The Political Discussion Thread

[garhkal]

How is it that you folks who do NOT live in the USA think/claim to know *more* about our tax system and our gov't, etc., more than us who live here? Where is your info coming from? Uncle Sam or nonUSA source? Just curious..

Dunno. Maybe they read up on it? Or they are just bloviating..

Sometimes we get those hidden prop#'s at multiple other elections being held thruout the year, not just in the November elections.

Or like with some of what the feds do, they Hide it in the back of another 'bill getting put up for vote' knowing "since this one needs to be passed, to continue to do XYZ, that people won't wanna vote NO on it, just to defeat the property tax hike..

The other thing I forgot to mention about property taxes was that I knew there was some monies that got directed over to the municipal building for police, fire, and EMS, but what I didn't know was that the property taxes also supported the various school or educational systems -- whether or not (generic) you had children yet. Non-married individuals with NO children pay property taxes as rental tenants or home-owners, regardless of their marital and dependent(s) status.

I've known that for a while, and keep making mention of it. Heck, it also goes to cover 'garbage, sewage, and in my neck of the woods, some also gets paid off for some old folks home assistance or other..

Quite right, it isn't your whole system, but Income Tax, Sales tax, Corporate tax and Property tax are the cornerstone elements of the vast majority of Tax codes worldwide............

Don't forget imo one of the worst of the bunch... INHERITANCE tax!!

By what measure has the US been on a downslide?

Living standard of the average worker.
In the 50-60's, a man (or woman, but wasn't common at the time) who was willing to work could easily earn enough to provide a comfortable middle class living for themselves and their family. This allowed the other spouse to stay home and focus on raising the children and tending the home.

Nowdays, that same couple has to work 2 jobs, due to the decline in incomes, which is in large part due to outsourcing of jobs thanks to free trade. This requires the couple to outsource child care to low paid day care worker or whoever they can get to watch them. Oh, coincidentally, have you noticed how many of today's youngsters are growing up wild, without proper parantage? There are alot of other effects of this switch to requiring two incomes, but that is the most important.
Our international status has certainly declined. At its peak, the US was the world leader in technology, economic might and numerous other areas. Look at the Apollo space program of the 60's. We have certainly fallen a great deal from those heights.

I can go on, but I don't have all day to list the various ways we have been going down hill since we peaked.

You also have to add in, other factors.. like how we seem to have more 'slum like' areas these days than in the 60s.. Food/gas/other items prices have risen it seems far more than just inflation would dictate..
More unemployed/out of work than it seemed we have ever had...
Then you also need to count in schooling.. It used to be our students would generally be ranked higher than other nations. Now we are what, 5th?

Open your wardrobe, look at the tags and figure out just how much of the stuff you own is made elsewhere. After that, go through your stuff and look at who might own the companies that you buy your stuff from.

Guilty as charged...

You mean like handing my taxes over to gov't sponsored Planned Parenthood for promiscuous teens and foolish adults getting girls and ladies pregnant, and having them pay the tab/bill in more ways than one (emotional dealing of the situations being another weight forced against the ladies)..

Its kinda of a catch 22 though.. Pay for it then, or pay for it over 18 years for them having the kid and often living off of welfare/section 8/WiC/EBT etc..

According to the article, *to make the roads safer*, there will be a ban against drinking coffee, eating, or grooming one's self while driving. Okay, putting on eye make-up and eating cereal in a bowl on your lap, while driving in bumper-to-bumper traffic is an understandable no-no. But applying chapstick or vaseline takes no extra effort, especially if lips are peeling and already bothersome.

I've known of only 3 incidents where someone got into an accident from drinking/eating while driving. Plenty though from chatting/using phones, or doing make up.. So imo THEY should be banned in cars first if they really wanna make the roads safer.

Oh, and if complaints about *grooming* include blowing one's nose from a sneezing fit?? -- well, that's just adding to the drinking insanity. Oooo! Allergy sufferers----Some dust particle of pollen or cut grass just got blown into your eye via an open window or air vent..??!! MAJOR distraction!

