and BS regulations promote lower wages

don't understand the paying employees more costs you more in taxes... but then I'm not really up on all that... I just know and read what happened in the 50's and 60's and the country was in pretty good shape.... moms stayed home and took care of the *******...schools were best in the world...******* could support his family....most jobs supplied health insurance of some kind...on and on...
look at where the corporate tax rate is now and what we have...
 
don't understand the paying employees more costs you more in taxes...
It's called "unemployment tax". Every business has to pay a tax based on their pay, just in case I fire them. And lets not forget Workers Comp... just to name 2. It's cheaper for a single McDonalds store to higher 50 employees and keep them under 20 hours each and pay them peanuts, than it is to hire 20 good employees and pay them a fair wage.

but then I'm not really up on all that... I just know and read what happened in the 50's and 60's and the country was in pretty good shape.... moms stayed home and took care of the *******...schools were best in the world...******* could support his family...

Had very little to do with the 90% tax rate.
 
It's called "unemployment tax". Every business has to pay a tax based on their pay, just in case I fire them. And lets not forget Workers Comp... just to name 2.

yes I know what those are...guess I never really had much cause to think about it

Had very little to do with the 90% tax rate.
the gov had money...wasn't in hawk and put money into schools and infrastructure and etc....now we have no money and owe far more than we take in...one of the first things you do as an adult is learn to balance a check book... and yet our gov can't?... and the right is the worst about it!
look at now.... deficit already way out there... and yet they are just going to raise the limits and... well give trump his wall for one thing...look at our education system for another... and the right just wants to do away with it....like Kansas and other states mine for another... and push for private education... who benefits there?... not the poor person just trying to get by

Ike was right without a balanced budget the gov has no money and is not stable... I read the article and found out that it is also a major factor in inflation!

the right is always the one to scream about the budget... but look at history as to who has spent and who has saved.....the right is always the worst and always scream the most... like they did under Obama.. and willing to shut gov down rather than pay the bills... but now with a repub in the white house... no mention or crying about the deficit and looks like it is really going to go up

now you see why I say the right can't manage!
 
the gov had money...wasn't in hawk and put money into schools and infrastructure and etc....now we have no money and owe far more than we take in...

I agree, but it's not entirely the Republicans fault. It has stiltedly gone down hill ever since. You can't tell me the Republicans have been in control all this time since the 50's - sorry not buying it.

The government can have money for those things again without the need for a huge income tax rate. I would much prefer to get rid of the income tax rate altogether and only tax things we do and use. The Wheel tax, gas tax, Tobacco Tax, Lottery tax, things like that all make much more sense. If I don't want to pay taxes , then I don't buy a car, I don't smoke and I don't play the lottery. Luxury tax would be another big one - you want a 200 foot Yacht - you pay for a 200 foot Yacht. Then taking money out of my paycheck for things like SSI, Medicare, and free health care is much less painful.

Just the lottery alone - think about it. Lets say the gov. taxes you $1 for every $1 lottery ticket - sure the tickets now cost $2, and people would still buy them, but with over 10 BILLION sold EVERY DAY, that's 10 BILLION the government would receive EVERY DAY. And that is just in my state alone!
 
I agree, but it's not entirely the Republicans fault

Democrats Are Better Than Republicans

1. Historical data from up to 70 years
1. Debt and Deficit. In the past 17 Presidential terms , nine were GOP led and eight Democratic. Of nine GOP Presidents, six added to debt/GDP and deficit/GDP as a percent. The only three that did not, had a Democratic House and Senate. Of eight Democrats, each one, reduced deficit/GDP and debt/GDP as a percent. That is 66 years of rhetoric of fiscal responsibility with zero net results for GOP. What makes matters even worse, is the fact that the president who added a historical 20.7% to the debt has one unique aspect of his presidency – President G. W. Bush had a GOP majority House and Senate.
2. Spending. The Republican Party often talks about financial responsibility, but did you know that since 1978-2011, spending has gone up 9.9% under Democrats versus 12.1% under GOP .
3. Federal Debt. Republicans love to tell us how they will not close tax loopholes on millionaires and billionaires, yet never bring to our attention that from 1978-2011 debt went up 4.2% under Democrats versus 36.4% under the GOP.
4. GDP. The only thing that the Democrats have a higher numerical yield than the GOP led administrations, is the GDP. It’s a good thing to have it at 12.6% versus a GOP 10.7%. From 1960 to 2005 the gross domestic product measured in year-2000 dollars rose an average of $165 billion a year under Republican presidents and $212 billion a year under Democrats.
5. Big Government. Federal spending (aka “big government”): It has gone up an average of about $50 billion a year under presidents of both parties. But that breaks down as $35 billion a year under Democratic presidents and $60 billion under Republicans. If you assume that it takes a year for a president’s policies to take effect, Democrats have raised spending by $40 billion a year and Republicans by $55 billion.
6. Federal Deficit. Under Republican presidents since 1960, the federal deficit has averaged $131 billion a year. Under Democrats, that figure is $30 billion. In an average Republican year, the deficit has grown by $36 billion. In the average Democratic year it has shrunk by $25 billion.
7. National Debt. The national debt has gone up more than $200 billion a year under Republican presidents and less than $100 billion a year under Democrats.
8. Inflation and Unemployment. Democratic presidents have a better record on inflation (averaging 3.13 percent compared with 3.89 percent for Republicans) and on unemployment (5.33 percent versus 6.38 percent). Unemployment went down in the average Democratic year, up in the average Republican one.

