red viking

The right-wing whacko conspiracy theories are never-ending. It's a true vortex of stupidity.

I watched 10 minutes of the RNC yesterday before I had to go to the bathroom and vomit. I heard people talking about how strong he is and one delegate even called him "Braveheart." First of all, the guy got grazed in the ear and I'm sure he was pumped full of adrenaline. Being able to shake your fist after getting grazed in the ear doesn't make you a tough guy. The guy also cowered from combat every chance he got and has hidden behind lawyers his entire life. He's a complete wuss bag.

This is the epitome of a conflict of interest. What we have here is a corrupt, right-wing judge that was appointed by Trump and is now making a ruling on his criminal activities. It doesn't get any worse than that. It also had nothing to do with the merits of the case, so this will either be appealed successfully or re-filed. Trump is a criminal and will eventually go down.

If it can legally be appealed, and is, and you have an objective judge(s), then whatever you want.

You can't make this stuff up. His case is "thrown out" by a judge that he appointed. It will certainly get appealed & reversed by any even somewhat neutral/objective judges.

Going from 35 to 40% top marginal tax rate is a COMPLETELY different situation than raising a tax rate that is already 95%. You may want to take a class in optimization. There's a curve (upside down "U") that provides the most tax revenue and it's always somewhere much higher than 0% but much lower than 100%. It's actually very complicated because we have different marginal tax rates, there are other taxes, and other factors at play, but to compare raising a tax rate that is already at 35% to one that is already at 95% shows a gross ignorance of the optimization concept.

A 99% is a gross extrapolation and therefore a completely different situation. Total strawman. 100%.

FDR raised taxes AND revenue. Your facts are so wrong it isn't even funny.

99% is WAY too high so that's a nice straw man argument. We would easily raise revenue by raising taxes on the rich.

The poor need to do more also, but for the most part, they are doing all they can. Most of these people (vast majority) are doing what they can and don't actually want to be poor. A lot of people are handicapped, addicted, or have other problems, and a lot have just had bad luck.The childaren also have zero control over their situations

You've still provided absolutely zero information. Just a bunch of questions and more so accusations. You need to educate yourself.

What's the solution then? Have them pull themselves up by their boot straps? LOL.

educate yourself Rasta. If you want an answer to a question, you need to look it up yourself. I can teach you how to fish but I'm not giving you the actual fish.

The actual data just shows more of the same. I don't think you understand that i've already done this research and don't have time to re-do it for your benefit. The only way you'll actually get educated is to look it up yourself and make a good-faith effort.

They should save as much money as they can for their own self interest but need to pay their fair share in taxes. The net result would be a little less money for their investments. So many may be able to save $900 million instead of $1 billion. I think they'll still be OK. The proof is the millions of people scraping to get by and incredibly high child poverty rate in this country, while fat cats acquire more wealth than they can shake a stick at.

https://inequality.org/great-divide/true-cost-of-billionaire-philanthropy/ Were you talking about this? All the money that they "donate" that actually provides political favors in return that are tenfold?

You asked me to take 30m to research a particular question that you seem to be seeking hard data for. If you want the hard data, go ahead and find it yourself. The problem is that there are a lot of ways to look at that data, since you weren't very specific. Therefore, this could end up being a huge rabbit hole and I don't have time for that. I do know for a FACT that the rich do NOT provide enough in taxes or charitable donations to help the poor and it isn't even remotely close to what they stash away or "invest." I can guarantee that whatever you find won't refute that. I've also seen enough data myself that proves that. Maybe YOU are the one that needs to be educated. Go look up what you asked about and get back to me.

Go ahead and provide the stats then. I've re-posted your question here. Onus isn't on me to research something that you seem to want to make a point on, but void of any factual information.

He keeps telling me that I need to be educated but won't actually tell me any facts to refute what I've said. Typical of the right...make accusations but can't back them up.

As I said, please go ahead and tell me something I don't know. 2nd request.

Go ahead and tell me something I don't know then. Most likely, it will be a another recycled propaganda talking pt from Fox News or CATO institute so I won't hold my breath.

If I had a multi-million dollar salary, I'd stash all of it away too. I actually do stash away what I can since I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford to do that. However, I don't live in a bubble and realize that not everybody has that luxury.

Yes; you said that in a subsequent post though, after I called you out. Duh.

Yes; I know the rich do it and avoid paying their taxes too. They are generally smart (and more so can hire smart tax accountants & attorneys) and will take advantage of every opportunity given to them, just like a pitbull on the pant leg of opportunity

There's some waste that goes on at EVERY level of government and also the private sector. Nobody is immune to it but, yes, the military waste is over the top so I agree that has to be reigned in severely. I'd actually take all the waste our of military paychecks.