Having had a few incidents of sneezing fits while driving, i agree those are major pains!

You mean Retiree's...............

I think he was on about those who 'timed out of' being eligible to receive unemployment anymore..

How is the choice of someone you do not know, will never know, and have nothing to do with "micro manage" your life?
Person A has the choice to have an abortion that you will never pay for.

If my tax dollars are going to PP, how am i not paying for those abortions?

[garhkal]

No, no it won't.
Your purchasing base is far, far to used to cheap product and all you will do is disenfranchise them.

How is it going to disenfranchise them???

That's one ugly figurehead

Well at least it will keep the Mermaids away!

The cost of manufacturing something determines where the company goes, and that includes wages so if you like your workers working for almost nothing than yeah sure, bring it back to your own lands.

Don't forget all the political red tape, taxes etc..

I don't see the problem. In fact, drinking and eating behind the wheel is forbidden in France as well. Doesn't mean, you can't have snacks or drinks in the car for emergency moments. It's always good to have water and snacks in the car in case you're stuck in a jam.

I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it, if they applied these rules EVENLY across the board. But how many times have you seen a driver pass you, when the driver's head was turned around cause they were chatting/yelling at someone in the back seat, gabbing on their phone etc?


PS, i just got back from Gencon last night, so am playing catch up...

[Gatefan1976]

Got it in one.. Which is what many of us keep saying. one rule for them, one for us..

Do you think either Trump or Hillary will change that?

With how the Muslims have shown how they react just from someone daring to misspeak out against Mohammed, Allah, etc, you honestly think that the FFRA foundation would have the balls to go after islam if they somehow became the majority religion in our country>??

Yes.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/freetho...her-religions/

If they were keeping it "In their own houses" though, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Ahh, yes we would.

And you don't see her being any less of a disaster?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0aae2a5a0ba36
I dunno, if 50 of your top advisors from your own party think he is............
I suppose though they are "establishment" GOP, so you can ignore them.

Agreed. Both sides tried to jimmy it for their 'favored son/daughter'.. One side just was successful while the other wasn't..

What the DNC did to Bernie was pretty bad, but the deciding factor was the votes, and Hillary got more votes, Just like Trump got more votes.

So why only NOT christianity??

I don't think you understood tood.

Which is strange, as you would think the more affluent wouldn't be all for socialistic tendencies..

Why?

But why only 'deport some, give others perm residency/citizenship'? Is that still NOT an amnesty? Is that still not saying to the thousands who are currently still awaiting THEIR paperwork who went through the time/money/effort to come over legally/become citizens, "hahahah suckers"..

Why not keep the ones who can advance your economy?

I fully agree. However, where are those cuts going to come from?
Either way you slice it, someone's gonna whine about THEIR slice of the pie getting smaller..

The cuts can come from anywhere that Annoyed will not be affected, he does not care.

What i would like to know, is why we never seem to hear of Republicans having 'super delegates', and only Dems having them..?

Umm, because the two groups have different rules? There is no federal mandate on the DNC or the RNC, they are private clubs who can run their business any way they want. They do not even have to let people vote if they don't want them too. They could dispense with the whole primary system if they wanted and just put forward anyone they want.
How can you not know this?

[Gatefan1976]

Dunno. Maybe they read up on it? Or they are just bloviating..

Feel free to fact check me

Or like with some of what the feds do, they Hide it in the back of another 'bill getting put up for vote' knowing "since this one needs to be passed, to continue to do XYZ, that people won't wanna vote NO on it, just to defeat the property tax hike..

Yup, but again, that is a function of politics, not economics

I've known that for a while, and keep making mention of it. Heck, it also goes to cover 'garbage, sewage, and in my neck of the woods, some also gets paid off for some old folks home assistance or other..

That's because all the money the states collect go into a generic fund, which is why you see petrol/road tolls being spent on other things as well. There is no "fund for this" or "fund for that" on a governmental level.

