TRUMP for Prez

Originally Posted by DenverRider

I've been noticing that the big Trump supporters from when this thread started are all gone now. Certainly there are some Hillary bashers left along with conservatives that believe in non Trump GOP candidates but nobody is left to actually say good things about Trump. Grant got this thread started and he hasn't come back to it in months and is probably embarrassed to have his name associated with it. Delta is still on the Trump train but as you can see, he's probably going to hang on to hope until election day and then lose it completely. We'll see a news story about how he strapped a bomb to his chest and blew up a taco hut full of "illegals" aka hipsters having some Mexican food for lunch.

I don't think Grant is embarrassed. I will not give up hope because I don't see any meaningful issues that motivate independents, youth and minorities to get behind. Democrats have been shown to be violent leftest that they are so I am pretty sure the independents will turn or not show in protest. Republicans are extremely motivated. The old people have not been scared into voting yet. Clinton can't even show up to a heavy democrat state to their disaster. Those things show who people are. Mondale was up on Reagan too.....

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Mondale was up on Reagan too.....

Never let facts get in the way of a silly argument... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ection.2C_1984

"Incumbent President Ronald Reagan led in all pre-election polls and was able to secure an easy victory over Democratic opponent Walter Mondale due to the improving economy and falling unemployment rate."

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Of course I am stirring the pot a bit, however I don't care what he does with the money. I don't donate to politics period. All I know is he is not Clinton just as Obama was not Bush for you guys. Anyone but Clinton to turn a phrase. I would not believe in ever poll or article. Republicans usually don't participate in polls and democrats don't usually show up especially when they are counting on youth, old and immigrants to get what they need. They have to be motivated and blacks are pissed at obama, youth really don't care right now. Immigrants may be motivated. Your standard hippie will show.

A lot of polls and analyst are historically accurate, and you still don't believe in them? It's no wonder you don't see the correlation of how a candidate spends campaign funds to their motivations of running the oval office.

You can stop trying to build a case that Hillary sucks, we all know it. Her favorably rating is lower than any recent president. She's still kicking the **** out of trump.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

I would like common sense welfare that does not destroy the family unit. Welfare was originally meant for the widow with children who could not qualify for anything else. It has morphed and has helped destroy the family. I think it is pretty well known that kids of two parent households do much better as adults on average. High crime areas are also the areas where the family has broken down. The stats of crime and poverty and the black family unit do not lie.

So you want welfare to be social engineering of the family unit? You made that clear by justifying it with your position on the benefits of two parent families.

You seem to be waffling. When you mentioned that it used to be only for widows I'm guessing that you said because you like that idea. I've kind of thought that welfare was mostly for the children. I believe that it's much harder to get if you don't have kids. But you want to make it easier for two non working adults to get it.

See my viewpoint on this is that no matter what you do you are going to hit the double edged sword. If you give it for an extended period to non working adults then you will be accused of discouraging them from working. If you give it with limitations to two non working adults then you are accused to splitting up the family. This is the problem that politicians face so it's no surprise that they have to flip flop or blow with the wind according to how their constituents have been most recently manipulated by the media.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the secrecy that Clinton has been exhibiting could be related to right wing wingnuts led by Faux News to twist the truth to extremes. The initial lie about the Benghazi video was related to the last election. IOW it served no purpose except to try and keep the right wing media from using it as an accusation of Obama being weak on terrorism. Most of everything going on in politics is disputing the function of our govt. People are so hung up on the lies and secrecy problems that they themselves created by being completely mindless and manipulated that the public really has no relevant input on what govt ought to be doing.

You would think that 4 years of Faux News lying to them about Clinton's role in Benghazi would have taught somebody on the right something. But apparently not.

don't make welfare very easy to get....

I always laugh when liberals dismiss fox news. It doesn't matter what the story is or how it was reported, if Fox news talks about it, it's crap

It's like when they reported that Romney(?) hates old people, hates women and wants to destroy the air.......

oh wait, that was ALL of the other media outlets AND Hollywood

makes you wonder why Fox news even came about. ALL of the other outlets, Hollywood, newspapers....etc....are so fair and unbiased


I'm convinced that Oprah had more to do with getting Ohbummer elected that any campaign financing did

and the left wants to complain about campaign reform and the Koch brothers..

I literally laugh every time....and will continue

Originally Posted by ord27

don't make welfare very easy to get....

I always laugh when liberals dismiss fox news. It doesn't matter what the story is or how it was reported, if Fox news talks about it, it's crap

It's like when they reported that Romney(?) hates old people, hates women and wants to destroy the air.......

oh wait, that was ALL of the other media outlets AND Hollywood

makes you wonder why Fox news even came about. ALL of the other outlets, Hollywood, newspapers....etc....are so fair and unbiased


I'm convinced that Oprah had more to do with getting Ohbummer elected that any campaign financing did

and the left wants to complain about campaign reform and the Koch brothers..

I literally laugh every time....and will continue

Dude, you're right! 17% of what they report on is found to be some degree of factually correct. So if you throw out the other 83% of their coverage you got a pretty good source of news. A close friend is a production manager for Fox and described it to me as "scripted drama disguised as news coverage". He went on to tell me the hardest part of his job mediating fights between producers and on-air talent when they won't stick to "script"

While writing this I turned on Fox and spot checked 4 statements through Google. All 4 completely contradict facts.

