scourge165

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...

Why doesn't it matter more to you that this Country is going bankrupt and the effective corporate tax rate is about 1/4th what the middle class pays?

But still Ruth over Brooks? I'll do mine and it's based on personal preference. Abas could Wrestle today with their scrambling ability where as... given the way Wrestling has changed, I think others would have had more trouble). I'm also prioritizing College Wrestling 125-Abas 133-Vito- The way he dominated RBY and Fix, then won a WT, he gets the nod from me. 141-Zain 149-Dake-I'm throwing him in here 157-Nolf's one of the most overlooked Wrestlers. Only really "lost" to Imar, he also came back and beat Imar. 165-Taylor 174-Starocci- I can see Askren here...I just can't put him over Starocci 184-Brooks 197-Cael HWT-Stevenson I might have Varner as my #2 at 197. 133 others have better careers... but Vito was in a loaded weight and dominant. I'm a guy who didn't see the older guys, I just think Wrestling is better than it was 20 years ago by in large and some of the controversial ones, ie, Snyder...I don't know how you don't givve the edge to the guy 40 pounds heavier. Starocci and Askren, Askren thrived at getting guys out of position... but Carter was a lot like Pentelton in that he was just so technically sound in every position. 10 matches...I'll guess 6/4 Starocci. Jordan Burroughs was a stud, but I'm only going off College...and I just have him right behind Nolf and Taylor. Burroughs was competitive with Howe at 165. Howe got down big and then got banged up so we never saw a healthy rematch(though I suppose you could use that as an argument for JB as I think Howe was a stud and actually underrated). Lee and Abas would be a matchup of styles. I like Abas slick shots, but Lee just worked guys on top. I'm still of the opinion that the best of Lee will come in the next few years, the further his knee injury gets put behind him.

Sorry, but except common sense. Is anone really taking Snyder or Stevenson at HWT? I've been as big a fan of Snyder(sans the girls in the red light district in whatever European city he was Wrestling in on a given weekend) but...this isn't a discussion if Hendrickson doesn't pull off one of the greatest upsets of all time. If it's not close without the upset, then you're allowing one match to change the outcome. As for the Freestyle and Greco, he came, he saw, he conquered. But you're comparing a 97KG Snyder vs a 125KG Stevenson who can match Snyder's footspeed. I don't know what you meant to say by "beat objectively better competing at NCAAs multiple years." I think you went through that quickly and missed a word or something.

That's what he believes. It's more that he advises to the parents that they don't focus on results until you're in 5th and 6th grade and you don't Wrestle many tournaments. And just to reiterate, this is ALL me relaying what people have said or what he's said online. I have some nephews that have gone to AWA for camps or Wrestlers that went there. Now personally, I would have hated that. Wrestling was only fun when I was...Wrestling. Practice was really never fun(unless we were Wrestling) and I hated drilling. Part of that is because I had two kids shat themselves during practice...and often had to Wrestle the HWTs because I was tall and skinny(I have rectified one of those two). -That...I hope is more of a problem unique to me and he finds a way to keep practices more fun than ours were. I think it's mainly the mental aspect(I may be wrong)...from what I've gleaned. If you're a normal, well adjusted adult, it's probably fine to start earlier(and he's not stopping kids, he just doesn't take kids to tournaments at that age). Sadly, kids Wrestling tournaments are like a bunch of psychos betting on dog fights all jockeying to get closer to the action and screaming instructions at their kids...

Works a little better if he's not suing Journalists, calling them the enemy of the state, threatening to throw them in prison... They don't come for the people first there sparky, it's the media(even Fox when they "aren't very nice to him).

LOL...I think you may be the political JimmyCinnabon who trolls his own "team" by saying just ridiculous things. These could go forever. Remember when the Wars in Gaza and the Ukraine started because they didn't respect Biden and Trump would end them on Day1(which we all knew was nonsense as he was going to do everything on day 1)...and now he's wondering...when did Putin become such a mean guy!

I don't know if that's what HE is saying, I think he's speaking for the general electorate. But...he can clarify that. The Gini coefficient...which tracks income inequality is at it's highest levels since the great depression(not at that level, but on it's way). I know this is a fools errand, arguing that we need to go back to something CLOSER to a 1950s tax rate to address the debt(well, first the deficit and then the debt...if we eliminated the deficit, we could actually... in theory be fine). Meanwhile, the income inequality has gotten BETTER in China. They seem to have at least learned run lesson. You can't JUST have rich oligarch's and then a peasant class. Another thing I omitted in my last post, get rid of oil/natural gas subsidies. I know this is controversial as it was suggested those "costs" would be passed on to the consumer, but...that's asinine as the US doesn't set oil prices and the different would be marginal at best. Pennies a gallon vs tens of billions.

You may be right. People are short sighted...and many people are just trying to survive. One thing that baffles me is how you're eliminating the subsidies on on the ACA. The cost of health insurance is going to sky rocket next year. The very thing the ACA was created to curb. But they keep stripping away piece by piece. But that's why it shouldn't target those making under 50K a year or should keep the child tax credit. But we have to change something. The corporate tax rate. Christ, just make it 12% but make it 12% on net revenue. That's a lot more money. Raise taxes on incomes over 400K. I don't want to see Capital Gains go away as... that's where most of my money comes from, but maybe you make it 5%, 17.5% and 22.5% and if it's part of a CEOs compensation package, it's taxes as income. Cut military spending by 25% Do these things while you CAN and not when you absolutely HAVE to and things are already crumbling. Hell, maybe it's easy to say since I know it won't happen, but that's what I'd do. ***The ONE thing I would also chance, the estate tax. #1-You exempt small farms, BUT...it is taxable if you sell within 5 years. These farmers live their whole lives sitting on...millions or tens of millions of dollars of "net worth," but...they are barely getting by and they've been screwed enough. There are Family farms all around me and since I was a kid, they've tried to figure out how they were going to keep it in the Family. -These people feed us. Don't let them go under because of the value of their land. #2-Don't raise the exemptions for anyone else. Tax liquid assets and then do not reset the capital gains for equities or property. If you Great Grandpa bought land for 150K in 1950 and it's worth 15M now, when you sell that, you have to pay the capital gains. This isn't a "the right are evil" post, this is a KEEP America Great and go back to the playbook that's worked for us in the past when we've accrued his type of debt. Also, 86 the tariffs on our allies. A growing GDP gives you a much stronger tax base. Imagine getting our Debt back down to 50% of the GDP instead of 130% or whatever it's going to be in 2-3 years. Raise the minimum retirement age for those of us under 50 to 65.

I feel like if anyone had REAL inside info(not just...a vague details from someone who kinda knows him which is...more accurate and how I should have articulated what little information I had)...it'd probably be Flo. Sure... never loved the Bare Feet, but I do love the way he brings kids along in the sport. He's not out there trying to get 2nd graders to win National Titles. That's why you have a lot of kids who aren't peaking until they are later in HS or College. But that's all secondary to his wife and children. I'm sure Ben will tell us all exactly what caused this in the future. Not to downplay how serious this is, but...this will not be the end of Ben Askren. ThatI'd bet money on.