Don't forget imo one of the worst of the bunch... INHERITANCE tax!!

Are you expecting to inherit more than 5.5 million dollars, because that is the tax free threshold. You are getting your panties in a bunch over a tax only the wealthy pay (the top 0.2% of estates in the nation to be accurate)
Seriously??

You also have to add in, other factors.. like how we seem to have more 'slum like' areas these days than in the 60s.. Food/gas/other items prices have risen it seems far more than just inflation would dictate..
More unemployed/out of work than it seemed we have ever had...

Seems to me that you are quoting feelings, not facts. "truthiness" as Colbert would say

Then you also need to count in schooling.. It used to be our students would generally be ranked higher than other nations. Now we are what, 5th?

About that. (5th)
Not to worry though, the GOP always wants to cut education. I wonder what that will do for your ranking.......

Guilty as charged...

Same here.

Its kinda of a catch 22 though.. Pay for it then, or pay for it over 18 years for them having the kid and often living off of welfare/section 8/WiC/EBT etc..

You don't "pay for it then", Abortion is not a "free service", it cannot be a free service.

I think he was on about those who 'timed out of' being eligible to receive unemployment anymore..

What??

If my tax dollars are going to PP, how am i not paying for those abortions?

Because Abortions, as noted above are not a service provided for free by PP. The -most- you might pay as a taxpayer is a form of rent assistance because the room is in the PP building.

[Gatefan1976]

How is it going to disenfranchise them???

Because people on the lower end of the economic scale simply cannot afford to pay double to 5 times the amount for nessesities such as clothing.

Well at least it will keep the Mermaids away!

Never trust a mermaid, they are evil, tricky creatures.......
*Shoot's Ariel*

Don't forget all the political red tape, taxes etc..

Yup

I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it, if they applied these rules EVENLY across the board. But how many times have you seen a driver pass you, when the driver's head was turned around cause they were chatting/yelling at someone in the back seat, gabbing on their phone etc?

Yup.

PS, i just got back from Gencon last night, so am playing catch up...

BASTARD!!!!

[Annoyed]

What i would like to know, is why we never seem to hear of Republicans having 'super delegates', and only Dems having them..?

Because the Republicans don't have them. Within the limits imposed by law, each party is free to organize and regulate itself as it sees fit.
The leadership of the Democratic party simply wanted to have a way to stack the deck so they wrote themselves one.
And you can bet the farm that there are members of the Republican party who wished they had also done that.

[Gatefan1976]

Hillary won without the Super delegates.
As for why they exist:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...legates-213921

[Annoyed]

From the cited article:

Well, here’s why. There are some circumstances where the “will of the voters”—often the will of a plurality of voters—may well put the party on the road to a massive political defeat. Further, it may result in the nomination of a candidate who violates the most fundamental beliefs of that party. Or whose temperament and character might put a dangerous, unfit person into the Oval Office. Under those circumstances, the existence of a bloc of superdelegates means the presence of an “emergency brake,” a last chance to avoid disaster. And while it may be “undemocratic” in the narrowest sense of that term, our political system is replete with “undemocratic” elements that have served us very well.

Bzzzt! Sorry, Wrong Answer! Thanks for playing.

At least in my opinion.

It is not the proper place of the party management to 2nd guess the voters. Under ANY circumstances.

If the voters go for someone who is unelectable, so be it. The party loses this time around.

We are likely to see that exact scenario play out this year, but for the Republicans. But I've opposed the Republican party leadership's attempts to derail the choice of the the Republican primary voters just as much. If Trump is truly unelectable, we lose this time around.

Going to be an expensive loss if it does play out this way.

[Falcon Horus]

What i would like to know, is why we never seem to hear of Republicans having 'super delegates', and only Dems having them..?

Because the Republicans don't have them.

Sorry Annoyed, but I'm afraid I have to correct you.

