2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[pac213up]

To be honest...the tax plan is irrelevant. 0% chance it would pass in Congress. Neither of these candidates are moving the needle very far in any direction.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Addison

Over half of the budget for some reason is defense. Since he isn't taking nuking Europe off the table, let's assume Don ain't touching that.

Where else would you expect he slash a few trillion?

Must have gotten this chart from Clinton because this chart is a straight lie.

[Addison]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Must have gotten this chart from Clinton because this chart is a straight lie.

So we don't spend over 50% of discretionary spending on defense as the chart indicates? A simple yes or no will suffice.

[corndog]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Must have gotten this chart from Clinton because this chart is a straight lie.

I perused the website of National Priorities Project, which supplied the chart, and clicked the board members tab.

Associated with animal rights, climate and environmental issues, national ACORN team, minimum wage increases, and other "non partisan" pursuits.

Shocking

[jrinne17]

Last I heard the Government spends around 20% on defense. I have no issue with a high budget for the military, the US does have the best technology in the World and better technology potentially mean putting fewer military personnel lives in danger. My cousin flies drones in the battle field and he said the worst thing that can happen is his drone gets shot down, but a life will not be lost.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Addison

So we don't spend over 50% of discretionary spending on defense as the chart indicates? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Yes, but you are misleading people. Discretionary spending is only 29% of total spending. Discretionary spending is 1.1 Trillion. Mandatory is 2.45 trillion. With social security, unemployment and labor costing 1.25 trillion. Medicare and healthcare costs 985 billion. Military spending is right around 16% of the total budget. You probably new all this, but many will not fact check and take a graph that someone posts as total budget. Want to cut the budget by trillions? How about the ponzi scheme that is social security.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Yes, but you are misleading people. Discretionary spending is only 29% of total spending. Discretionary spending is 1.1 Trillion. Mandatory is 2.45 trillion. With social security, unemployment and labor costing 1.25 trillion. Medicare and healthcare costs 985 billion. Military spending is right around 16% of the total budget. You probably new all this, but many will not fact check and take a graph that someone posts as total budget. Want to cut the budget by trillions? How about the ponzi scheme that is social security.

Also I have worked since I was 15, with only 8 months of unemployment in almost 20 years. The money I saved over the years covered my living costs for 8 months. I would gladly lose the almost 20 years of money I have put into social security if they would phase it out. People need to start taking responsibility for their lives and stop living off the government and expecting a handout. Flat tax across the board no matter how much someone makes, no right offs what so ever. No tax money coming back when you file your taxes. Just because someone only makes 20k a year and has 3 kids, doesn't mean they should be getting 10k back in taxes. Having kids was a choice, you can't afford the cost of a kid, then don't have them.

[JohnRyno]

I'd like someone to get an interview with dem Koch Boyz. With a combined wealth exceeding that of Bill Gates, no one from the Koch family, their corporation, or one of their many political organizations is giving support to Donald Trump. Instead, this season's Koch donations have been allocated to senatorial and congressional races(this was taken from a Fox News Business article).

Chuck and David dropped hundreds of millions in an attempt to defeat Barry Obama in 2012. It would be pure speculation to claim they tacitly support Hill the Thrill, but the Kochs either fear for the security of their wealth under an economy stewarded by Donnie, cannot endorse his brand of social conservatism, dislike him personally from the world of Manhattan rich bros, etc... Could be a combo meal.

Seems like Trump's descent started with the dismissal of Lewandowski. He has yet to appoint a campaign manager, and has been seeking "political consultation" from his son in law. Nepotism is an abysmal plan of infrastructure for a political campaign.

Republican strategists ran the streets in the 2000's, but this nomination is the biggest blunder since tacking Palin on McCain's ticket. Hopefully he can keep the race interesting enough until the NFL kicks off.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by JohnRyno

Seems like Trump's descent started with the dismissal of Lewandowski. He has yet to appoint a campaign manager, and has been seeking "political consultation" from his son in law. Nepotism is an abysmal plan of infrastructure for a political campaign.

Do you think they're swingers?

ETA: Maybe I just mean wife swappers. Look, all I'm saying is, The Donald's SIL has something The Donald wants.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnRyno]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

Do you think they're swingers?

ETA: Maybe I just mean wife swappers. Look, all I'm saying is, The Donald's SIL has something The Donald wants.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He owns some legit concrete on 5th Avenue. Ironically, Chris Christie prosecuted his father, who is currently incarcerated(According to the New York Times).

The article is actually worth posting a link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/05/us...ald-trump.html

[ajlaxmn]

Originally Posted by cruiserdaddy7

Let's not forget the MAJOR cut in taxation on small businesses, the backbone of this country. His tax plan looks very good.

