-
Comment -
Yeah the 11 million people that do all the crap work & pay tax's but don't get the same rights. There the problem, LOL try looking at your own party. Your so stupid.Comment -
Hey you want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale. I will give you a good price. LOLComment -
and cost us far more than they contribute?
yep, most people with logic would call that a problem... lol think before you post khicks, I swear you can do it.
and I got a good chuckle at the "pay tax's" part. Back to posting inaccurate information again. What else do you have though really? just lies.Comment -
this bum never had a job until he was elected into office at 40Comment -
^lol exactly
I can imagine the exact thought in his head when he had an epiphany for how he was going to make a living finally haha. Very much like L. ron hubbard; preyed on stupid people.
well, stop doing it. More people are not leaving the country than entering. Walls work. Illegal aliens DO NOT pay their fair share. In fact, they cost us a fortune every year. Illegal aliens are also far more likely to be on welfare than whites or blacks. This trend will not change with their children when you consider the terrible education system. Speaking of, investing $1 into education will not put out $6. In gambling/investing that is called throwing good money after bad.
so you tell me your reasons for lying to me khicks because you are, in fact, lying to me and it hurts me. You know I put logic and facts above all else so why must you cut me deep like this over and over with your lies?Last edited by brooks85; 02-24-16, 05:41 PM.Comment -
lol I'm being silly, it doesn't hurt me. But anyways I can prove what you say is wrong, I just won't do it more than once so it's upon you to correct yourself buddy. Think about it, why would I keep proving you wrong on the same things over and over when all I should have to do is prove it once?
I've already proved you wrong on the lie that more people are leaving than entering. Of course, you made the claim therefore you need to prove it. The problem, as you know, is if you went to prove it those things you hate, numbers, wouldn't add up in your favor.
As far as everything else from illegals costing a fortune to education system being a joke I have already proved to you with posted links. You just have this ability to ignore why you don't like to hear/read...Last edited by brooks85; 02-24-16, 05:54 PM.Comment -
Your opinion & those of who you listen to are not facts. You have never proven me wrong. If someone post something that proves you wrong, you just say its a lie.
Your like (How can I say this) Oh I know
"Thick as a brick" is a phrase meaning stubbornly dumb, as one's head is so thick that no new thoughts can enter it. The song starts with Ian Anderson expressing his low expectations for his target ("I may make you feel but I can't make you think") before singing about class structures, conformity, and the rigid moralistic beliefs of the establishment that perpetuates it.
The song follows a young boy who sees two career paths: soldier and artist. He chooses the life of a soldier, just like his father. We see him assimilate into the society he once rebelled against, becoming just like his dad.
LOLComment -
Most important poker stat is YGTHB.
You Got To Have BallsComment -
liar is a strong word and it fits. Purposely or not you're liar. You do not tell the truth. You intentionally tell the same false statements over and over. That is the very definition of a liar, look it up.
for example, I can ask you why would I pay you a 1000 points when you didn't(couldn't) meet the objectives? and you would reply with a lie that you know isn't true... lolComment -
Senator Bernie Sanders has proposed an ambitious program of social reform, including regulatory changes to raise wages and protect workers' rights, progressive tax reforms, and universal health insurance (Improved Medicare for All). Taken together, these policies would not only dramatically increase employment and national income, but would also raise wages, reduce poverty, and narrow the gap between rich and poor Americans.
The Sanders program will end wage stagnation. (See Figure 1.) I project that, under the Sanders program, real wages would grow by 2.5% a year, returning to the growth rates of the late 1990s. Faster wage growth would result from 1) faster economic growth, which would raise wages by improving the bargaining position of workers, and 2) government regulations restoring the real value of the minimum wage and protecting workers' rights to overtime pay, equal pay for women, and workers' right to organize unions. In addition, universal health insurance financed through progressive taxation would lift the burden of health insurance premiums off workers and employers, freeing up employers' expenses on labor to be paid in higher money wages.
