|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 8, 2017 2:22:06 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 4:19:23 GMT -5
I lean a mile further left since I got sick, but Christopher Reeves did eff all for paraplegics before he became one, so I'm not alone.
Can we talk about gun control next?
BTW - My Aussie Rules football team plays a qualifying final tonight. If you've never seen AFL, check it out
|
|
reebdoog
TGCT Design Competition Directors
Posts: 2,742 
TGCT Name: Brian Jeffords
Tour: CC-Pro
|
Post by reebdoog on Sept 9, 2017 14:11:10 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 14:32:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nantez88 on Sept 10, 2017 4:41:00 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2017 8:45:39 GMT -5
What in the actual hell?!?! |
|
|
|
Post by smurfblade88 on Sept 10, 2017 9:43:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mtsalmela80 on Sept 11, 2017 20:58:03 GMT -5
Canada does not even have 40 million people in the entire land, America has roughly 400,000,000. There is your problem. It'll never work, especially because lawyers and the insurance industry are the real power players in the medicine fields. You don't have to allow the big corps to run your country you know? You can take it back from the profiteers. On your mention of the population you could argue that the more people you have the more tax money you have to put into the system. Yeah except in this country more than half of the citizenry pay little to no income tax, then tack on illegal aliens, and you have a system where 400 million need coverage but maybe 100 million are paying into it. Of those, maybe 40 million pay hefty sums of money. And NO, you cannot just "take it back", maybe with bloody revolution but almost no one in America has the stomach for that. Sounds great, but in reality, we are stuck in the cycle, probably until the end of America as it is now known. |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Sept 12, 2017 0:36:44 GMT -5
You don't have to allow the big corps to run your country you know? You can take it back from the profiteers. On your mention of the population you could argue that the more people you have the more tax money you have to put into the system. Yeah except in this country more than half of the citizenry pay little to no income tax, then tack on illegal aliens, and you have a system where 400 million need coverage but maybe 100 million are paying into it. Of those, maybe 40 million pay hefty sums of money. And NO, you cannot just "take it back", maybe with bloody revolution but almost no one in America has the stomach for that. Sounds great, but in reality, we are stuck in the cycle, probably until the end of America as it is now known. Sofa change compared to the corporate welfare that is dealt out. But check it out, Trump's tax plan also wants to cut in half the number of people paying taxes - anyone making under 25k > no federal income taxes. This is the biggest problem i am having right now as far as policy goes. If no one is paying taxes, how the hell are we going to pay for our sht? This is also the argument i made during the campaign. Trump's plan is to reduce revenue via taxes while continuing to spend money we don't have, somehow hoping that "trickle down economics" is going to cover the costs. He's insane. |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Sept 12, 2017 2:36:43 GMT -5
Yeah except in this country more than half of the citizenry pay little to no income tax, then tack on illegal aliens, and you have a system where 400 million need coverage but maybe 100 million are paying into it. Of those, maybe 40 million pay hefty sums of money. And NO, you cannot just "take it back", maybe with bloody revolution but almost no one in America has the stomach for that. Sounds great, but in reality, we are stuck in the cycle, probably until the end of America as it is now known. Sofa change compared to the corporate welfare that is dealt out. But check it out, Trump's tax plan also wants to cut in half the number of people paying taxes - anyone making under 25k > no federal income taxes. This is the biggest problem i am having right now as far as policy goes. If no one is paying taxes, how the hell are we going to pay for our sht? This is also the argument i made during the campaign. Trump's plan is to reduce revenue via taxes while continuing to spend money we don't have, somehow hoping that "trickle down economics" is going to cover the costs. He's insane. He's obviously heading in the direction of total privatisation. Everything monetized is heaven to a man like Trump, a man who has always had his arse wiped and never felt hardship financially. It seems these days that governments can always find a private company to pick up a job that was previously funded by the government, they call this efficiency savings but in reality it costs much more because everybody has to pay for it directly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 7:17:21 GMT -5
