A Russian double agent. That's funny. I've read that no other place than in your post. But, as I've said, you have a right to your ideas.

I must admit it was pretty bad when Trump told the Russian president that he would have more "flexibility" once the election was over. Boy was that ever a statement laden with the possibilities of collusion. No.. Wait. That was Obama, wasn't it? Was it just an oversight that you have not mentioned it?

Quote:

---

Good luck with that objective. You won't get it done on a website like this.

---

Actually, Paraclete, I hope I just did. I see no hope outside the message of Christ.

I'd still love to know how you got Paraclete as a name for this site. I imagine you know the Greek origin of the word.

You know, Tal, that we have to continue this. There is so little traffic on the plumbing area. Have you noticed how it's died down the past couple of years?

What ever happened to Speedball? I really liked him. A little gruff, but a wise old cat.

Just listened to a public service commercial by a bunch of rich Hollywoodites. They want us to sign a petition asking the feds to increase foreign aid. They close by saying, "We're not asking for your money. We're asking for your voice." What?? Do they really think we are that stupid? Where does the money for the federal foreign aid come from?? A money tree?

Quote:

---

What ever happened to Speedball? I really liked him. A little gruff, but a wise old cat.

---

Sadly he succumbed to his illness. We've lost a few good people over the years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

A Russian double agent. That's funny. I've read that no other place than in your post. But, as I've said, you have a right to your ideas.

---

What would you call an American who works for the Russian government.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ripaska-680630

That's what his NEXT trial is about. Thought you knew.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I'd still love to know how you got Paraclete as a name for this site. I imagine you know the Greek origin of the word.

---

Yes I do know the meaning of the word, one who comes along side and helps or a counselor. I also am aware of the biblical use of the term. You might note I don't capitalise the name

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Where does the money for the federal foreign aid come from?? A money tree?

---

Yes that is where the libs think it comes from, it grows in Washington.. But don't worry even if the feds increase foreign aid there is not much chance that any of the money would actually get out of the country

I know Oleg Deripaska ! Christopher Steele was working on the dossier at the same time he was lobbying Bruce Ohr on behalf of Deripaska over his visa status !! It's amazing how the same cast of characters keep on popping up in this charade .Steele repeatedly advocated for Deripaska at the time (early 2016) .Steele completed the dossier the end of June 2016 .Ohr's wife Nellie was the point person at Fusion GPS working with Steele on the dossier . Bruce Ohr's involvement in the investigation of Trump and Manafort was a conflict of interest .


As far as this Manafort trial is concerned ;the jury needs to come to a decision if Manafort directed the bank fraud committed by Rick Gates or was that Gates own doing ? Interesting to note that although an IRS agent testified that Manafort hid $16 million from the IRS, not once did the IRS target him in the decade involved . I don't believe there was any audit brought up in testimony .

Quote:

---

Yes that is where the libs think it comes from, it grows in Washington.. But don't worry even if the feds increase foreign aid there is not much chance that any of the money would actually get out of the country

---

And much of that which does get out ends up in the pockets of corrupt government officials. We'd probably be shocked to see how little of the money actually gets to the poor souls it is intended to help. Sad deal.

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

Quote:

---

These Gini values (40.8 in 2007) show the United States to be the third most dis-equitable economy of all the developed nations (behind Denmark and Switzerland).

---

There is little left after the rich guys take their cut, leaving the rest of us to fight each other for the crumbs.

And how do the rich guys go about "taking their cut"? How do they "take" it?

Find a duly elected politician, donate big bucks, or donate big bucks to his campaign, and get favorable legislation passed, a regulation changed that's favorable, or a multimillion dollar tax cut on top of favored loopholes, and before you know it he has a huge write-off he turns to CASH. Like a discount at the checkout line. Remember he pays no payroll tax that he redeems later so his money is already in his pocket. Let me ask what was the first thing a rich guy or corporation do with his tax cut? Easy, buy back stocks, split his money with his board, sure sending bonus sounds good to 3 million workers, contingent on his own accounting, but in actual money to a select few, doesn't compare to a raise in wages. Simply do the math.

As an example, Walmart's ONE TIME bonus of $1000 dollars went to workers with 20 years experience, the rest get less or laid off or both.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/12/walm...l-receive.html

• In total, Walmart will spend $400 million in fiscal 2018 to fund one-time bonuses.
• Some workers will receive $1,000, but only if they've served at the company for at least 20 years.
• The announcement came on the heels of new tax legislation.
• Walmart also revealed it would be shuttering dozens of its warehouse club stores across the country.

