scourge165

It sounds like you're asking him, telling him...and then answering him all in one post Jimmy.

He doesn't know. He's clueless. I'm pretty sure he's just Jimmy posting under another handle. "If you say so." Yes...you're making the laws for a Muslim Country on Women transitioning to Men... if YOU say so!

Yeah, Coleman beat Brooks. Letts beat Ruth. Coleman got...pretty lucky and scored 5 and had to hang on for the win. I don't think that swings it much. Letts took a 7th, Coleman took a 5th and a 7th. I think Ruth was great. He made it look so easy...I just think Starocci and Brooks stayed in such great position, they VERY rarely got scored on. 141-Yeah, that's fair. I was just trying to get the best 10 on the team. Could have put Dake there, but...neither should be at 141. It's gotta be Yianni, Stieber or Ware and... I don't know how to pick between Yianni and Stieber. I'll go with...Yianni and that's just because I think he's a tougher matchup for Stieber, but it's really 1 and 1A. Nolf-JB would have been interesting, but I think JB was just starting his ascent then. He went to Junior World's that year and took a 10th. He was still becoming...Jordan Burroughs. Askren-Starr, I've always said that I don't think you should rank a guy based purely on titles won...I don't think there's much of a gap here. I guess I just thought of those two and then how I thought that match would go...which would be Starocci staying in good position and IMO, winning a 1 TD match. But I could be wrong. I'd have thought Mark Hall would end up here at one point, but then he couldn't beat Valencia. Well...I said I'm prioritizing their College careers and then said I'm only going off College. Meaning, I'm taking a guy who won a couple titles over a guy like...Fix who took a World Silver AND that I'm limiting it to what they did during those 4 years(or 5 years, or 6) but I'm not including Burroughs illustrious career post-College and I'm putting more weight on how awesome Vito looked vs RBY and Fix vs the WC, but I'm not ignoring the WC... or how Brooks beat a guy like Amine who took a Bronze. The guy who gets screwed the most on mine is Snyder(but he did pay for it...ba‑dum‑tss). No, cheap shot, but he's a 2/1/1/1 and he's one of the 4-5 best College Wrestlers, but he Wrestled at a Weight class with two absolute studs in Stevenson and Cael. The other guy is Lee, but I've always thought Abas was underappreciated(this thread is telling me otherwise). Just so incredibly slick.

It was the first example of your stupid cut and past contradicting itself stupid. Deficit decreased (annual average or trend) Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat, 1963–69): reduced deficit by about $8.2 B per year newyorker.com+9reddit.com+9congress.gov+9gordonwaynewatts.com+1goliards.us+1jacobin.com+2reddit.com+2reddit.com+2. Jimmy Carter (Democrat, 1977–81): cut by roughly $11.7 B per year . Bill Clinton (Democrat, 1993–2001): brought deficits down and finished with multiple budget surpluses, reducing debt by an average of $21.6 B per year, and even achieving surpluses from 1998–2001 . Barack Obama (Democrat, 2009–17): also achieved meaningful deficit reduction, averaging ~$179 B less per year over his full term reddit.com+10gordonwaynewatts.com+10reddit.com+10. Done with you now scout. Jesus Christ....15 pages and Jimmy needs to Google was the deficit is vs the debt and Caerira still doesn't get it.

"Manage your credit cards?" Serious question, you just learned tonight there was a difference between deficit and debt, didn't you? Even the most rudimentary Economics are over your head, but you have it solved how we can dig ourself out of a debt 130% the GDP(which is going down under Trump) and pay down 36.3 TRILLION in debt, mostly added by Republicans. This isn't even complicated and you people are too stupid to understand the distinction between deficit and debt...or how Government spending works. You're a Republican though... So you'd probably add most of the money to it and still blame your wife, make 18K, but get upset at the idea of corporations paying more than a 6% or even 9% effective tax rate(and I just realized...you likely don't know what effective tax rate means either).

Shocking the sarcasm was lost on you.... You are just another account for Jimmy, aren't you? The posting 4-5 times in a row, one or two sentences? Effective corporate tax rate 6% right now. Effective corporate tax rate between 35-45% in the 1950s.

You mean where it literally says Obama cut the deficit? I think like Caveira, you're both SO clueless, you don't understand the difference between DEFICIT and DEBT. The DEBT is the total amount of money we owed. The DEFICIT is the YEARLY spending... so when it says "Barack Obama decreased the deficit during his Presidency, but still ended with a deficit." You really aren't smart enough to understand what that is saying? Then why are you arguing?

