The Government can’t give someone something without first taking it from someone else

[JimmyBT]

14 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

It looks like someone is acting out due to the lack of attention.  You need to calm down, stop tugging on my shorts, and go back and have a seat at the kiddie table. I’ll come play when I’m ready. 

Ya. Let’s play on the thread I created mr hypocrite.  Bahahhahahahha 

[JimmyBT]

[JimmyBT]

24 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

Ya. Let’s play on the thread I created mr hypocrite.  Bahahhahahahha 

I’ll let ya know when it’s your chance to move up a table jr. Better swing hard(er).  

Edited January 12 by JimmyBT

[mspart]

18 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To your points:

1.   It is not bad policy to restrict immigration.   In fact, every nation does this.   It is good policy to safeguard the economy.  We are the only ones with a porous border allowing millions in. I think you are totally missing my point.  Maybe that is on me.  Perhaps, but I see you did not argue with what I wrote.  

2.  This point is ludicrous and even you should be aware of it.   Legal immigrants come here and have a job waiting for them and that is what is wanted by the US.   Illegal immigrants do not.   And if they get a job it is at the expense of a legal citizen or alien to have that job.   How else can you describe it?   If you want to say an illegal will take a job no other wants, that's ok, but how many of those are around?   There is a limit and we obviously have gone beyond that limit and it is delibilating to government budgets - cast your eyes at NYC  and Chicago. Our difference is on the fundamental principle.  I don't disagree on what is and what is not an 'ileagal' immigrant.  I disagree on what it seems to be your stance and who and who should not have the opportunity to 'live the american dream'   And letting millions into the country unchecked will allow them all to live the american dream?  Please explain. 

3.  So what is the difference between a tax cheat and a murderer.   It is only a paper difference.   The tax cheat just wants to make a living here.   That's all.  wow    You gave an absurd example, I was just returning the favor.  By your logic, a tax cheat hurts no one.   So therefore the analogy works.  Wow!! 

4.   Immigration policy is pretty simple.   The US determines how many legal immigrants it wants for a given year.   It allocates that many work visas.   The US does not allocate work visas for illegal immigrants.  The fact that you cannot understand this very simple situation says you can't find the tree for the forest.  I'll just agree to completely disagree.  There doesn't seem much for us to discuss on this point.   True, if you want to make it this extremely complicated morass.  I completely disagree that doing that is necessary.   Immigration is pretty binary.   Legal or illegal.   Wanted or unwanted.    There's not much of a way to make it more simple.   Complicating it does not help explain the issue at all, it obscures it. 

mspart

Responses to you in RED.

mspart

[mspart]

17 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

“If they want to come here it should be allowed?”  Pretty broad question. A free for all, with no regulation? Of course not.  
 

Well, you just made it a very simple issue.   Right now we have a free for all.   You don't want that.   Why don't you want that?   What are you reasons for being against a free for all that we now have?   Why would it be bad to have a free for all?   Even those that come that are beyond what you call necessary want the American Dream.   Are you saying you don't want them to have the American dream?   You accused me of it and now you are doing the same thing.   Boy, funny how it turns back on you isn't it. 

mspart

[WrestlingRasta]

1 minute ago, mspart said:

Responses to you in RED.

mspart

To your points:

1.   It is not bad policy to restrict immigration.   In fact, every nation does this.   It is good policy to safeguard the economy.  We are the only ones with a porous border allowing millions in. I think you are totally missing my point.  Maybe that is on me.  Perhaps, but I see you did not argue with what I wrote.  I don't have any problem with what you wrote, I have never said anything against what you wrote.  Would you prefer I make up an argument.  I literally said "maybe that is on me"

2.  This point is ludicrous and even you should be aware of it.   Legal immigrants come here and have a job waiting for them and that is what is wanted by the US.   Illegal immigrants do not.   And if they get a job it is at the expense of a legal citizen or alien to have that job.   How else can you describe it?   If you want to say an illegal will take a job no other wants, that's ok, but how many of those are around?   There is a limit and we obviously have gone beyond that limit and it is debilitating to government budgets - cast your eyes at NYC  and Chicago. Our difference is on the fundamental principle.  I don't disagree on what is and what is not an 'ileagal' immigrant.  I disagree on what it seems to be your stance and who and who should not have the opportunity to 'live the american dream'   And letting millions into the country unchecked will allow them all to live the american dream?  Please explain. I see where this is going, and I will have to ask you where I said  letting millions in unchecked, and by that I don't mean something else I said that you decided to turn as that (don't forget I've had to call you previously on your famous quote "I know that's not what you said, but this is what you're saying")  Maybe that is where our disconnect here lies.

 

Regarding the last two, I do not have anything to add to what I have already said.

[mspart]

WR, for item 2 I was responding to "I disagree on what it seems to be your stance and who and who should not have the opportunity to 'live the american dream'  ".   That sounds to me that you question anyone who would restrict immigration because they all just want the american dream.   That's where I got that.   If that is not what you meant, then maybe I misinterpreted your statement.  