You can read the rest which includes a break down of how much each worker will get according to service, This is but one example, a newer one. You can look up many others yourself, and go back as far as Romneys Bain capital business model, That factory in Indiana that The Dufus saved by giving them a tax BREAK to stay, but the moved anyway (Yeah Pence was the Governor), or those shuttered plants in the rust belt that went overseas, yep they reaped a tax break from that too.

Haven't heard a word about that pipeline The Dufus promised would be made with American steel either have you? Better check THAT out, while you are holding your nose. The FACTS are out there and it comes down to whether you believe THEM, or a lying, cheating, DUFUS.

Your choice!

In the meantime, the top 5% of taxpayers continue to pay about 60% of all federal income tax. Wow. They don't seem to be getting much for all this influence you say they are buying.

And again, when you talk about a lying, cheating dufus, I don't know if you mean HC or Obama. You need to be more specific. For, you see, therein lies the problem. You had no problem being lied to by liberal democrats, who are also funded by the big money people.

Quote:

---

Sadly he succumbed to his illness. We've lost a few good people over the years.

---

I was afraid of that. Sad. He was entertaining. I enjoyed reading his responses more than anyone else's. Make a mistake, and he'd let you know about it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

In the meantime, the top 5% of taxpayers continue to pay about 60% of all federal income tax. Wow. They don't seem to be getting much for all this influence you say they are buying.

And again, when you talk about a lying, cheating dufus, I don't know if you mean HC or Obama. You need to be more specific. For, you see, therein lies the problem. You had no problem being lied to by liberal democrats, who are also funded by the big money people.

---

What you are really saying is the wealthy own the country, pay for the services and consider they are entitled to something for their money. Reviewing the facts I would say they are getting a poor deal, and it was worse under BO and the Demorats. There were screams when these taxpayers were given some sort of break and the unfair impost of health insurance was removed. So what I can't work out is the Demorats are funded by the people with the money and their policies are "generous" to the less wealthy, how come they lost the election? Oh, I remember the HC scream, it was stolen because the system worked against the anointed candidate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

In the meantime, the top 5% of taxpayers continue to pay about 60% of all federal income tax. Wow. They don't seem to be getting much for all this influence you say they are buying.

And again, when you talk about a lying, cheating dufus, I don't know if you mean HC or Obama. You need to be more specific. For, you see, therein lies the problem. You had no problem being lied to by liberal democrats, who are also funded by the big money people.

---

Sure the top 5% pay 60% of the taxes but they OWN 90% of the wealth. That's what you consider while you defend them after you have done the math.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.fba18f195292

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth..._United_States

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

What you are really saying is the wealthy own the country, pay for the services and consider they are entitled to something for their money. Reviewing the facts I would say they are getting a poor deal, and it was worse under BO and the Demorats. There were screams when these taxpayers were given some sort of break and the unfair impost of health insurance was removed. So what I can't work out is the Demorats are funded by the people with the money and their policies are "generous" to the less wealthy, how come they lost the election? Oh, I remember the HC scream, it was stolen because the system worked against the anointed candidate

---

Naw the Dufus won by winning the electoral college because he won the rust belt states by 80,000 votes. Hey he won, duly and legally, and I'll admit nobody thought a lying, cheating wacko dufus would win, but its water under the bridge now, but you must forgive the left for not bowing down to The Dufus, just as the loony right wingers and repubs didn't bow down to Obama.

Yes the wealthy own the country, but they don't pay for services, taxpayers do, so consider that when you review the facts and I hope I gave you some clarity. Less than 4 months until the next election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Naw the Dufus won by winning the electoral college because he won the rust belt states by 80,000 votes. Hey he won, duly and legally, and I'll admit nobody thought a lying, cheating wacko dufus would win, but its water under the bridge now, but you must forgive the left for not bowing down to The Dufus, just as the loony right wingers and repubs didn't bow down to Obama.

Yes the wealthy own the country, but they don't pay for services, taxpayers do, so consider that when you review the facts and I hope I gave you some clarity. Less than 4 months until the next election.

---

I thought we just established the wealthy pay the taxes, that makes them taxpayers, confusion there. I'm not interested in who bows to who, tug the forelock and get on with it. There is no reason to forgive, I wouldn't want him either, but then I would want a system that works, and selects competent people

Quote:

---

Sure the top 5% pay 60% of the taxes but they OWN 90% of the wealth.

---

I must be missing something. This is the chart from the wikipedia article. As you can see, the top 5% own about 60% of the wealth, not 90%.