Outcome: Based on the data, Democrats have had a much more successful run when it comes to economy, job creation, debt and deficit, and shockingly, even spending.

Plain facts, but what about the qualitative data. Let’s look at some of the best aspects of economy, and drill-down to specific presidencies to see which one added what to the economy. I look at the pivotal economic factors and researched which president added:
1. Greatest gross domestic product (GDP) growth?
2. Biggest jobs increase?
3. Best after-tax personal disposable income rise?
4. Highest industrial production growth?
5. The lowest Misery Index, which is inflation plus unemployment?
6. The lowest inflation?
7. The largest federal budget deficit reduction?

There answers are, if you are done guessing? Okay , here are the answers: 1. Clinton; 2. Truman; 3. Carter; 4. Johnson; 5. Kennedy; 6. Truman; 7. Truman; 8. Clinton.

Outcome: It is also a Democratic sweep.
So, now you are thinking two things. One, this does not mean too much because it takes time for a President’s policies to come into effect and two, what about Obama since this is all in the past?


To address our first question, I gathered this information: First, the analyses presented above took into account the transition time to for policies to kick-in and factored in relative adjustments. Plus, I find it hard to believe that it was just a fluke a that six of nine GOP Presidents failed in terms of GDP and Debt, and not even one of eight Democrats did. So I wanted to look at GOP Presidents that followed at least two GOP terms and Democratic Presidents that followed at least two Democratic terms. Here is the verdict: Truman, who followed two Democratic terms and still succeeded in all areas of economy, while Bush senior, who followed two Republican terms still added to debt and deficit through excessive spending.

Outcome: This highlights an interesting point that somehow Democrats who follow Democrats still outperform economically, and Republicans who followed GOP presidents somehow still failed to perform in absence of policies of the other party impacting them anymore.
Now, the second part, Obama. So, some people who supported him in 2008 are fed up a little. He shows no leadership in the face of stiff tea party politics. But here is the truth about the man who promised you to pass the health care reform, who promised you to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, who promised you that, while it will take time, he will slow down economic failure and he promised you that he will do everything to keep manufacturing jobs in the US. In his defense, he did all of that and then some.

He passed the Health Care Reform Act. He repealed the discriminatory DADT policy. Since he has become president, he has already created more net jobs in his first two years than Bush administration did in 8 years altogether. While GDP growth is slow, it has been positive now for 8 straight quarters since the stimulus was passed, which also worked. Not to mention, Obama inherited an economy in a wreck where the GDP had fallen to over 8.8 percent, the banking industry has just collapsed, two wars were going on for about seven years, and above all, he took over from a President who had raised the debt ceiling a historic, record six times while taking a 53% debt at the beginning of his first term and transforming it into an 84% by the end. According to my research, the Obama administration added more jobs to the economy than eight years of the former President Bush did. The GDP has now been positive for 8 straight quarters bouncing from a negative 8.8%.

Obama extended Bush bailouts and bailed out the auto industry because many US jobs were at risk and our auto industry was soon to become foreign at the hands of global buy outs. Well, this past May, Chrysler paid off its loans . The American auto industry is still American, those jobs in the Mid West still exist. Obama, despite the roughest opposition that any president has faced, still did all he promised. But, here is an eye-opening compilation on more: See what else Obama has done. Also, I must include the fact that we have half as many troops in Iraq, a 2014 plan to be out of Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden is dead. You don’t need a hyperlink for that, do you? Oh, and he also became the first president ever to have to deal with a distraction of proving, through his birth certificate, that he is an American.


