patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,192,904 comments by 13,872 users - Booger, Ceffer, mell, The_Deplorable online now
A president that actually stands up for the best interests of the US
invite response
2018 Jul 15, 2:20pm 10,651 views 48 comments
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 48 of 48 Search these comments
41
LeonDurham
2018 Jul 17, 9:16am
CBOEtrader says
Not sure what "the same logic" is. In true communism there is no rich and no poor, so your point is moot.
But, regardless, nobody is proposing Communism so who cares?
By the same logic, ending communism would benefit the rich more than the poor. Accept the facts, eh comrade?
Not sure what "the same logic" is. In true communism there is no rich and no poor, so your point is moot.
But, regardless, nobody is proposing Communism so who cares?
42
WookieMan
2018 Jul 17, 9:52am
WookieMan
2018 Jul 17, 9:52am
LeonDurham says
How so? Feel free to point out how the wealthy in the states I list won't pay more in federal income taxes. I'm not talking about people making $150k either. More then that. The wealthy in blue states (high income and property tax ones) are going to take a bath most likely when filing in early 2019. It's a drop in the bucket for most of them, but many will pay more due to the $10k cap. This isn't wrong and if it is, show me the way (Frampton).
No, that's wrong. There is much more to the tax law than that.
How so? Feel free to point out how the wealthy in the states I list won't pay more in federal income taxes. I'm not talking about people making $150k either. More then that. The wealthy in blue states (high income and property tax ones) are going to take a bath most likely when filing in early 2019. It's a drop in the bucket for most of them, but many will pay more due to the $10k cap. This isn't wrong and if it is, show me the way (Frampton).
43
LeonDurham
2018 Jul 17, 9:58am
WookieMan says
What you say isn't wrong, it's incomplete. Implying that's all the law does is what I say isn't correct. The law does much more than just penalize blue states (many of which have already designed their own workarounds). The law basically borrows $84T from future generations and gives it to the top 1%.
How so? Feel free to point out how the wealthy in the states I list won't pay more in federal income taxes. I'm not talking about people making $150k either. More then that. The wealthy in blue states (high income and property tax ones) are going to take a bath most likely when filing in early 2019. It's a drop in the bucket for most of them, but many will pay more due to the $10k cap. This isn't wrong and if it is, show me the way (Frampton).
What you say isn't wrong, it's incomplete. Implying that's all the law does is what I say isn't correct. The law does much more than just penalize blue states (many of which have already designed their own workarounds). The law basically borrows $84T from future generations and gives it to the top 1%.
44
WookieMan
2018 Jul 17, 9:58am
WookieMan
2018 Jul 17, 9:58am
Patrick says
Totally understand and get the motive behind it. Problem is that when you put someone on ignore and they come back with a different username (email as well) it sometimes can be hard to identify the person. There's a reason they were put on ignore. There's no perfect solution obviously, but the fact people need/want to change their usernames speaks volumes to that type of person.
If you can't stand behind your history of posting here, then you probably have bigger problems. I tend to try and avoid those types of people. It's generally anonymous after all here, so I just don't get it.
The idea for getting rid of it was to get people to read past the username and actually look at the point the user is making.
Totally understand and get the motive behind it. Problem is that when you put someone on ignore and they come back with a different username (email as well) it sometimes can be hard to identify the person. There's a reason they were put on ignore. There's no perfect solution obviously, but the fact people need/want to change their usernames speaks volumes to that type of person.
If you can't stand behind your history of posting here, then you probably have bigger problems. I tend to try and avoid those types of people. It's generally anonymous after all here, so I just don't get it.
45
LeonDurham
2018 Jul 17, 10:46am
WookieMan says
I'll chime in--I have changed usernames. Once I forgot the password to the email account it was tied to because I no longer used it so I just created a new user here. After that, I created new users because moderators kept stifling free speech and killing my posts because I dared speak the truth about the moderators.
@Patrick - I recall in the past there was a way to see different aliases if a user changed their name. Anyway to reimplement that? Not going to point out specific people, but I can identify at least 4 in this thread that have changed their username multiple times. Not sure why that would be necessary. Been enjoying my summer and not spending a lot of time here, but when I come back and everyone has different names it's a little confusing.
I'll chime in--I have changed usernames. Once I forgot the password to the email account it was tied to because I no longer used it so I just created a new user here. After that, I created new users because moderators kept stifling free speech and killing my posts because I dared speak the truth about the moderators.
47
lostand confused
2018 Jul 17, 8:13pm
lostand confused
2018 Jul 17, 8:13pm
WookieMan says
But isn't that what blue states have been saying-rich have to apy their fair share?
The rich in the blue states will make up a lot of the reduced tax revenue for those that got cuts
But isn't that what blue states have been saying-rich have to apy their fair share?
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 48 of 48 Search these comments
Very different from Clinton, Bush, and Obama. How bow da?!?!?