Attachment 49029

Quote:

---

I'll admit nobody thought a lying, cheating wacko dufus would win

---

They were right. She didn't win!

Everybody is a taxpayer, but is it equitable if the 5% who own 90% of the wealth should only pay 60% of the taxes? Why would they balk at paying 90%?

Why are 95% of the people fighting for a share of the 10% that the wealthy don't own? Just asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I must be missing something. This is the chart from the wikipedia article. As you can see, the top 5% own about 60% of the wealth, not 90%.

Attachment 49028



They were right. She didn't win!

---

They attachment didn't work so a link and copy and paste will do, and humor aside any reference about The Dufus that I make is about the current president... just so you will know who I'm talking about.

Quote:

---

Why are 95% of the people fighting for a share of the 10% that the wealthy don't own? Just asking.

---

Because they are deluded into thinking it is a free country and they can get their share. The point really is; if the wealthy don't own it, the government does, and therefore they can never get their share. It is bread and circuses all over again. Welfare is the bread and the Circus runs permanently in Washington. You should be aware that the government is run by one of the 1% who own the wealth and no way do you get a share

Look at it again, Tal. I think the chart works now. As you can see, your 90% figure is not correct unless I'm not reading something right.

Clete, this country is filled with stories of men/women who started with nothing and ended up worth millions. In my own state a guy named Hartley Peavey started building guitar amps in his father's basement back in the 60's. He is the founder/owner of Peavey Electronics, one of the leaders in the music equipment industry. This is still the land of opportunity for those who work hard, work smart, and don't waste their time listening to people who tell them it can't be done. For that matter, the Obamas and the Clintons are all examples of people who started with modest means and made it big, as is Dr. Ben Carson. Most millionaires in America did not inherit their money, they worked for it. This is most definitely still a free country. Not as free as it could be if we would stop robbing people in excessive taxes, but still free. Our biggest problem is that we don't appreciate what we have. We don't value and treasure it.

Quote:

---

humor aside any reference about The Dufus that I make is about the current president... just so you will know who I'm talking about.

---

I know. That was my lame attempt at humor. But I just hope you know that it could truthfully refer to Obama or HC just as easily as Trump, and I'm pretty sure you never referred to either of them that way. It's the old double standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Look at it again, Tal. I think the chart works now. As you can see, your 90% figure is not correct unless I'm not reading something right.

Clete, this country is filled with stories of men/women who started with nothing and ended up worth millions. In my own state a guy named Hartley Peavey started building guitar amps in his father's basement back in the 60's. He is the founder/owner of Peavey Electronics, one of the leaders in the music equipment industry. This is still the land of opportunity for those who work hard, work smart, and don't waste their time listening to people who tell them it can't be done. For that matter, the Obamas and the Clintons are all examples of people who started with modest means and made it big, as is Dr. Ben Carson. Most millionaires in America did not inherit their money, they worked for it. This is most definitely still a free country. Not as free as it could be if we would stop robbing people in excessive taxes, but still free. Our biggest problem is that we don't appreciate what we have. We don't value and treasure it.



I know. That was my lame attempt at humor. But I just hope you know that it could truthfully refer to Obama or HC just as easily as Trump, and I'm pretty sure you never referred to either of them that way. It's the old double standard.

---

My bad, I did a very poor job being clear and showing the wealth gap had grown when I used that WPA link*

Quote:

---

by net worth (2007).

^[12]

The net wealth of many people in the lowest 20% is negative because of debt.

^[12]

By 2014 the wealth gap deepened.

---

*Interactive chart at the beginning of quote left off, but here it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth..._United_States

Yes my blasting of Trump is deeply partisan... as is yours. Nature of the political beast. Your guy is in office so gets BLASTED.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yes my blasting of Trump is deeply partisan... as is yours. Nature of the political beast. Your guy is in office so gets BLASTED.

---

---

Why wouldn't we abandon partisanship and simply stick to the issues and the truth?

Which issue would that be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Why wouldn't we abandon partisanship and simply stick to the issues and the truth?

---

We have been, I thought. It's hard to separate strong feelings from facts though for anyone, no matter their political leanings.

Ah those perspectives

So the top 5% owning 90% of the wealth is not accurate, correct?

Quote:

---

It's hard to separate strong feelings from facts though for anyone, no matter their political leanings.

---

Very true, but it's a challenge we really need to accept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So the top 5% owning 90% of the wealth is not accurate, correct?

Very true, but it's a challenge we really need to accept.

