[talaniman]

It's not like the economic growth is kicking butt now, except for the rich. Who got a tax cut and a virus bailout of 10 trillion bucks.

[paraclete]

well that is a good question, the case of the vanishing money

[Athos]

Hello socialism.

When tomder was asked to give specifics on what he didn't like about "socialistic" plans of the Democrats, he refused to answer.

How about you? What are your specifics on the approaching "socialism"?

[paraclete]

When tomder was asked to give specifics on what he didn't like about "socialistic" plans of the Democrats, he refused to answer.

How about you? What are your specifics on the approaching "socialism"?

why do you think he would be capable of approaching socialism? Perhaps he would like to try the Swedish approach, no, too radical for an american capitalist, it relies on actually caring, something beyond his brand of wasp

[jlisenbe]

It's not like the economic growth is kicking butt now,

Prior to the Covid invasion, the economy was setting records in low unemployment. It is still doing remarkably well all things considered. Blaming our current woes on Trump would be about as dumb as blaming the 09 economy on Obama or the 33 economy on Roosevelt.

Who got a tax cut and a virus bailout of 10 trillion bucks.

What 10 tril bailout are you talking about? There hasn't been one. You see why I say that Trump has really influenced you??? And for the five hundred and sixth time, when the top 20% of income earners are paying 87% of fed income taxes, then it is not really possible to give much of a tax break to the remaining 80%. But Trump did give many in the middle class some tax reduction. Harris' tax plan is just a continuation of the liberal mantra. "We care so much for poor people that we are willing to force other people to help them while we cook hamburgers on the backyard grill."

Socialism. We are not going to become purely socialistic anymore than the Europeans have, but we will move more in that direction if Harris is elected. The feds will extend their already growing control of health care and energy production, for instance. And when AOC's GND gets going, and it will in some form or fashion, fed regulation (and that is an element of socialism) will grow greatly leading to ever larger deficits. It will all come tumbling down at some point.

There is a part of me that thinks a Harris election will be good for the country in the long run. Lets the dems have it all. Let AOC become Speaker. Four years from now, perhaps we can pick up what's left over and renew a nation founded on the idea that, "...all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." That would mean the blessing of individual freedom rather than federal control and provision. It will be extraordinarily painful, but perhaps it will help people understand that this "pie in the sky" politics is for children and not adults.

In the meantime, I will be preaching this morning on the topic of, "The Five Greatest Words in Life".

[tomder55]

"The antibody cocktail that President Trump received for his COVID-19 infection and touted on Wednesday evening as a 'cure' for the deadly virus was developed using cells derived from aborted fetal tissue..."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/regener...-fetal-tissue/

Not quite . The cocktail was NOT derived fetal tissue cells . However it was tested from cells repeatedly reproduced from fetal tissue from 1970. I do not know if the fetal tissue was from an abortion but i guess we can assume so.

The use of aborted fetal tissue is immoral and leads to a slippery slope. I suspect that the testing of the cocktail could've been achieved by other means ,like adult stem cells or placenta stem cells . However it wasn't .

[Athos]

Blaming our current woes on Trump would be about as dumb as blaming the 09 economy on Obama or the 33 economy on Roosevelt.

The difference is that Obama and Roosevelt did something to save the economy. Trump is not to be blamed for COVID, but he has done nothing to save the economy. His crisis mismanagement has worsened it.

when the top 20% of income earners are paying 87% of fed income taxes, then it is not really possible to give much of a tax break to the remaining 80%.

Of course there is. The tax break comes in the form of making sure the top 20% pay their fair share in taxes so that the money can be used in many ways to benefit all - infrastructure, various tax credits, ensuring health care is available to all, and many, many more uses.

But Trump did give many in the middle class some tax reduction.

The overwhelming benefit went to the wealthy who had no need of it. The actual cost of Trump's tax cut was over $1,000,000,000+ - that's one TRILLION!

Harris' tax plan is just a continuation of the liberal mantra. "We care so much for poor people that we are willing to force other people to help them while we cook hamburgers on the backyard grill."

No comment.

Socialism. We are not going to become purely socialistic

As I thought, you provided no specifics. You anti-socialists are big on platitudes, but not much on details.

The US is currently a capitalism system modified by socialism. It runs best with each providing its strengths, and would not be effective as a society if it were completely one or the other.