I would like to make one more really important point here because a lot of Republicans often cite their desire to vote for GOP candidates despite their stiff opposition to social and civil freedoms in exchange of offering small government. It is a fact that as Americans we are living in the time of the smallest government in half a century. We are paying the lowest taxes, some of the largest free-trade agreements, and a proposal to pay even lower corporate taxes, small business reliefs, and to lower income taxes down from 6.2% offered by President Bush to 3.2% proposed by Obama and the democrats. It is even mentioned in a post at FOX News.

Outcome: The Obama administration has done everything they promised to do when elected, socially and economically. Democrats have failed to improve the economy but have been very successful in creating jobs and avoiding further economic slip. Actually, this administration has now added over three million jobs in 23 straight months of positive employment gains. 2010 and 2011 also mark the first years since 1997 to see positive gains in manufacturing jobs, as shown in this interactive graph. Additionally, March 2012 marks the month in which the Nasdaq hit 3,000 mark for the first time since dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones hit 13,000 for the first time, growing at 63% under Obama which is the fifth best for any president, and the S&P 500 hit 1,400 for the first time since 2008 showing a remarkable economic recovery on the free-floating capital indexes.
Living standard review of GOP vs. Democratic states

Finally, it’s not fair to highlight just money issues. How about the living standards? None of us desire to live in poverty, food scarcity, without health insurance or earn below a minimum wage. Here is an eye-opening part of my analysis that truly shook me.

The worst standards of living are in states that have Republican legislatures. One can argue that it is just that the poor in the deep South that vote a GOP heavy legislature, but when coupled with all the economic statistics listed above, that argument starts to appear very vulnerable. These conservative states have highest poverty levels despite having all GOP fiscal policies in place, for example:
◾ Poverty. Not even one liberal state has over an 18% poverty rate – six GOP states including Texas do.
◾ Labor Abuse. Not even one liberal state has over 8% of its population being abused through earning lower than minimum wage, but nine GOP states do including Texas.
◾ Food Insecurity. Not even one liberal state has over 17% of its population living “food insecure.” Four conservative states do, including Texas.
◾ Healthcare Access. Not even one liberal state has over 20% of population living without health insurance but four GOP states do, again, including Texas.

This study highlights how a huge population of Texans live under an extreme poverty-stricken climate earning below minimum wage, without health insurance access, and without access to daily food while being abused as workers.

Outcome: While GOP policies seem exciting in rhetoric, when given full liberty to implement them through a Republican controlled legislature like the one in the southern states, they are very ineffective. When Democratic financial policies are given full freedom of being implemented, like in the liberal states, they have been much more effective.
I already explained the GOP vs Democrats on social issues in my other post , through which we understand some fundamental differences such as democrats wanting to legalize gay marriage while GOP candidates run clinics to cure gays, GOP candidates working on legislation to criminalize gays and ban gay marriage, GOP legislation to outlaw Islam, and so on and so forth. But, about economic report, here is a recap and conclusion.
1. GOP Presidents have failed, Democrats have not. Historically over last six decades, Democrats have been consistently successful economically, while six of nine Republicans have failed. Keeping in mind the argument that policies of previous administrations haunt the following, the Democrat Truman that followed two Democratic terms still reduced debt and deficit, the Republican, Bush senior, that followed two Republican terms, still added to both.
2. GOP States have lowest living standards, Democratic states do not.
3. Obama has done what he promised and the economy is getting better. It is just hard to climb out of a financial black hole overnight. He still created more jobs than lost, delivered eight straight positive GDP quarters, and the debt that was growing at $3.65 trillion over four years, is now slowed down to about $1.6 trillion. You were not expecting him to change the economy overnight; I know I was not.
4. The GOP offers rhetoric, Democrats offer plans. I will really back this one for you through solid examples. Remember the debt crisis? Democrats took into account an earlier GOP report in which the GOP stated that the most optimum for economic growth is a deficit reduction plan that has an 85-15 split between cuts and revenues. Democrats offered an 83-17 with $6 in cuts for just $1 in return in tax loophole expiration on millionaires and billionaires. It was a mammoth $4 trillion debt reduction offer. The GOP walked away from it, and failed to offer an alternative. Similarly, remember Heathcare reform? Democrats took a major step by offering a plan under which most Americans would be covered, people would be allowed to stay on parents’ insurance after college graduation, insurance companies will no longer be able to increase cost or drop people after an illness, neither will they be able to refuse insurance to people with a preexisting condition. The GOP is currently running on an agenda to repeal that. The GOP alternative? It does not exist.
5. Democrats are willing to sacrifice, the GOP has evolved into a party of “Always No”. The shared Retirement Sacrifice Act of 2011 , which would require lawmakers to wait until the age of 66 to collect their pensions and take a pay cut has been introduced by an Ohio Democrat. Her logic is that congress should also take a pay cut and delayed retirement like other Americans do. Do you know why her simple bill is not passing? The GOP has it blocked. Additionally, as the Democrats fight to raise the age and reduce benefits for themselves and their GOP peers, Rep. John Fleming (LA), a republican responded to a proposed tax loophole expiration on millionaires and billionaires by saying that “by the time I feed my family, I have maybe $400,000 left over.” Thus, fighting against another democratic plan.
6. Democrats reform, GOP wants to take a step back without reform. Last election Democrats offered ideas that would alter the future such as Healthcare reform, the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, creation of anti-discriminatory laws, Postal Services Reform which is happening right now, lower taxes on small businesses, tax write-offs on first 104K paid in employee salary for large businesses, and increase education funding to keep America’s edge. Have you notices the GOP platform this year? It has been: Repeal Healthcare reform, repeal the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, ban gay marriage, ban building of Islamic religious institutions, block tax reform on millionaires and billionaires, block the jobs act, block deficit reduction plans, abolish the Department of Education, and abolish the EPA. Do you notice a trend? It’s a step back through repeal without alternatives or abolishing of institutions without an alternative plan.