---

The only way we are going to take it away from them is a revolution, followed by a devolution, and an execution. Are you up to the challenge, that is the question?

https://kurtnimmo.blog/2018/08/14/fe...tical-retards/

The trend has been moving that way for years, and it was at 80% in 2016, before the tax cuts added 83% to the wealth of the richest, and created a trillion and a half dollars of DEBT. You call that a middle class tax cut? Okay, whatever. At least read the articles charts and graphs as I am still searching new numbers.

https://www.moneyandbanking.com/comm...tion-of-wealth

https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22910.html

Quote:

---

...we find that increasing GDP growth rates alone cannot restore absolute mobility to the rates experienced by children born in the 1940s. In contrast, changing the distribution of growth across income groups to the more equal distribution experienced by the 1940 birth cohort would reverse more than 70% of the decline in mobility. These results imply that reviving the “American Dream” of high rates of absolute mobility would require economic growth that is spread more broadly across the income distribution.

---

Now you can parse a few percentage points all you want, but the axiom the rich get richer and the poor get poorer holds regardless, and poverty in America may not be as bad as any place else on Earth, but why compare when poor is poor? Supply side economics creates wealth for the few, and makes poor from the many. Supply side economics makes hoarders of the few, and that's always been the failure of it... NO CIRCULATION. A consumer based economy depends on CIRCULATION, put simply people buying stuff in great quantity.

OK. I'm frustrated. This is your original statement. "Sure the top 5% pay 60% of the taxes but they OWN 90% of the wealth." I then posted a graph from your own article that showed the top 5% owned about 60%, not 90%. Now you post another graph which supposedly shows that your original statement was at least close to correct.The graph is of the top 10%, not the top 5%, and yet it still is not even close to 90%. That's why I don't trust what you post on this topic. You seem to just pull figures out of the air. And your own data on that same chart shows that the top 10% of wage earners earn about 47% of the income, yet we know that they pay 70% of the income taxes, meaning the bottom 90% pay only 30%. So your assertion that the wealthy don't pay their fair share, and somehow conspire to shift the tax burden down to the middle class, is shown to be incorrect. AND when did this trend of wealth accumulation continue? Much of it was under the administration of your Saint Obama and his tax increases on the wealthy. If you want to make the case that this trend of wealth accumulation is a bad one, then go for it. You want to argue in favor of tax reform? I'll be right there with you. Our tax code is awful, and it does favor those who hire accountants to try and find the tax deductions that can make a big difference. It should be simple. But make an appeal to the truth.

Attachment 49033

Sorry to confuse you but it would help if you check the DATES of the links to give you a trend line of where things are going economically in this country. Seldom can you take one set of numbers without context, and draw a conclusion from them. That's why I have laid out a clear time line that supports my position. If you noticed the first graph was from BEFORE the recession in 2007 (I think I pointed that out.). So in 11 years and a recession the income has increased greatly among the rich, and remained flat (Or stagnant) for the rest of the population, which I have to qualify by terms of percent of population.

Clearly I'm making a case for the same kind of bailout that allowed the wealthy a quick recovery (AND the rest of the world) from the rich guys recession. Consider a true middle class tax cut targeted at the rest of us, instead of the rich, because my contention is that a consumer main street bailout would have more immediate results than rich guys who hoard their ever growing wealth. My theory has been in face of the RESULTS of years of data circulating more money through more people will stimulate the whole economy in a sustainable way and yes pay for itself, reduce the deficit and debt, and yes the rich guys would keep getting rich.

Giving a rich guy mo' money through deficit spending and a better carried interest rate is not my idea of a working man simply put.

I get your point, but how do you explain the continuing accumulation of wealth among the top 10% during the Obama years when he RAISED taxes on the wealthy? He did what you are advocating, and it plainly did not work.

Even if you increase tax revenue from the upper 5% by 50%, you still don't balance the budget. Spending is the problem, not tax revenues.

I have said nothing about raising rich guys taxes except the .05% specifically to fund an infrastructure bank for upgrades to roads and schools and the grid. Essentially a 10 year jobs program. That was blocked by repubs, Obama didn't raise taxes per se, he let the Bush tax cuts expire. This is a pretty good article that may help see a bigger pattern.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-b...ercent-3306296

As far as wealth accumulation, as the value of ASSETS brings it's own added revenues. Property, stocks, bonds, INVESTMENTS, foundations, trusts, LLC's and such yet yield huge revenue streams. Romneys and Bushes love overseas banks and they are not alone. Here's some good reading. Short and to the point

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=3631669&page=1

Also read up on 501c3's tax shelters. You remember that blow up don't you?