From Does The GOP Have Superdelegates? The Republican Party's Nomination Rules Are Different This Year (February 2016):

The technical answer is that yes, the Republican Party does have superdelegates. However, they function differently for the GOP than Democrats, and in 2016, Republican superdelegates will have way, way less power and autonomy than the superdelegates on the Democratic side.

Don't forget imo one of the worst of the bunch... INHERITANCE tax!!

How much is it?

In comparison - the inheritance tax for Belgium:

Calculated on everything the deceased had in his/her possession at the time of their passing (in euro).

First degree connection between deceased and the one who stands to inherit (married, civil partnership, parent to child, child to parent)
Between 0 & 50,000 - 3%
Between 50,000 & 250,000 - 9%
Above 250,000 - 27%

Second degree connection (inheritance between siblings, grandparents to grandchildren)
Between 0 & 75,000 - 30%
Between 75,000 & 125,000 - 55%
Above 125,000 - 65%

No connection between the deceased and the one who stands to inherit
Between 0 & 75,000 - 45%
Between 75,000 & 125,000 - 55%
Above 125,000 - 65%

Then you also need to count in schooling.. It used to be our students would generally be ranked higher than other nations. Now we are what, 5th?

LOL!! 5th ...

According to the Top 20 Best Education Systems Countries In The World the USA ranks ...

18. United States of America : Most people thought that the United States would be able to rank highly due to its financial muscle but this is far from the reality. The US needs to work on their high school graduation rates and their early childhood education in order to rank highly.

However, you do have the best universities, or some of the best anyway.
In 2008 my alma mater landed on 72 -- I believe it has fallen out of the top 100 since, and Ghent has made its way in. Not sure.

There's even a list on national IQ-scores, the US is at place 9 with 98% (Belgium's at 8 with 99% -- we're 1% smarter ... actually I have no idea what that percentage stands for ).

But how many times have you seen a driver pass you, when the driver's head was turned around cause they were chatting/yelling at someone in the back seat, gabbing on their phone etc?

More talking on the phone, and less turning of the head.
My route to work doesn't have children in backseats.

[Gatefan1976]

From the cited article:


Bzzzt! Sorry, Wrong Answer! Thanks for playing.

At least in my opinion.

BZZZ sorry, your opinion means squat.
The Republican party and Democratic party are PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS. They do not have to let you vote at all.

It is not the proper place of the party management to 2nd guess the voters. Under ANY circumstances.

Yes, yes it is. The primary process allows parties to "take the pulse" of the people, they are effectively asking for your opinion, and they are not beholden to your opinion -unless that is their own rules-, and they write their own rules.
Here:
http://chriskeniston2016.com/primary-elections/

If the voters go for someone who is unelectable, so be it. The party loses this time around.

No.

We are likely to see that exact scenario play out this year, but for the Republicans. But I've opposed the Republican party leadership's attempts to derail the choice of the the Republican primary voters just as much. If Trump is truly unelectable, we lose this time around.

Only if the RNC allows it, or is forced by their own rules to abide by it. I -think- they still have options if they want to ditch him, but they are rapidly running out of time to act on them.

Going to be an expensive loss if it does play out this way.

How?
Tax rates will change on things that don't affect you at all?
The drop of the estate tax threshold from 5.5 million to 3.5 million is going to destroy you?
The personal income tax rates on brackets you are no where near will go up?
Average joe, slogging his guts out to stop taxes on the people better off than they are..........

[Annoyed]

Most expensive will be the SCOTUS.

[Gatefan1976]

Did you have any complaints when the SCOTUS was Republican dominated?

[Annoyed]

In my opinion, it should be dominated by Conservative/Republicans.

Obviously, I expect you would think otherwise.

[Gatefan1976]

In my opinion, it should be dominated by Conservative/Republicans.

Obviously, I expect you would think otherwise.

I expect them to be Apolitical. Law based on party political affiliation is as bad as law based on religion.

[SoulReaver]

In my opinion, it should be dominated by Conservative/Republicans.

in other words to hell with civil liberties & human rights