The feds will extend their already growing control of health care and energy production, for instance. And when AOC's GND gets going, and it will in some form or fashion, fed regulation (and that is an element of socialism)

I see that it is regulation that disturbs you about socialism. No society can survive without regulation. From laws forbidding murder to laws keeping water clean, regulations are critical. Do you oppose federal control of the military? No, I thought not.

(Socialism)will grow greatly leading to ever larger deficits. It will all come tumbling down at some point.

Not if it is managed correctly. But it's hard to be specific since you have provided none - just platitudes.

There is a part of me that thinks a Harris election will be good for the country in the long run. Lets the dems have it all. Let AOC become Speaker. Four years from now, perhaps we can pick up what's left over and renew a nation founded on the idea that, "...all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." That would mean the blessing of individual freedom rather than federal control and provision. It will be extraordinarily painful, but perhaps it will help people understand that this "pie in the sky" politics is for children and not adults.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

In the meantime, I will be preaching this morning on the topic of, "The Five Greatest Words in Life".

I hope it's not. "person, woman, man, ummm, camera, tv."

[jlisenbe]

top 20% pay their fair share in taxes

Huh? 87% is not fair? Go figure.

One trillion spread over 10 years. Be honest.

No comment.

I don't blame you. If I was you I wouldn't comment either. It's true and you know it. On not a single occasion has a single lib on this board ever suggested that THEIR taxes be raised in order to help the poor. It is always, always, always someone else's taxes that will go up so the poor can be assisted. It is the great, sickening secret of liberal political philosophy. It's like the man who believed so much in the war that he was willing to send his brother to go fight it.

Not if it is managed correctly

Dream on.

you provided no specifics

Energy and health sectors. GND. Pay attention!!

"He who believes in Me (Jesus)"

[talaniman]

JL you spin almost as well as your fellow conservative. I got no problem with you guys having your causes but it should be pretty clear too much of either of our crap will never work for the whole country and that's why we have elections every two years, because we NEED them.

Far as I'm concerned most minds are made up and all that's left is vote and count and see what we got.

[Athos]

Huh? 87% is not fair? Go figure.

Read what I wrote. Then go figure.

One trillion spread over 10 years.

True.

If I was you I wouldn't comment either.

My "no comment" was a response to your mean-spirited nasty comment of "back yard grilling".

On not a single occasion has a single lib on this board ever suggested that THEIR taxes be raised in order to help the poor.

Yes, they have, if they're included among the rich it goes for them, too.

It is always, always, always someone else's taxes that will go up so the poor can be assisted.

No, that's only your twisted take. As above, it's the rich - regardless of race, religion, creed or politics. Your bias is getting in the way of your thinking.

It is the great, sickening secret of liberal political philosophy.

There is no secret about helping the poor. Nor is the idea a sickening one. If you think it's sickening, throw away your Bible.

It's like the man who believed so much in the war that he was willing to send his brother to go fight it.

Not a bit like that. Poor analogy.

Dream on.

Dream on is the refuge for someone who no longer has anything coherent to say.

Energy and health sectors. GND. Pay attention!!

EXACTLY my point! Just a general complaint without a scintilla of specificity. You're hopeless and clueless when it comes to details, yet you love to throw around the trigger word "SOCIALISM"!!!!!

"He who believes in Me (Jesus)"

I'd ask you to explain this, but you would probably come up with some weird interpretation relating it to taxes.

[jlisenbe]

On not a single occasion has a single lib on this board ever suggested that THEIR taxes be raised in order to help the poor.

My statement is absolutely true. Your reply to the effect that if they're wealthy then they called for their own taxes to be raised is silliness. If you want to have your taxes raised to help the poor, then say so. Otherwise, stop the evasive nonsense. The comparison to the man who wanted someone else to go to war is exactly on target. "I want to appear to be noble and charitable without it costing me anything." It's the moral game plan of liberal dems and it is utterly sickening. It has nothing to do with real charity. If you really believe in something, then stand up and be counted in paying the costs for it. If you're not willing to sacrifice for it, then you really don't care.

Lowering the age of Medicare is the health care side of it. GND is the energy side of it. Sorry. I thought you kept up with the news.

[Athos]

My statement is absolutely true. Your reply to the effect that if they're wealthy then they called for their own taxes to be raised is silliness.

As I tried to explain to you, the rich include everybody that's rich. That's not evasive. The words plainly mean what they mean.

The comparison to the man who wanted someone else to go to war is exactly on target. "I want to appear to be noble and charitable without it costing me anything.