Faster growth, pro-worker regulation, and universal health insurance would all help push wages up. (See Figure 2.) CBO economic forecasts imply that annual real wages for the average American worker will grow by about $1,300, or about 3%, for the next decade as a whole. Faster growth under the Sanders program would add about another $2,200 in average wages. Regulatory programs, notably a higher minimum wage, would add nearly another $3,000 - still more for women who would benefit from new pay-equity regulations. Finally, universal health insurance would add nearly another $5,000 for workers who would no longer have to pay private health insurance premiums. Only a small increase is expected in average wages from the Workplace Democracy Act - which would establish card-check unionization and first-contract arbitration - because these policies would likely do little to increase union membership.
Taxes on the wealthy would pay for widely shared benefits. (See Figure 3.) Sanders would finance expanded infrastructure, universal free pre-K education, free public higher education, universal health insurance, and other programs with progressive taxation and through the elimination of tax deductions for rich individuals and large corporations. While the benefits of the increased spending would be widely shared, increases in income taxes and other targeted tax changes would be borne mostly by the richest Americans; almost half of the tax changes would be paid by the richest 5% and nearly 30% by the richest 1%. In addition, measures like a financial transactions tax and elimination of favored tax treatment for fossil fuels would promote greater economic efficiency by discouraging economically and environmentally harmful activities.
The Sanders program would dramatically bring down poverty. (See Figure 4.) Since the 1960s, the U.S. poverty rate has remained stuck between 11% and 15%. Economic growth, as forecast by CBO, would do little to lower the poverty rate over the next decade. Faster growth and targeted increases in wages and Social Security benefits under the Sanders program, in contrast, would dramatically lower the poverty rate. Higher employment, higher wages, and, especially, increases in the minimum wage would lift virtually all working Americans and their families out of poverty. Increasing the minimum Social Security benefit and using a more appropriate price index to adjust benefits for inflation, meanwhile, would lift the elderly and disabled out of poverty.
Sanders's regulatory and tax programs would sharply reduce inequality. (See Figure 5.) The ratio of the average income of the richest 5% to that of the poorest 20% has increased from less than 11:1 in the early 1970s to about 23:1 today. Economic policy and growth rates forecast by the CBO would allow this ratio to widen further - to over 27:1 by 2026. While faster economic growth due to the Sanders program would narrow differentials slightly, this effect is limited because faster growth also increases corporate profits. By raising wages at the bottom, the Sanders regulatory program - especially the higher minimum wage - would do much more to reduce inequality. By ensuring that the rich pay their fair share of taxes, meanwhile, Sanders's progressive-taxation program will also dramatically bring down inequality.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/3...uld-sanders-doComment -
Comment -
Thank you.Republicans hang out in a Sanders thread for a majority of the day but won't answer a very simple question. So socialism is okay for bank bailouts but democratic socialism used to lower US child hood poverty is a bad idea? Honestly. I am tired of making conservative's look stupid in this forum.Comment -
I knew you never wrote it but how can you possibly know I didn't read it? Oh and as far as his plan goes, common sense overrides any one of those fake positive analysis. It's kinda like that preacher and his wife who drive Bentleys and fly in private jets doing "God's work" while taking even $10 from a poor person. He'll walk around in his $2000 suites just before he goes sailing on his luxury yacht and people will still believe!
BS is like that guy from Office Space. No really knows why he's there, but he is. When he leaves, no one will ever notice. Just like no one noticed him in Washington for the last 25-years.
Last edited by DwightShrute; 02-24-16, 11:01 PM.Comment -
Well maybe you read after I said something. But I also doubt that. As for your comparison of the analysis to a fake preacher. Well that's just a BS comeback, & makes me doubt even more that you read it.Comment -
We lowered tax's & deregulated our ourselves into this mess. All started by your boy Reagan. What makes you think we have money to fight wars with ISIS, Iran, deport 11 million people & build a giant wall for no reason at all? All while lowering taxs on the rich & waiting for it to trickle down. Pretty much what we have been doing for the last 35 years.Comment -
Comment -
Trump loves you.
LOLComment -
You got to love a guy that tells it like it is. LOL
Your going to see a lot of this over the next few days. Just saying.Comment -
Do you play poker Dwight?Comment -
Comment