Certainly, I understand these are politics, and all GOP donations come from big businesses but to letting America’s credit rating fall to protect millionaires and billionaires just because the 2012 election is on the horizon is probably not the best approach for America. While a Democratic donation averages $69 and comes from every day Americans, GOP donations average large sums from huge lobby groups and in order to be competitive the GOP has to protect its interests. But at the end of the day, we hire politicians not to win but to make America succeed. I want you to take these facts into account, remember, you are the CEO and you have a choice to make. I exhort you to make that choice keeping our social freedoms and financial facts into account.

I exhort you to educate yourself. When the GOP tells you that they want to lower taxes on millionaires and billionaires and cut education funding and corporate regulations to help the economy grow, understand that capitalism is not pro-business, it is pro-consumer. Businesses thrive with regulation and demand it. Understand that the GOP wants to cut educational funding because we see a direct link between higher education and an increase in more liberal voting patterns. Please understand that tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not funnel into an economic spur, as one of the best investors Warren Buffet, who saved GE, Goldman Sachs, and now the Bank of America from a colossal collapse explains
I have presented you past data, current policies, poverty statistics, and current party agendas. I wanted to just ask myself one last litmus test question. What have GOP and Democratic states added to America to see what kind of societies GOP versus Democratic governments create? If GOP economics really work, then we should see them work in states where we vote GOP legislatures and vice versa for Democratic states.

From the entertainment industry based in California to IT in Silicon Valley, each one of the Ivy League schools to Health Care and Life Sciences industry based in Philadelphia-NJ area, from banking based in NYC to the services hub in Boston, and all the way down to high-tech in Seattle, almost all of America’s progress comes from liberal states. But what is even more shocking is that a lot of southern progress happened in places like Atlanta, with large telecommunications’ industry development post 1996 Olympics, where about majority of Atlanta’s population is liberal and ascends from the north east. The truth is, this alone is a litmus test. Democrats have financially outperformed GOP governments economically and are offering actual plans as opposed to simple repeal ideas. Republicans have carved societies that are drastically behind in economic, living standards, or academic progress.


a little history lesson
 
Democrats Are Better Than Republicans
:bounce::bounce::bounce: Where did you find that? Huffignton post? lol

I can find a ton of web sites that says just the opposite - Hype, that's all it is. Look around, the reality does not support your data. The fact is, Republicans and Democrats have widely different views points on Social issues like LGBT, Abortions, guns etc etc. But when it comes to money - they are really pretty much in parallel with each other. The only thing they fight over is how to pay for it. Take the ACA for example, the only real issue with it is how to pay for it.

Why do you think Democrats have not tried getting rid of supply side Reaganomics? If the democratic money policies were so great - why then does it not switch back to the good ole Ike Days every time they have a trifecta? It all comes back to a corrupt government and corruption knows no political bounds. If you want to know how well a Democratic government works, just as the people of Africa. Most of Africa has been under Democratic control now for the past 30 plus years. Ask the impoverished people of Africa how that's working out for them.