Ok...so you do NOT understand what the deficit is vs the DEBT. This is BASIC-BASIC economics.

Same question I asked Caveira to you...

OK...FIRST you define what the DEFICIT is and lets see if you can distinguish that from the DEBT. Then you go and compare Bush and the DEFICIT he left and Obama's deficits. Jesus Christ...

I was really just pointing out your inability to read and understand what YOU were writing.

I clicked on your post...probably 1 of the last 40 or 50 I've seen and... you're not smart enough to understand what you're reading. "Barack Obama decreased the deficit during his Presidency, but still ended with a deficit." "Joe Biden decreased the deficit in his first fiscal year, but his overall impact on the deficit remains to be seen." Hey, Jimmy, really, stay out of the grown-ups arguments. THEY'RE LITERALLY SAYING THEY CUT THE DEFICITS. FIRST of all, it helps to know what a deficit is. It's the LAST YEARS budget. So when you take over for a Republican, you either spend MORE money than him or LESS than him. You just showed me a link saying Obama and Biden did just that and Carter absolutely did. What you APPARENTLY thinks this means is did they ELIMINATE the deficit...which just once again indicates that...when the adults are talking, even if you are able to type words into Google, just...shhh. There is a reason you're on ignore. So again, EVERY Democrat has cut the DEFICIT and Ever Republican has INCREASED the deficit.

I like how the moron "Scouts Honor" is liking your post when he cited a source that was even lower than mine. It's also cute how you're just listing off a bunch of exemptions. You can gift 13.99M dollars in your life tax free, 19K a year, 38K married. The Estate Tax doesn't start until ~28M for married couples. The Government Collected 17.1B from Gift and Estate taxes TOTAL because you have Dynasty trusts with executors where you can just avoid it. The "alternative minimum tax?" Do you even understand what this is? This is for people like Trump who paid 750 dollars in taxes how many years in a row(despite being a billionaire because...you get to claim depreciation on your properties despite the fact that they're not depreciating). It doesn't work and it feels like you're just citing taxes now. The carried interest tax, the QBI, tax loss harvesting, carried interest, Family Office... Yeah, you're wrong, you're just repeating an old, tired talking point. JUST as you did when I predicted you'd tell me to "just give more money to the IRS, nobody is stopping you!"

Yeah, it's not about WANT you child. I don't think they WANTED to go fight in a War because a pathetic little guy with a Mustache started a war vs...the world. They did it though. That's the point stupid. And they did at a rate 6,7 TIMES higher. Who would argue with an EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate of 15% if their tax rate is supposed to be 21%? Someone who knows those numbers are meaningless. Cut Fema, Cut the FDA, Cut ICE, cut...all Federal funding for EVERYTHING... keep the defense spending, Medicare, social security and paying the interest. Tell me with JUST those cuts and Trump's proposed tax cuts...how long until we pay off the debt? So basically EVERYTHING except for Military and the programs we pay into?

Yes...corporations are the middle class as are the executives who get their pay via stock options. WTF are you getting it's the Middle Class I want to target?

You actually did it. When you repeated that bogus "the top 10% pays 90% of the taxes," line, I literally said; I thought you'd say the dumbest thing possible...and you did not disappoint. You seriously went to the dumbest possible answer.

I'm not going to keep doing this with you. You're right. And who is spending more? Every Democrat since Eisenhower cut the deficit Every Republican since Eisenhower INCREASED the deficit The EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate in the 1950s was 35-45%... vs 9% and then 6% GDP grew at ~4% for the decade. Wages rose about 3.6% for the top 10%, they rose 3.5% for the bottom 90% NOW wages are growing at .81% for the poor, .87 for the Middle Class. The stock market grew nearly 500% in the 1950s. The STRONGEST decade in HISTORY on the back of RISING Corporate profits despite that super unfair and mean tax rate.

A-You realize that proved you wrong several times, right? B-I don't care about the top 10% Being part of the top 10% doesn't really require that big of a starting salary. That's like 150k a year. And I'll happily pay more. But no, it's BRILLIANT to stifle the GDP with tariffs, lower your tax revenue...AFTER you lose your final AAA Credit Rating... Gee...what do you think that's going to do to the 870 BILLION that just goes to service the debt? As expected, you addressed NOTHING I said, nothing about how we got out of this deficit the last time...just breezed right past all the stuff you couldn't argue/didn't understand.