Cut the entitlements down t o nearly nothing. Give people 90 days to get on their feet and then cut them off. People will work to avoid starvation and if they dont.....well they won't so it doesn't matter.

I think this would be a start, kind of, but in small towns where jobs are scarce how could a single mother work, pay daycare, pay rent, pay utilities, pay for food, maybe a car payment if she has one. When kids are involved it throws a whole different wrench into the system. I agree that adults that don't have any major ailments or injuries that prevent them from taking most jobs (of course you'll have people who will try like hell to say this or that prevents them from doing a lot of stuff, always will have scammers) should be given 3-4 months and then your off, could also look at incentivizing with travel money to reimburse someone who had to accept a job out of town that increases there travel compared to there normal job, this would have to be regulated and well thought out so people, again, don't try to scam.

[cruiserdaddy7]

Originally Posted by ajlaxmn

I think this would be a start, kind of, but in small towns where jobs are scarce how could a single mother work, pay daycare, pay rent, pay utilities, pay for food, maybe a car payment if she has one. When kids are involved it throws a whole different wrench into the system. I agree that adults that don't have any major ailments or injuries that prevent them from taking most jobs (of course you'll have people who will try like hell to say this or that prevents them from doing a lot of stuff, always will have scammers) should be given 3-4 months and then your off, could also look at incentivizing with travel money to reimburse someone who had to accept a job out of town that increases there travel compared to there normal job, this would have to be regulated and well thought out so people, again, don't try to scam.

I'm a fan of the child care tax break for this reason. The cost goes down already under Trump's plan. There are already voucher systems in place for free daycare for the indigent. If you prove you work, I don't mind a program to help with childcare. BUT, there must be oversight to prove continued employment. As the parent (s) holds a job and they work their way up, the naturally will no longer be dependant on the program.

That's how these programs were meant to work. They have gotten out of control with freeloaders and people no longer wanting to work.

[NeedChapmans]

Hillary Clinton everyone ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_cC0mAsPKQ

[jarrodsalas]

Well this is interesting.

Father of Orlando shooter attends Clinton rally, touts candidate | Fox News

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jarrodsalas

Well this is interesting.

Father of Orlando shooter attends Clinton rally, touts candidate | Fox News

Was very strange. He made a big banner and everything.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Hillary Clinton everyone ...

Oh she is SASSY.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by cruiserdaddy7

I'm a fan of the child care tax break for this reason. The cost goes down already under Trump's plan. There are already voucher systems in place for free daycare for the indigent. If you prove you work, I don't mind a program to help with childcare. BUT, there must be oversight to prove continued employment. As the parent (s) holds a job and they work their way up, the naturally will no longer be dependant on the program.

That's how these programs were meant to work. They have gotten out of control with freeloaders and people no longer wanting to work.

The child care tax break is not well defined at this point. No one know how it works, and how it should work.

Currently, we already have Dependent Care FSA. You fund the account with pre-tax money (up to certain limit). Trump's child care tax break is very similar to this. So, I am not sure if his new plan is in addition of FSA or the plan has higher limit.

[trixstar]

The fully tax deductible child care is not gonna help people that actually need it.

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by trixstar

The fully tax deductible child care is not gonna help people that actually need it.

Tt is funny how the rich family can pay ($600 after tax money) LESS than the poor family ($850 after tax) if they both use the same daycare service.

It is good to be rich.

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by trixstar

The fully tax deductible child care is not gonna help people that actually need it.

Oh no, 6 guys named Steve helped create the policy. The horror. MIchael Linden is an associate director at CAP and got his master in public policy at Berkeley. Enough said.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by trixstar

The fully tax deductible child care is not gonna help people that actually need it.

Ahhh yes, the US tax code at it's finest. Built solely to befuddle and confuse the average american. It's sole purpose is to make sure the average american pays more taxes than necessary while the outliers pay as little as possible.

Gee, it sure would be swell if we could get a simplified tax code. Point of fact, I can only think of a single presidential candidate that has proposed such an option...

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by quackhead

Oh no, 6 guys named Steve helped create the policy. The horror. MIchael Linden is an associate director at CAP and got his master in public policy at Berkeley. Enough said.

I will never understand anti-intellectualism. He has an advanced degree on this topic, so somehow he has LESS credibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trixstar]

Originally Posted by quackhead

Oh no, 6 guys named Steve helped create the policy. The horror. MIchael Linden is an associate director at CAP and got his master in public policy at Berkeley. Enough said.

Then this idiotic policy seems even worse than I had originally assumed.

[trixstar]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I will never understand anti-intellectualism. He has an advanced degree on this topic, so somehow he has LESS credibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being smart doesn't mean you understand what people actually need.

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I will never understand anti-intellectualism. He has an advanced degree on this topic, so somehow he has LESS credibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From a liberal university. Can you understand that?