Plainly put - the Government has everyone fighting over Right and Left while they pass the corruption right under our nose. <-- There is your Smoke and Mirrors.
 
anyone hear about this new law they are pushing through... to make it harder to sue Ins comp that drag their feet... penalized if you have a lawyer...can't sue if nat disaster... etc
 
Why do you think Democrats have not tried getting rid of supply side Reaganomics

anymore corruption with them all has something to do with that... but look at under Obama...even without any help from the corrupt wash people he still managed to do enough to put the economy back on track...slow.. but in the right direction...had congress helped who knows where we would be now....no one wants to admit he did anything... but again the numbers speak for them self!

can you show me a time when under a dem pres the economy was not doing well?
sure at the start of Clinton and at the start of Obama

Now i'm sure under a dem pres corps paid more in taxes.....but it is a far cry from what they used to pay and what they should pay..
matter of fact look at Minn. economy versus Wisc. economy..... Minn raised the taxes on corps and put it in schools and infrastructure... best economy in the nation.... Wisc..tax cuts pay cuts etc...or better yet reagonomics in action.. KANSAS...states a mess!
the right just can't manage nor balance a check book!
 
Last edited:
Look at Wash. state they fought a min wage raise... said it was a job killer and would need to put employees part time all kinds of *******... well the raise went through and now look at their economy..... now lets look at Missouri... they just voted a pay cut on the min wage... lets see where they are in 2 years!
 
Last edited:
Every business has to pay a tax based on their pay, just in case I fire them.
So investing in R&D isn't a write-off anymore? Constructing/upgrading a office building? Buying/upgrading fleet cars? Find ways to cut operating costs ... outsource bookkeeping & payroll services, increase line-of-credit, update business/marketing plan, desigjn/create incentives to improve employee productivity, etc. Studies show that when businesses experience higher taxes they invest in these types of things to help offset the costs of high taxes. Also, if you were being more diligent about your hiring, you wouldn't be having to fire employees as often.
Why do you think Democrats have not tried getting rid of supply side Reaganomics?
Hummmmm, just spitballing here, but could it just possibly be because our two-faced, wealthy Democrats benefit, themselves, from Supply-Side economics? I bet it does. So, WHY would they wish to stop Republicans from taking the blame, you think?
 
Last edited:
Where did you find that? Huffignton post?
So, what are you implying here, TwoBi ... that the Huffington is guilty of false facts? This is not some Globe type magazine that intentionally prints false stories. Huffington is very accredited. Occasionally all printed reporting makes unintentional errors in their haste to be the FIRST to be the ones out with the NEWS! How can you even imply the Huffington is guilty of intentional false news after experiencing the alt-facts of the Republican party these days? Give us a fucking break, would you?
gif_Yellowball-smackingYellowball.gif
 
Last edited:
If Trump cuts DACA, 700,000 jobs would be at risk. CEOs are not pleased.
The Week 6 hours ago

Some of America's top CEOs are none too pleased to hear that Trump is "seriously considering" an end to the deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA) program, an Obama-era policy that allows young immigrants who were brought to America illegally as children (colloquially known as DREAMers, after the protective DREAM Act) to avoid deportation and temporarily work and study in the U.S. "There's no issue that's more gut-wrenching for us," one "top Silicon Valley executive" told Axios. Many CEOs are already preparing for the worst since research shows that as many as 700,000 jobs could be at risk with the termination of the program. "Some multinationals are even making contingency plans to move vulnerable workers to overseas locations," Axios writes. ...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/e527e816-3059-3243-971d-68cebfc74ea1/if-trump-cuts-daca,-700,000.html
 
So investing in R&D isn't a write-off anymore? Constructing/upgrading a office building? Buying/upgrading fleet cars? Find ways to cut operating costs ... outsource bookkeeping & payroll services, increase line-of-credit, update business/marketing plan, desigjn/create incentives to improve employee productivity, etc. Studies show that when businesses experience higher taxes they invest in these types of things to help offset the costs of high taxes.

Not really, what they DO do is lay people off, cut wadges, initiate a highering freeze, cut benefits and increase prices. Did you get that info from the HP also? I also want to point out that out of all those things listed, the only thing there that *might* help the employees is the incentives to improve employee productivity. Simply giving them a higher wadge doesn't help much in the way of taxes. Don't you think companies that give their profits back to the employees should get a break? Or do you prefer all the red tape bullshit hoop jumping companies do in the way of tax deductions.