Privatization is a fools game. Vital services are the ones ripe for privatization. It's a captive customer with no choice. As soon as you add profit into the mix for a vital service you have big fckn problems. You cannot just say, oh I don't need this service or I will shop somewhere else, hence none of this will effect me. Water, power, law enforcement, fire, healthcare, roads, education, military, environmental protections, drugs, emergency response just to name but a few. Services you need, services vital to the public good. Services you are far better off paying taxes for then paying on a fee for use based model. The private companies who get control over any of the above services just want to be profitable and could give a rats about the quality of the service either. Quality costs money. Quality has no bearing on whether or not you continue to need those services. Quality gets pitched in the bin as being wasted money spent. Follow that with throwing out regulations and enforcement of such and you get companies that provide no other service than to collect your money from you and provide near zilch in return. They want every last nickle from you to buy their yaughts and castles. As soon as your money is being diverted from providing the services to buying yaughts and castles for a few, you have huge problems. Problems you can already see, if you bother to pay attention.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 12, 2017 7:28:16 GMT -5
Reduction in taxes for the poor seems like a good thing. And it would be if it were balanced by increase in tax revenue from the rich to make up for it. But actually it's just part of a diabolical neo-capatalist plan to undermine the very concept of public services....
Step 1) Reduce tax income
Step 2) Point at all the failing services as a failure of the public model (even tho it's actually just due to underfunding)
Step 3) Use 2 to drive through policy to privatize everything
Step 4) Now everyone is beholden to private owners of capital, let the profiteering begin
It's not really new - the Tories have been doing it over here in the UK for the last 8 years, under the term "Austerity" - which is actually just a low tax and public spending system. Oh and as I mentioned previously in this thread, that policy is actually killing tens of thousands of our most vulnerable..
|
|
|
|
Post by misternic on Sept 12, 2017 9:55:17 GMT -5
I have avoided this thread, looked at it a few times and thought - nope not getting into that mess. I especially like the headline of this thread. I think many of the people who voted for him (I did not (but not Hillary either)) thought he was a bad human being when they voted for him. We needed some sort of outsider. Now we got an outsider, but he isn't capable of leading. We need someone who is not going to sell politics as usual. We pry got that, but again by a guy not smart or disciplined enough to rein himself in. The problem with this country is not taxes and public services, it is life long self serving politicians. If an election cycle takes 18 months (30 for president) how do you expect someone to focus on doing what is best for the constituents when they are ALWAYS running for election. 438 of our elected officials have an election every 2 years. Every decision is about protecting their seat at the table, and few if any are about what is best for the country.
All of our founding fathers did something else for a career and then "served their country". We need to get back to that mentality. I have worked for a financial services company for 20+ years and am looking at running for state office in a few years once I "retire". Not because I need work but because my state needs people who put the needs of the many ahead of the needs of the one.
|
|
|
|
Post by SweetTeeBag on Sept 12, 2017 10:14:10 GMT -5
Trump may go down as one of the best leaders in US history.
On a side not does anybody know if Rosie O'Donnell moved to Canada yet? 
![]()
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Sept 12, 2017 10:56:01 GMT -5
Reduction in taxes for the poor seems like a good thing. And it would be if it were balanced by increase in tax revenue from the rich to make up for it. But actually it's just part of a diabolical neo-capatalist plan to undermine the very concept of public services.... Step 1) Reduce tax income Step 2) Point at all the failing services as a failure of the public model (even tho it's actually just due to underfunding) Step 3) Use 2 to drive through policy to privatize everything Step 4) Now everyone is beholden to private owners of capital, let the profiteering begin It's not really new - the Tories have been doing it over here in the UK for the last 8 years, under the term "Austerity" - which is actually just a low tax and public spending system. Oh and as I mentioned previously in this thread, that policy is actually killing tens of thousands of our most vulnerable.. Pro Corbyn? |
|
