Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Rich

US Politics

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/thesaurus/progressive

It isn't misleading and has literally nothing to do with anyone's opinion. They are synonymous terms, with the word progressive having its origins from the Latin word progredi, which literally translates to advance or forward.

It's definitely misleading if/when applied to those in the political spectrum that are labeling themselves "progressives".  They are actually the furthest thing from it!  That's the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

No. What you are trying to say is very misleading. You are factually incorrect, there is no opinion here. Please stop spreading misinformation. 

Progressive and forward-thinking are EXACTLY that by the very definition of synonymous.

 

OK, I get what you are saying. It's factually correct to say that progressive and forward-thinking are the same, and it's just the people right now in the political sphere who are labeling themselves progressive, because they are actually not forward thinking, that are being factually incorrect.  I get it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I

Asking the super rich to pay more is not anti-rich or anti-business.  Its pro-human.

and as has been demonstrated in every country that this has been tried, the "pro-human" types end up taxing nothing, as the super-rich head out the door.  Even uber-leftist and Fidel Castro super-friend Gerard Depardieu high-tailed it out of France when they brought in a tax on the super-rich, proving the hypocrisy is alive and well in all of these far-left celebrities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

OK, I get what you are saying. It's factually correct to say that progressive and forward-thinking are the same,  I get it now.

this ^^

and less this ↓↓

6 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

 and it's just the people right now in the political sphere who are labeling themselves progressive, because they are actually not forward thinking, that are being factually incorrect. 

One portion is fact (hint: the first portion) and one section is opinion (hint:the second portion)

 

2 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

and as has been demonstrated in every country that this has been tried, the "pro-human" types end up taxing nothing, as the super-rich head out the door.  Even uber-leftist and Fidel Castro super-friend Gerard Depardieu high-tailed it out of France when they brought in a tax on the super-rich, proving the hypocrisy is alive and well in all of these far-left celebrities.

What is going on here? We are at risk of losing Gerard Depardieu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wideleft said:

No.... he's the worst, too.

Off topic, but Nixon for example was much worse. He attempted to stall peace talks to end the Vietnam war, to help himself get elected. 

Quote

Eventually, Nixon won by just 1 percent of the popular vote. “Once in office he escalated the war into Laos and Cambodia, with the loss of an additional 22,000 American lives, before finally settling for a peace agreement in 1973 that was within grasp in 1968,” says the BBC.

That's about as vile as it gets.

 

Edited by Mark F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

this ^^

and less this ↓↓

Well of course you want less of the latter, because you want to sell the myth that "progessive" (ie Left-wing politicians) are "forward thinking (the myth).  This is not the case, as much as the Left are trying to push this false narrative.

 

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

What is going on here? We are at risk of losing Gerard Depardieu?

The country is at risk of losing it's most wealthy, who, despite claims to the contrary, create jobs and wealth.  Venezuela chased all of their capital and investment and rich people out, and look where that got them.  It's a doomed strategy that will always fail, as long as the mega-wealthy have somewhere else to go.  Taxing zero wealth at 70% is less tax revenue than taxing billions of dollars at 40%.  They never get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

WHy?

What about her plan is batshit crazy?

What part of her plan isn't?  Where is she going to get the money???

Chasing Amazon out of New York has pretty much doomed her.  It's nice to promise unicorn farts and pixie dust, but when you kill real jobs and cost people actual money, it's not fun and games anymore.  Even DeBlasio couldn't believe she was that clued out, and he's right up there with the most regressive "progressive" leftists.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2019/02/18/bill-de-blasio-aoc-didnt-understand-amazon-dealat-all-n2541634

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

lol so Gerard depardieu is the authority on tax. Hahaha. Imagine irrationally attacking AOC using a fox opinion piece and Gerard Depardieu. 

This is pretty ignorant.  It's like you are deliberately putting your head in the sand to not understand basic tax concepts.  How are you supposed to be taken seriously with comments like this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Off topic, but Nixon for example was much worse. He attempted to stall peace talks to end the Vietnam war, to help himself get elected. 

That's about as vile as it gets.

 

Having read a lot about the Vietnam war, and having been there twice (and truly realizing what a stupid freaking horrible waste of humanity that war was) I can safely say that the BBC is not telling the entire story (surprise surprise).  And if you want to blame politicians for Vietnam, Kennedy and Johnson wear a lot of shame as Kennedy started a stupid useless war, and Johnson escalated it dramatically.  Nixon ended the war, though he really didn't have much choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

lol so Gerard depardieu is the authority on tax. Hahaha. Imagine irrationally attacking AOC using a fox opinion piece and Gerard Depardieu. 

 

8 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

This is pretty ignorant.  It's like you are deliberately putting your head in the sand to not understand basic tax concepts.  How are you supposed to be taken seriously with comments like this?

WHo is being ignorant? Dude, YOU were the one who brought up Gerard Depardieu...

 

How can you be taken serious when you twist reality around to try and support your narrative. I don't even understand if you have a point anymore- you don't have any valid arguments, you misrepresent facts, propagate lies and distort the truth to try and support a false reality. 

 

Please stop trying to derail this thread and get it locked. 

Edited by wanna-b-fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Mueller recommends no further indictments.  

 

38 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Thought for sure Don Jr. would be.

 

Oh, I don't think anyone is in the clear yet....

 

Seth Abramson's take on it is pretty interesting, he kind of explains the more nuanced aspects of the investigation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

WHo is being ignorant? Dude, YOU were the one who brought up Gerard Depardieu...

yes, as an example of a hypocrite who wanted super-high taxes, and then ran to Belgium when they actually were implemented.  Perfect example.  The wealthy are able to transition to lower-tax jurisdictions, and so if you implement high tax rates, they leave, and you get nothing.  Nada.  High tax rates DON'T WORK.  It's that simple.  