During Obama, people couldn't find a job if they had to, going into His final year to present day, factories can't hire people fast enough. You tell me which is better for the economy.

Also, if you were being more diligent about your hiring, you wouldn't be having to fire employees as often.


Just another statement to prove to me you really don't understand economics or how business actually works. It does not matter who I higher - or how long they are employed, higher good employees or bad employees. I still have to pay the unemployment tax the entire time they are employed. Even during that 90day probation period where they couldn't file unemployment on me anyways. I suggest you stick with HR.

Huffington is guilty of intentional false news after experiencing the alt-facts of the Republican party these days? Give us a fucking break, would you?

The HP is no more reliable or non-biased than Fox or CNN.
 
The HP is no more reliable or non-biased than Fox or CNN.
....I don't know ... seems the Huffington has won a Pulitzer for excellent journalism, how many have Fox and CNN won? I can't recall them ever winning a Pulitzer.
http://www.adweek.com/digital/pulitzer-winners-announced-huffington-post-the-stranger-david-wood/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304432704577348070480217982

....Obama saved the country from an entire economic collapse ... TwoBi, but, Republicans were complaining only a couple months after he took office because he wasn't growing jobs ... then when they started growing, they complained that they weren't full time jobs ... (a record 78 consecutive months of unprecedented jobs growth) and they weren't the right kind of jobs ... and on and on and on, while everything he tried to do, the Republicans blocked it. Trump took over (illegally I might add) as president with a growing economy ... it wasn't losing 800,000 jobs a month, or the investment, housing and auto industries collapsing, yet he started bragging about his jobs growth and the stock market growth 2 months after taking office while playing golf an unprecedented number of times as a new president. Imagine if Trump was the President during the Obama time period! LOL! Hell, we'd never hear the END. Thing is, the economy would have recovered two or three times faster had the Republicans not been obstructionists all through his 8 years as President. Then they take over with a trifecta election and look at the mess they've made of EVERYTHING ... can't blame the minority Democrats. Tax cuts for the wealthy are ALL they know and they haven't shown the details of that YET, yet intend on giving the tax cut EVEN after Hurricane Harvey has devastated the country with the worst storm in its history ... they're estimating Harvey will cost $200 billion + (twice that of Hurricane Katrina) ... yet Republicans want to cut the very thing that is helping those flood victims out; they want $800 billion in FEMA cuts to offset their nice (no details yet) tax cuts for the wealthy. Just add another $10 trillion of debt to the ND and blame it on the past administrations ... alt-facts. The only accomplishments the Trump administration have made thus far is "executive orders" reversing what Obama did ... and Trump couldn't tell you what he's reversed because he doesn't care. If it has Obama's name on it ... just reverse it.
....Sounds to me like you might be afraid to invest in your own business. You don't believe those items I listed will help you. Why not hire yourself a nice, fancy lawyer or business consultant to give you some directions? Do you have an updated business & marketing plan for your company that responds to today's new business environments?
....You shouldn't be incurring overhead expenses for paying out a wadge ... since there is no such thing as a wadge. The correct spelling for the compensation you pay your employees is wage. I only note that because you spelled it incorrectly both times you used it. I once knew a guy who complained for paying too much in tackes .... once he learned he didn't have to pay tackes he was quite happy ... but wasn't happy at the new taxes he had to pay. :p
 
Last edited:
I don't know ... seems the Huffington has won a Pulitzer for excellent journalism, how many have Fox and CNN won? I can't recall them ever winning a Pulitzer.

How many Pulitzer prizes has Fox news won???? Exactly as many as CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC and all the liberal leaning TV news organizations....ZERO....since the prize can only go to print/online journalism. Broadcast media and their websites are not eligible.

http://www.pulitzer.org/page/2018-journalism-submission-guidelines-requirements-and-faqs
 
Broadcast media and their websites are not eligible.
Fair enough ... any accolade would suffice, I imagine.

Just curious, are you over your sabbatical? Might you actually be initializing a conversation at some point or just continuing to sniper posts from other forum members? Maybe enlighten us on all the Trump "accomplishments" thus far. He's still to fill half the Washington jobs left vacant when the Obama administration left ... care to talk about those or why nothing is getting done by Trump other than continuation of dividing the country and trying to halt the Russian investigation?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top