I agree, not much more to say.    Have a good day and a fun time contemplating retirement in NC. 

mspart

[WrestlingRasta]

11 minutes ago, mspart said:

 then maybe I misinterpreted your statement.  

And thank you (NC).

[JimmyBT]

WR wears a mask and thinks that makes him/her/SHe/IT a progressive.  

Edited January 13 by JimmyBT

[WrestlingRasta]

18 hours ago, JimmyBT said:

Ya. Let’s play on the thread I created mr hypocrite.  Bahahhahahahha 

Okay, okay I am able to spare a little quality time for you now.  And I want you to know I am really proud of you and this achievement, you should be too. This hopefully will give you a little confidence, and something to build on. 
 

Small victories is the way my little man, no victory is too small. Keep that in mind as you press on to even greater creations! Maybe one day you can create a whole page!!

I’m glad we were able to share this time. Now run along half pint. 

[JimmyBT]

4 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Okay, okay I am able to spare a little quality time for you now.  And I want you to know I am really proud of you and this achievement, you should be too. This hopefully will give you a little confidence, and something to build on. 
 

Small victories is the way my little man, no victory is too small. Keep that in mind as you press on to even greater creations! Maybe one day you can create a whole page!!

I’m glad we were able to share this time. Now run along half pint. 

[JimmyBT]

4 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Okay, okay I am able to spare a little quality time for you now.  And I want you to know I am really proud of you and this achievement, you should be too. This hopefully will give you a little confidence, and something to build on. 
 

Small victories is the way my little man, no victory is too small. Keep that in mind as you press on to even greater creations! Maybe one day you can create a whole page!!

I’m glad we were able to share this time. Now run along half pint. 

Progressive mask boy posts in the middle of the night. On break during the night shift. Good for you jr.  Work hard and make sure to put up the slippery when wet signs after mopping the floor.  

Edited January 13 by JimmyBT

[WrestlingRasta]

‘middle of the night’? . You don’t realize that comment says a lot more about you than me. 
 

And what’s with the sudden mask fetish out of nowhere?

[JimmyBT]

2 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

‘middle of the night’? . You don’t realize that comment says a lot more about you than me. 
 

And what’s with the sudden mask fetish out of nowhere?

Says a lot doesn’t it?  

[JimmyBT]

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/11/2024 at 4:36 PM, jross said:

Immigrants are people.  People deserve respect, even criminals.

While acknowledging the vast majority have no malicious intent, non-citizen criminals, which by default includes all who cross into the country illegally, should go home.

As our current poor citizens say... go home!

Not all of them. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/11/2024 at 5:19 PM, jross said:

Here's the thing that Dave Ramsey gets right.

1. Get an emergency fund.
2. Get out of debt.
3. Put aside money for children's college.
4. Pay off the house.
5. Build wealth.
6. Then use the accumulated wealth to give back.

The US is on step 1.

Right now, it has no business taking in illegal immigrants.

Have you ever heard of putting on your own oxygen mask first before assisting others?

Not a great guy. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/13/2024 at 8:42 AM, JimmyBT said:

Progressive mask boy posts in the middle of the night. On break during the night shift. Good for you jr.  Work hard and make sure to put up the slippery when wet signs after mopping the floor.  

What's with the bully routine? What do you get out of it?

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/11/2024 at 6:20 PM, Offthemat said:

Good, let’s work on your immigration stance.  Being as half of our college STEM graduates don’t find employment in their respective fields, how many immigrants do we need to fill STEM jobs?  These would be legal, H-1B immigrants.  

Do not find employment or purposefully chose a different field? 

Is your argument that a percentage of college grads don't go into their chosen field of study(and that is pretty much across the board), so therefore we shouldn't allow immigrants into the country? Not sure what problem you're trying to solve but not seeing the solution, if this is in fact, your opinion. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/11/2024 at 2:03 PM, WrestlingRasta said:

I'm not proposing anything be implemented, I'm smart enough to realize I'm not smart enough to argue the intricacies of the United States tax code, particularly in an audience so unbelievably astute in this (and next week's hot) topic.  My point being I'm less concerned about what the tax code says a particular income bracket should pay and more concerned that that amount actually.  For example I would be okay if everyone was at a flat 20%, as long as everyone actually paid 20%.  Or, I would be okay if it remained bracketed, and the really smart people figured out a fair and equitable bracket system ( I mean I think if we get to brackets where people are paying at or near half their earned money in income tax, I'm not down with that).......generally speaking I'm okay with that as long as everyone pays their determined equitable share.  

Yes. People should pay their taxes. Great start. I'm on board. 

Rich people can afford to pay accountants and lawyers and lobbyists to fight on their behalf to keep more of their money. Do we think its for altruistic purposes or more of a selfish/greedy nature? I'd be interested in that conversation. But we all agree that money does not trickle down the way that grandpa Ron tried to convince us. 