Sorry, but you're not even in the ballpark with that. Your description of those you don't like is strange. I'm sure you have no idea what liberals or conservatives or anybody else does. You despise liberals - we all get that. The why of your attitude nobody gets. You truly come across as obsessed with the issue. And very angry.

It's the moral game plan of liberal dems and it is utterly sickening. It has nothing to do with real charity. If you really believe in something, then stand up and be counted in paying the costs for it. If you're not willing to sacrifice for it, then you really don't care.

I read this as a "holier-than-thou" attitude. I can't explain it but I suspect it is connected to your religion. You're back with your ad hominems. You've been warned about that.

Lowering the age of Medicare is the health care side of it.

By "the health care side of it", I presume you mean you're concerned about lowering the age of Medicare. Are you opposed to health plans for those who would be covered by lowering the age? I support that. So here we have a disagreement. Good. I think everybody, regardless of income, should have health insurance. If some want to have private insurance, and can afford it, I support them too.

GND is the energy side of it.

Again, you're not being very specific. I can't believe you are against a better, cleaner, safer environment. So what is it that you oppose?

Sorry. I thought you kept up with the news.

Now you're being snarky. I thought you wanted to stop that. Have you changed your mind?

[Wondergirl]

My statement is absolutely true. Your reply to the effect that if they're wealthy then they called for their own taxes to be raised is silliness.

What about Illinois governor Pritzker?

[tomder55]

lol the wealthy are covered . Quid's call for raising taxes on those over incomes of $400,000 impacts the upper "Middle Class" . The millionaires and billionaires work the system that Quid and everyone else leaves in place. More billionaires support Quid than Trump .(the caveat being that their accountants are working over time this year to take advantage of the current tax rates .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michela.../#5630428d2341

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...ow-raise-taxes

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/so...now-2020-09-16

[Wondergirl]

Wealthy Pritzker wants Illinois to have a graduated tax, not a flat tax as it is now.

[jlisenbe]

The words plainly mean what they mean.

Mine sure did.

I can't explain it but I suspect it is connected to your religion

I agree that you can't explain it.

As I have said before, if you want your taxes raised to help the poor, then simply say so. You don't, and it's plain what that means.

Again, you're not being very specific. I can't believe you are against a better, cleaner, safer environment. So what is it that you oppose?

You know what I was referring to, the increase of a socialist program of ever increasing government regulations. But you might want to note the utterly remarkable 15% decline in carbon emissions by the U.S. over the past twelve years.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ons-from-1999/

WG, the reference was to people on this site, not to some governor.

[Athos]

The millionaires and billionaires work the system that Quid and everyone else leaves in place.

The only way the millionaires and billionaires can work the system is if the system allows it. The system can be structured to not allow it.

[Athos]

I was referring to the increase of a socialist program of ever increasing government regulations

Ok - it's the regulation by the government you are opposed to. Is that also the case with your health care comment? Government regulation? Am I right in assuming that other than government regulation you agree with health care for everybody and with a cleaner environment?

WG, the reference was to people on this site, not to some governor.

That's ok, WG. I didn't understand it, either.

[jlisenbe]

That's ok, WG. I didn't understand it, either.

You didn't understand THIS??? "On not a single occasion has a single lib on this board ever suggested that THEIR taxes be raised in order to help the poor." Huh. I don't see how that could be not understood, especially considering that you both quoted AND responded to it, but OK.

Am I right in assuming that other than government regulation you agree with health care for everybody and with a cleaner environment?

I don't think health care for all is a role of government. Cleaner environment, like the dramatic reduction in carbon emissions we are enjoying, in large part due to natural gas usage spurred on by fracking? Sure.

I will say this yet again. If you want it, then explain how to pay for it with no budget deficits. If you can't do that, then you don't have me on board.

[Wondergirl]

You didn't understand THIS??? "On not a single occasion has a single lib on this board ever suggested that THEIR taxes be raised in order to help the poor." Huh. I don't see how that could be not understood, especially considering that you both quoted AND responded to it, but OK. I don't think health care for all is a role of government. Cleaner environment, like the dramatic reduction in carbon emissions we are enjoying, in large part due to natural gas usage spurred on by fracking? Sure.

No. I had responded to this:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe
My statement is absolutely true. Your reply to the effect that if they're wealthy then they called for their own taxes to be raised is silliness.