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

How can you be taken serious when you twist reality around to try and support your narrative.

I can ask you the exact same question.

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

I don't even understand if you have a point anymore- you don't have any valid arguments, you misrepresent facts, propagate lies and distort the truth to try and support a false reality. 

Right back at you.

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Please stop trying to derail this thread and get it locked. 

Please stop accusing me of this.  And take a long hard look in the mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

yes, as an example of a hypocrite who wanted super-high taxes, and then ran to Belgium when they actually were implemented.  Perfect example.  The wealthy are able to transition to lower-tax jurisdictions, and so if you implement high tax rates, they leave, and you get nothing.  Nada.  High tax rates DON'T WORK.  It's that simple.  

I can ask you the exact same question.

Right back at you.

Please stop accusing me of this.  And take a long hard look in the mirror.

Thanks for your opinion, I disagree and respect your right to say it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

What part of her plan isn't?  Where is she going to get the money???

She already told everyone, taxing the super wealthy. They can afford it and still be stupidly rich. In fact that's how it was in America when it was as great as people want to make it again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

She already told everyone, taxing the super wealthy. They can afford it and still be stupidly rich. In fact that's how it was in America when it was as great as people want to make it again. 

You can’t make the blind see.  It’s not even about AOC’s plan being perfect. The right has moved so far right they’re effectively plugging their ears, covering their eyes and yelling na na na na na I cant hear you. 

And they are scared to death of AOC. Because these once-“crazy” ideas are gaining more and more traction with people. They are becoming “Center” or moderate ideas.  There’s no point on engaging with the white nationalists because they don’t hear anything that isn’t their own narrow minded perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

And that has never worked before and won't work now.  Taxing the "super wealthy" won't provide the funds needed, even if some of the super wealthy stick around to pay the taxes (they won't).  This is a tried and true failed path.  It won't work and will result in mass suffering. 

 

And how is trickle down economics working out? Increasing wealth gap, more consolidation of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people....

What they're doing now ain't working, why not try what DID in fact work in the past? You are a hardcore conservative I get that, you buy their economic principles but the truth is that those ideas only work for the wealthy no one else. The times they are a changing, the super wealthy need to start paying more or the entire thing will devolve into feudalism again. Not that they're trying to fight that, it's really their ideal. It keeps up there's going to be a repeat of the events of the french revolution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

You can’t make the blind see.  It’s not even about AOC’s plan being perfect. The right has moved so far right they’re effectively plugging their ears, covering their eyes and yelling na na na na na I cant hear you. 

oh man, the irony in the above statement is just off the charts.  Where's my irony detector?  Oh it just exploded.

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

And they are scared to death of AOC.

Not really.  The DNC is scared to death of Omar and AOC.  They are so scared of Omar they had to introduce a bill because of her rampant anti-Semitism.  Omar can't even stop herself from tearing down Obama, which is just so mind-numbingly stupid it is beyond belief, if you are a Dem supporter.  If AOC and Omar are the new face of the Democratic party, get used to losing a lot of elections.  And supporting racist anti-semites.

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

Because these once-“crazy” ideas are gaining more and more traction with people. They are becoming “Center” or moderate ideas.  There’s no point on engaging with the white nationalists because they don’t hear anything that isn’t their own narrow minded perspective. 

I don't agree about not engaging with white nationalists, obviously, because here I am engaging with you.  I think anybody and everybody should be engaged with, because just because you apply a label to someone doesn't make it true.  It's just a label that seeks to further divide people via identity politics.  "Crazy" ideas becoming center or moderate ideas does have some historical basis, however, the true test is if these ideas actually are sustainable, or if they turn your country into Venezuela.  When ideas become reality, and that reality results in the greater good being served.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

And how is trickle down economics working out? Increasing wealth gap, more consolidation of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people....

This is great rhetoric but I am from the 1970's, and can honestly say that people are a lot better off now then they were then.  When I look at how I grew up, definitely as "middle class" at that time, we'd be considered poverty level now, given what metrics are being used to measure these things.  You preach doom and gloom, I say that's a load of bunk.  Do wages need to go up?  I think so.   And they are going up.  Should the wealthy share more of the pie?  Yes.  Is that government's problem?  I say no. 

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

What they're doing now ain't working, why not try what DID in fact work in the past?

Except that it is working, and if you are saying "taxing the super wealthy" worked in the past, I say that I have bridge over Lake Okanagan to sell you.

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

 

You are a hardcore conservative I get that,

What's with this obsession of labeling people?  So if I am a 'hard-core conservative", what are you?  A hard core communist? 

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

 

 

you buy their economic principles but the truth is that those ideas only work for the wealthy no one else.

This is just ignorant propaganda.

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

The times they are a changing, the super wealthy need to start paying more or the entire thing will devolve into feudalism again. Not that they're trying to fight that, it's really their ideal. It keeps up there's going to be a repeat of the events of the french revolution. 

If you do any research, the only time revolutions start is when people don't have anything to eat.  The Czars would still be running Russia if they had had the brains to give the people bread (well not really, they'd have evolved to a constitutional government by now).  What you are doing is buying into propaganda.  "Everything is bad".  It's just not true.  Human civilization is at its historic peak.  More people than ever are living free of poverty.  Technology has provided amazing advances in medicine and human comfort.  Why is everyone so willing to buy into the 'everything sucks" propaganda?  Why the glumness?  Why the negativity?  Turn that frown upside down! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...