Great public sentiment? Really?Meh, Trump has done all he legally needs to do. Offering up anything else for the enemy to pick apart and turn into "news"is non productive.
It's interesting that this illegal release of stolen documents come the day before a Trump rally. Wonder what they are planning for after the rally to tamp down the great public sentiment Trump rally's generate?
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Kut's Trump Approval Thread #1 (Starts Out at 100%)
- Thread starter Kutnupe14
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
People get so hung up on percentages of income. If we wanted to be truly fair about taxes we would be taxed on the value of government that we consume. But that would be burdensome and impractical because the poorest people, as a group, are the biggest consumers of government. A flat tax would be fairer--why is financial pain the determining factor in fairness? A flat tax hurts rich people less, but that has nothing to do with fairness. How many people will even MAKE $38M in their lifetimes, let alone pay that much in taxes, ever.
Consumers of big government should thank the people who pay that kind of money into the system, which enables them to reap that which they haven't earned themselves.
Consumers of big government should thank the people who pay that kind of money into the system, which enables them to reap that which they haven't earned themselves.
Meh, Trump has done all he legally needs to do. Offering up anything else for the enemy to pick apart and turn into "news"
It's interesting that this illegal release of stolen documents come the day before a Trump rally. Wonder what they are planning for after the rally to tamp down the great public sentiment Trump rally's generate?
Here's the thing. Some people think that more people think like they do, than actually think like they do.
/denny
hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
my woodchuck chucked 14 truckloads, for the record
How many trucks would a wood chuck, chuck, if a wood chuck could chuck trucks? A question even the tootsie pop owl can't answer?
That's what Hillary said...
...and all the libs...
...and the news media...
...and the nevertrumpers...
From what I've been able to understand from reading, we've had some form of consumption or franchise taxation before the construction of the first city walls in the Indus Valley 7,000 years ago. A transaction tax might be the best form of allocation. However, ALL transactions would be taxed. I have a sense that some here might stare in wonder at the resource usage by the upper classes of this society that they believe pay more than their fair share.
I dont know that that bothers me particularly. I've already heard a lot of highly educated commenting on this limited disclosed in ways that aren't supported by the limited facts in evidence. The more that is disclosed the more unsupported assumptions and accusations that are going to be made. People that are thinking his tax returns are going to answer questions like whether he rec'd payments from Putin (or Russia) or has investments in Russia are, frankly nuts.
Disclose the returns or not, the naysayers are going to be naysayers. Why give them the satisfaction or ammunition?
Or, cogito ergo sum as Rene Descartes would say.
Well, I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.
These other people? I'm not so sure.
Seeing your Descartes, I'll raise you a Turing.
Call with a Mill: "[FONT="]That which seems the height of absurdity in one generation often becomes the height of wisdom in the next."[/FONT]
That's what Hillary said...
...and all the libs...
...and the news media...
...and the nevertrumpers...
No. Hillary didn't say that.
No. It wasn't a landslide.
More voters voted for Hillary. Now please don't take that as any endorsement of Hillary as it was not intended that way. And I am not suggesting that Hillary would necessarily have won if the election had been held as a popular vote. What I'm saying is that the demographics of who actually voted, and why they voted the way they did, give us a pretty good idea of just how like you everyone else is.
Trump won the states that Republicans typically win. He easily won in the demographics of people who might tend to think like you do. People in rural areas came out pretty big. Trump did better than expected with Evangelicals. Obviously, the selection of Pence didn't hurt, and probably helped in that regard. But he was able to expand the tent, so to speak. Not that that demographic would have voted for Hillary, but a few key issues made them come out for Trump much more than expected.
But Trump could not have won those states if only people who think like you do voted for him. Those people aren't conservatives. They aren't the so-called "moral majority". They liked many of the social programs of Obama. They liked Bernie Sanders. Likely, many of the non-conservatives would not have voted for Trump if Sanders had won. The point is, not everyone voted for Trump for the same reasons you voted for him. They're not of the same mind or world view you are. Thinking that because Trump won all the red states and a few blue ones doesn't suggest that you're all the same.
That said, if Trump delivers on the promises that caused blue collar/moderates to vote for him, I think he could win reelection. But don't think that the Democrats will necessarily run a turd against him like they did in 2016. If they keep going like they are now, yes, they will run a far left loonbag against Trump. But I'm not discounting the possibility that they might learn something in the next 3 years. We'll see.
I wouldn't mind having that discussion but probably in a separate thread. But just to say, I don't think it's necessarily fairer to tax people on resources used. The purpose of taxation isn't to punish people or create this or that incentive. The purpose is simply to pay for government. So, as I said before, the fairest way to tax people is based on how many government (publicly provided) resources they consume. But that's just not practical because obviously people consuming welfare can't possibly pay for that consumption.
I do think wealthier people do tend to consume more government services than the average middle class American. But I'd suspect that a flat tax rate might make up for that. Public resource consumption may correlate with wealth, but I doubt the relationship is directly proportionate.
So maybe instead, there is a threshold of wealth where it's practical and fairest to tax based on consumption of publicly funded resources. So, it could be a flat rate based on income for most people, but beyond a certain point of wealth, the flat rate is just a floor, but you pay additional taxes based on what you cost the people (government).
femurphy77
Grandmaster
Why should he or any other president provide their tax returns? I've never had a job that required I provide a copy of my tax returns.
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
GodFearinGunTotinSuper Moderator
Members online
- jagee
- jtmiller951
- GodFearinGunTotin
- Jdr308
- Thomas1969
- tv1217
- swamptick
- ancjr
- 11infantryb
- VERT
- jamil
- red_zr24x4
- clayshooter99
- hammerd13
- Scott58
- BluePig
- slipnotz
- EPeter213
- Bosshoss
- Butch627
- KJQ6945
- doddg
- Titanium_Frost
- Hop
- Doug
- PTinbound
- WillH
- Glock22
- BigMoose
- Born2vette
- deo62
- Capvideo
- Jmtbug21
- anawaseem
- Ark
- xzjohn
- 85Cosmo
- Machinist68
- littletommy
- Jtrain
- Taurus the turtle
- Andyccw
- ECS686
- phylodog
- rkwhyte2
- indyk
- joncon
- armalitesheepdog
- Bookmark
- Codyf44