NO-THEY-HAVE-NOT They've been taking 9% from Corporations while Corporations continue to generate record profits and they take less from the truly wealthy as they get compensated in stock options which are taxes at 0%, 15% and 20%. NOT 30% I don't know what the point of YOUR RothIRA is. And you keep saying "CUT SPENDING," but...nobody wants to cut the TRILLION we spend on the Military. Or the now NEAR trillion we spend on servicing the debt. The 1.4T on Social Security. Right off the top, you're at nearly 80% with healthcare, social security, defense and interest payments. And there are people who are still dumb enough to think we can just cut spending. No, we've been here before. There's a VERY clear blueprint. The difference between the greatest generation and this generation...

What are you babbling about? How am I "changing my metric?" Also, do you understand what an EFFECTIVE tax rate is? In what situation did I use "raw dollars?" Are you talking about when I said his bill is going to add ~5 TRILLION dollars to the deficit? Would you prefer I said what percentage it'll add to the deficit? WTF would you like me to do? I'm talking about ONE bill. Do you want me to go corporation by corporation? And yes, SHOCKINGLY when you make 170 BILLION dollars a quarter, you pay WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more dollars than the guy who makes 120K a year. The fact that you felt you needed to articulate that is amazing. This is an incoherent, disjointed, nonsensical post. It's ALMOST like we have been in this situation before, the solution was ABSOLUTELY more taxes and it's not just "more efficient" Government. Medicare, Social Security, Military. Cut one or shut up and realize you need more tax revenue... I laid out how literally EVERY financial metric was better in the 1950s, how Corporations paying a 35% to 45% effective tax rate STILL led to 4% GDP growth, the greatest decade for wages, the stock market and cementing the United States as thee World Super Power. Finally, I never said it was THE solution, but CUTTING taxes for corporations or the wealthy DAMN sure isn't a solution when you're already over 36 TRILLION dollars in debt, 120% of your GDP. Did I NOT suggest raising the age for social security as well?

I'd guess the next time you hear it'll be Amy or maybe Max, someone just commenting that he's awake and talkin and doing better... but the fact that it's going on makes it a little more disconcerting.

No, it's not... I feel a little embarrassed side tracking it. I know how serious it is, I just can't imagine he's not alright.

And AGAIN, I repeat...every single Democrat President has CUT the deficit since Eisenhower(I didn't look beyond Eisenhower...though I'd suspect Truman didn't coming out of the War and then right into another and if FDR did...he only cut his own). Every SINGLE Republican has increased the deficit since Eisenhower. They're not the same. The Democrats haven't been great. The Republicans by all measure have been worse.

Lets start with the fact that this meme that has been going around for decades is not accurate. They pay about 74% of the taxes. They have about 75% of the wealthy. Then you could look at the reference I made to Eisenhower, the last time our debt was this high(110% of the GDP). In the 1940s and 1950s, the strongest decade(50s)of economic prospertiy we've s Or the 9% effective tax rate that corporations paid PRIOR to getting their taxes cut from "35% to 21%." Now it sits at ~6%. So I used my big boy words and said very clearly Would that not be fair? ACTUALLY making corporations pay 15% when their tax rate is 21% and they're currently paying 6%? The top 10% is only ~135-140K a year, so...not really who I was addressing, that was just a lazy opportunity for you to pull out the 10% pay 90% line that Republicans have been using for decades. The only lazier line than what you and...I'd imagine Jimmy could use is "err...why don't you just give the Government more of your money." The EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate in the 1950s was 35-45%... vs 9% and then 6% GDP grew at ~4% for the decade. Wages rose about 3.6% for the top 10%, they rose 3.5% for the bottom 90% NOW wages are growing at .81% for the poor, .87 for the Middle Class. The stock market grew nearly 500% in the 1950s. The STRONGEST decade in HISTORY on the back of RISING Corporate profits despite that super unfair and mean tax rate. To recap, 1950s; So a MUCH higher effective tax rate( 3 TIMES what I'm suggesting). A MUCH stronger middle class. Wages growing 4-5X the rate for the poor. Equities performed better than ever. The GDP 40% Right now Effective corporate tax rate of 9% in 2017 to 6% now A dying middle class. Wages lagging WELL behind even the ideal rate of inflation. Equities are still doing well...or at least they were doing great 3 of the last 4 years. This year they're...doing fine(though, it's only half over). For the decade we're doing fine. I paid... a significant amount in taxes last year and it sucks. Between my income and selling a property my taxes along would have been in the top 5% of incomes. Make it political all you'd like. It's about preserving the United States of America. We are NOT going to do that by cutting taxes AGAIN and just ignoring the debt. We're going to end up like Greece if we do that.

Jimmy's the type who gets 20 dollars, loses half of it, then gets 7 dollars back and acts like he's ahead of where he started the day...