amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
Meh, tying individual income tax returns to net worth is kind of a guessing game. Last I checked, Forbes listed him at $4.something billion and with his property holdings that’s probably not a bad estimate.
No. It's the entire point of the system.It's a fluke of how our system works that he (Trump) won.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
The least this 'billionaire' could do is pay more in taxes than I did.
Meh, tying individual income tax returns to net worth is kind of a guessing game. Last I checked, Forbes listed him at $4.something billion and with his property holdings that’s probably not a bad estimate.
They can fivestars all they want about it, but what are their policy proposals? Take a Byzantine tax system and make it even more opaque?Its indicative of the socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor all these "progressive communists" are *****ing about.
They can fivestars all they want about it, but what are their policy proposals? Take a Byzantine tax system and make it even more opaque?
It frustrates me as an American overseas because I’m still obliged to file even on my meager income, and if I want to do anything financial of any significance I run into regulatory burdens that no Canadians, Britons, Australians, etc. face. It’s ridiculous!
Hate to agree w/ this guy but calling someone a Nazi really does dilute the word.Again, I ask. Where are these teaming legions of Nazis, or these Nazis allegedly running the U.S. Government.
They can fivestars all they want about it, but what are their policy proposals? Take a Byzantine tax system and make it even more opaque?
It frustrates me as an American overseas because I’m still obliged to file even on my meager income, and if I want to do anything financial of any significance I run into regulatory burdens that no Canadians, Britons, Australians, etc. face. It’s ridiculous!
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
The least this 'billionaire' could do is pay more in taxes than I did.
Is the answer to the eternal question of how could Bloomberg best spend his money, to buy up the $400m in debt and use it to just control Trump if he wins?
Hate to agree w/ this guy but calling someone a Nazi really does dilute the word.
Is the answer to the eternal question of how could Bloomberg best spend his money, to buy up the $400m in debt and use it to just control Trump if he wins?
My thoughts on this are that the Democrats lack the power to stop the nomination, and making the Supreme Court into an issue is bad because it is a winning issue for the Republicans (mostly since they have the power, but also because their demented legions of "abortion is the worst genocide in history" people care about this waaaaaaaaay more than even the most devoted RBG fans do).
This morning, I dove into 2016 CCES data (50,000+ person national survey). Only 15% of Clinton's voters at least leaned pro-life and 11% held mixed views (74% at least leaned pro-choice). But 22% of Trump's voters at least leaned pro-choice and another 13% held mixed views.
Although Trump downplayed abortion in 2016, voters w/ mostly pro-choice attitudes made up more than a fifth of his support in plenty of battleground states:
25% in Iowa
24% in Florida
24% in Pennsylvania
24% in Michigan
21% in Arizona
20% in Wisconsin
20% in Ohio
Economic inequality helps Republicans electorally & does not make public favor redistribution. It is associated with bipartisan support for financial deregulation & an increase in the neg effect of status quo bias on reducing inequality
Inequality does not lead the public to favor policies that reduce it. It makes racially biased citizens less egalitarian & more supportive of Republicans. More Republican control in Congress increases inequality, which in turn increases Republican control.
Increasing inequality has been associated with financial deregulation, which further increses inequality. Several of the small number of major laws that still pass with bipartisan support were inequality inducing, while those that reduce inequality were limited in effect
As inequality rises, negative effects of status quo biases in American institutions on reducing inequality rise. It’s not general polarization, but specific combo of high top income shares & institutional constraints that create spiral of rising political & econ inequality 4/4
Hate to agree w/ this guy but calling someone a Nazi really does dilute the word.
Completely agree. Frankly I think the Democrats should just waive all debate/hearings on Barrett and maybe even boycott the hearings entirely, citing the Republicans hypocrisy in not sticking to their "election year rule" as justification. Its obvious that Barrett is 100% getting confirmed no matter what. The Kavanaugh confirmation demonstrated that. Participating in the hearings just gives the Republicans an opportunity to style on the Democrats, humiliate them and spike the ball. This whole confirmation is just a victory lap for the Republicans. The Democrats should deny them that as much as possible by not showing up. Boycotting the hearing would shift all the focus onto the Republicans hypocrisy and deny them the sham "fight" that they want. It would also ensure that the hearings were over as quickly as possible so we can go back to focusing on covid and the rest of the Trump administration's failures. In fact, I suspect that if the Democrats boycott the hearings and just label them as a farce and a sham and a distraction, they will drain all the drama out of the hearings and the networks won't even want to cover them as they will be too boring with just Republicans present.I think the Supreme Court is a winning issue for the Republicans because, ultimately, for Democrats it's a hopeless fight. The issue is plain as day: Republicans have the power to control appointments to the court and they're using it. To get the power Democrats need to win the elections. The best way to do that is keep the election about losing issues for the Republicans, COVID and the failure of governance around it. The Supreme Court is a winning issue for the Republicans, at least imo.
I'm thinking that a 6-3 Conservative majority overturning Roe v. Wade could be a political watershed event for Democrats. I guess we'll get to see soon enough.The background to this is that I'm not sure many Democrats truly get the extent to which abortion opponents are committed to this thing. Their level of commitment is frightening, far beyond even the most devoted fans of RBG. We do not want to induce them to turn out en masse because suddenly the election is about Roe v Wade, even though the issue around the court is settled for now because, win or lose the election, the Republicans are appointing the next justice.
Ironically, I think a video like this is more likely to make Trump supporters think that maybe Hitler wasn't all that bad, than to think that they themselves are bad for supporting Trump... or that Trump is bad for being like Hitler.
Ironically, I think a video like this is more likely to make Trump supporters think that maybe Hitler wasn't all that bad, than to think that they themselves are bad for supporting Trump... or that Trump is bad for being like Hitler.
If he were a "better" Hitler we'd probably all be dead by now... so I guess we can be thankful for that.Worst Hitler ever! I mean aside from that other Hitler.