Hire more IRS agents. Give them a bigger budget. Make elections at certain levels publicly funded so as to keep them shorter(I'll bet many honest people agree with that) and to keep these kinds of shenanigans from happening again. Agreed. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 1/11/2024 at 4:35 PM, mspart said:

To your point TPT, there are only two types of immigrants.   Legal and illegal.  So talking about them all as immigrants is disingenuous.   Legal immigrants ostensibly is planned for immigration that the country wants.   Illegal immigration ostensibly is not planned and not what the country wants.   Hence one is legal and the other is illegal.  

NY and Chicago, among others, are suffering the effects of unwanted (illegal) immigration and complaining about having to spend money supporting them.  That's another point about immigration - you usually have to show that you will not be sucking on the government's teat while here.   This happens more than not with illegal immigrants and that hurts everyone.    Right now in NY, students were kicked out of their school so the building could house illegal immigrants.  That is not the purpose for why the building was built.   That is not why the community spent the money to have it built.    But those students are now forced to do the on line learning that was such a disaster during covid.   https://news.yahoo.com/nyc-decision-move-migrants-tent-233732293.html

So now the illegal immigrants are more important than the students.   Is that the priority that we want?

Yes, illegal immigration is not good for the country as a whole.  

mspart

 

How is it its so difficult to think of these people as people and not a blight to what you have? Its only a little bit of luck that you are not one of them. 

If every billionaire was assessed and all but $1B of their(each family member was allowed to keep $1B too) wealth was taken and used to shore up our defenses, food production, education, health care, getting money out of politics, and housing issues. Also to help fund those causes around the world that were needed to better human flourishing. 

What would be draw backs of that system? 

Everyone is still allowed to grow enormous wealth. But like the corporate tax system use to be, they would need to reinvest that money into, something like, R&D to write it off so as to not pay it to the IRS. Would that money find its way into better purposes than accumulating more of itself for the sake of having it?

[mspart]

33 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

How is it its so difficult to think of these people as people and not a blight to what you have? Its only a little bit of luck that you are not one of them.   This is true. 

If every billionaire was assessed and all but $1B of their(each family member was allowed to keep $1B too) wealth was taken and used to shore up our defenses, food production, education, health care, getting money out of politics, and housing issues. Also to help fund those causes around the world that were needed to better human flourishing.   What aboutism.   I'm told we can't go there.

What would be draw backs of that system? What aboutism.   I'm told we can't go there.

Everyone is still allowed to grow enormous wealth. But like the corporate tax system use to be, they would need to reinvest that money into, something like, R&D to write it off so as to not pay it to the IRS. Would that money find its way into better purposes than accumulating more of itself for the sake of having it?  And this has WHAT to do about immigration?

I feel very fortunate to be a US citizen.   You have stated yourself you don't want an open spigot but you have not detailed why.   When you do so, then we can discuss who is worthy and who is not to come across the border.   Do you think as a US citizen you can just go park yourself in any other country, claim asylum and you get to stay indefinitely?   It does not work that way in any other country.   Why does it work that way here?   For what intrinsic national reason would we have unfettered immigration?   I can tell you there is an intrinsic reason to have fettered immigration and that is spelled out in the law Biden is ignoring to the tune of millions of undocumented, and unknown people have come.   Does a country not have a right to regulate that?  Of course it does.   That's why we have immigration laws that are being ignored. 

mspart

[JimmyBT]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

What's with the bully routine? What do you get out of it?

Watching softies whine makes me smile. 

[JimmyBT]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

How is it its so difficult to think of these people as people and not a blight to what you have? Its only a little bit of luck that you are not one of them. 

If every billionaire was assessed and all but $1B of their(each family member was allowed to keep $1B too) wealth was taken and used to shore up our defenses, food production, education, health care, getting money out of politics, and housing issues. Also to help fund those causes around the world that were needed to better human flourishing. 

What would be draw backs of that system? 

Everyone is still allowed to grow enormous wealth. But like the corporate tax system use to be, they would need to reinvest that money into, something like, R&D to write it off so as to not pay it to the IRS. Would that money find its way into better purposes than accumulating more of itself for the sake of having it?

They are people.  Some people come here legally and some people come here illegally. 

[JimmyBT]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Yes. People should pay their taxes. Great start. I'm on board. 

Rich people can afford to pay accountants and lawyers and lobbyists to fight on their behalf to keep more of their money. Do we think its for altruistic purposes or more of a selfish/greedy nature? I'd be interested in that conversation. But we all agree that money does not trickle down the way that grandpa Ron tried to convince us. 

Hire more IRS agents. Give them a bigger budget. Make elections at certain levels publicly funded so as to keep them shorter(I'll bet many honest people agree with that) and to keep these kinds of shenanigans from happening again. Agreed. 

We all agree. Bahhahahahahahahha. ASSume much????