Spending and debt is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as you manage them both.

As is your custom, you did not answer the question. You have a habit of avoiding unpleasant data. Your favorite president, Mr. Obama, had every chance to implement policies to reverse the trend you are weeping about and, evidently, he did nothing.

As far as jobs programs go, I much prefer the one President Trump has started. It's called a healthy economy, something Mr. Obama never had. The private sector is doing it, as it should be. There are now more vacant jobs than unemployed Americans. It's fantastic. Give him credit.

I read through the abcnews article. All generalizations and conjecture. Not a single American named, at least not that I saw, other than pure conjecture.

As to Obama tax increases, read this.

4. Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income (Tax hike of $123 billion/takes effect Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93

	Capital Gains	Dividends	Other*
2011-2012	15%	15%	35%
2013+ (current law)	23.8%	43.4%	43.4%
2013+ (Obama budget)	23.8%	23.8%	43.4%

I remember 2013 very well when repubs heads exploded over implementation of the ACA. When they got the Dufus after years of promising to repeal it, they FAILED but did weaken it enough to allow insurers to bring back JUNK policies at cheap rates. The bad news is you won't know it's junk again until you use it.

The price of health care will rise a lot faster than before, so it's a good thing you middle classers got that hugest middle class tax cut in history from the Dufus. You will need that and more before he's done with you.

Was the ACA website the source for your data? As I remember they had a lot more pay fors contained within it. They also did away with the junk policies, pre existing conditions, and most health savings accounts.

This was my data source: https://www.atr.org/full-list-ACA-tax-hikes-a6996

"The price of health care will rise a lot faster than before.." More conjecture.

Thanks for the link and testimonials. What stops health care costs from rising since historically they ALWAYS have? How much, how fast, is the subject of debate.

Have you signed up for Medicare?

I have and bought the supplemental as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

I remember 2013 very well when repubs heads exploded over implementation of the ACA. When they got the Dufus after years of promising to repeal it, they FAILED but did weaken it enough to allow insurers to bring back JUNK policies at cheap rates. The bad news is you won't know it's junk again until you use it.

The price of health care will rise a lot faster than before, so it's a good thing you middle classers got that hugest middle class tax cut in history from the Dufus. You will need that and more before he's done with you.

Was the ACA website the source for your data? As I remember they had a lot more pay fors contained within it. They also did away with the junk policies, pre existing conditions, and most health savings accounts.

---

Obamacare was a disaster before it was ever forced down our throats. The Dims (Specifically Harry Reid) had to change the rules for a simple majority to force it through, they also did it from behind CLOSED doors without a single Republican present. NONE of them read it beforehand, and most still haven't. The only people that want it are the welfare class who aren't the ones paying their fair share of taxes now (a term they love so much). And demand stuff they expect someone else to pay for, (generally people who pay far more than their fair share in taxes). Odd that the people who demand free stuff are the same people who are LEAST likely to do anything for nothing. Don't have enough money, get a second job, Don't have six kids, and don't get everyone of them their own personal iPhones and unlimited data plans, etc, etc. I spent nearly a decade skrimping by to pay my college loans off, and my own insurance etc... so can everyone else. Since we aren't talking the severely handicapped people.. that means they are able bodied and fully capable of working. Can't find work where you are, then move to where the work is... I've done it more than once... so can they.

Quote:

---

Obamacare was a disaster before it was ever forced down our throats. The Dims (Specifically Harry Reid) had to change the rules for a simple majority to force it through, they also did it from behind CLOSED doors without a single Republican present. NONE of them read it beforehand, and most still haven't. The only people that want it are the welfare class who aren't the ones paying their fair share of taxes now (a term they love so much). And demand stuff they expect someone else to pay for, (generally people who pay far more than their fair share in taxes). Odd that the people who demand free stuff are the same people who are LEAST likely to do anything for nothing. Don't have enough money, get a second job, Don't have six kids, and don't get everyone of them their own personal iPhones and unlimited data plans, etc, etc. I spent nearly a decade skrimping by to pay my college loans off, and my own insurance etc... so can everyone else. Since we aren't talking the severely handicapped people.. that means they are able bodied and fully capable of working. Can't find work where you are, then move to where the work is... I've done it more than once... so can they.

---

Careful, Smoothie. Facts, data, truth... you'll confuse some of the folks in this discussion!

And yes, I say that jokingly...sort of.