In doing so I found this one from yesterday:
http://www.vice.com/read/believe-me-...ing-the-mirage

My favorite:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8305/h...-aaron-bandler

But then you also have to remember just yesterday you said this:

Originally Posted by ord27

The system doesn't promote families staying together or people finding work. I see this every day. I even have conversations with people about why they don't work, or don't work two or more jobs.......handouts


trump might not be the one who could fix this. But I am certain, that any politician who talks about it.....commits political suicide. Sad state of affairs for sure

So when you laugh at people who call Fox News, Faux news. You should realize other people are not laughing with you, they're laughing at you.

Originally Posted by ord27

I always laugh when liberals dismiss fox news. It doesn't matter what the story is or how it was reported, if Fox news talks about it, it's crap

OK, I get it. You're not very discriminating about going back to liars for your information. Even notice when Faux News fans disparage the other news outlets hardly anyone defends them? But when people talk about Faux News that plenty of right wingers come to their defense.

You probably don't know this but defending Faux News by putting down the other 24/7 entertainment news outlets that nobody watches just supports the point that you are a 24/7 entertainment news tool.

Maybe now that Ailes is out, Fox will actually start doing some news. Fox's prime time lineup is just talking heads, no news. Heck, I've seen Hannity cite Breitbart as a source!

I'd love to see what fox could do with actual investigative reporting, even if it came with a slant. Would be much more persuasive and entertaining than watching Rudy, Newt and Hannity agree that one another's farts all smell good.

(with the demise of the daily show and colbert, Fox is now my go-to for newsy infotainment)

I'm aware that some of Fox news is hollywood. I'm also aware that msnbc and cnn are bias. you guys won't seem to admit to that ....like other things

whatever John. You are assuming that I even watch the news. That's not the point. I also understand that any other narrative doesn't fit your agenda.

I guess I need to fall in line and agree that:
Obama is the greatest
Hillary isn't corrupt and will lead us deeper into nirvana
we need to open the borders wide and far. Let all comers come. Make them citizens immediately

have multiple national languages, government documents printed in these languages
water down school so that everybody passes
increase all welfare to all that want it

ignore excess

limit all campaign finance except from labor unions, hollywood, bias news, and of course.....soros

make it so a guy who makes pizza, gets paid a minimum of $31,200 a year, plus a 401k, health insurance, dental, paid time off.....a company car? what else?

charge all of that back to the business owner who needs 12 handicap parking places, multiple language menus, 60% or more employees of color, astronomical amounts of insurance to protect from frivolous law suits......etc.....

I could do this all day.....

If fox news supports some of my concerns, even in a hollywood fashion....and all other news outlets call me a bigot, racist, selfish, say I didn't build that and that I ought to kiss the government sidewalk in praise............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .......

I will defend Fox every day and twice on sundays

And I don't really give a **** who laughs...

Originally Posted by ord27

whatever John. You are assuming that I even watch the news. That's not the point. I also understand that any other narrative doesn't fit your agenda.

I guess I need to fall in line and agree that:
Obama is the greatest
Hillary isn't corrupt and will lead us deeper into nirvana
we need to open the borders wide and far. Let all comers come. Make them citizens immediately

have multiple national languages, government documents printed in these languages
water down school so that everybody passes
increase all welfare to all that want it

ignore excess

limit all campaign finance except from labor unions, hollywood, bias news, and of course.....soros

make it so a guy who makes pizza, gets paid a minimum of $31,200 a year, plus a 401k, health insurance, dental, paid time off.....a company car? what else?

charge all of that back to the business owner who needs 12 handicap parking places, multiple language menus, 60% or more employees of color, astronomical amounts of insurance to protect from frivolous law suits......etc.....

I could do this all day.....

If fox news supports some of my concerns, even in a hollywood fashion....and all other news outlets call me a bigot, racist, selfish, say I didn't build that and that I ought to kiss the government sidewalk in praise............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .......

I will defend Fox every day and twice on sundays

And I don't really give a **** who laughs...

I'll save you the time and paraphrase this for you John: Cliff lives in his own fears, He likes Fox News because they placate him, facts and history do not have a place at the table.

Cliff's a blaring example of the damage that Trump has done to the GOP. The GOP is no longer the party of conservative values, but the party of less educated, older, white men only. Here is a news fact that didn't come from CNN, MSNBC, and certainly not Fox; The voting population is larger, more diverse (culturally and socially), more educated, and overall younger. So in Honky Tonk talk that means, youre not part of an enlightened minority, you're part of group that country is out growing.

Originally Posted by ord27

I'm aware that some of Fox news is hollywood. I'm also aware that msnbc and cnn are bias. you guys won't seem to admit to that ....like other things

Cable news of any ilk is for morons. It's info-tainment. Won't catch me arguing that CNN is better than CNBC or whatever. They are ALL for morons. If you rely on TV for your news.... well... Cliff I know from reading your posts you are smarter than that.

Better is to sample from a variety of sources. NPR, Christian Science Monitor, Reuters, and Politico are my go-tos. Then I'll peruse the Fox website from time to time to see what they're keying in on. Meet the Press on sunday mornings (other than boating season) too.

whatever doudlemwa

I've had these concerns long before Trump was in the national eye

I've seen what government can do to small business, both good and bad. Left unopposed, things would get ugly

and doublemwa, what part of my post isn't something that's in the national headlines?

here you go...

how about: you're someone that watches the main stream news outlet. You enjoy boating, wakeboarding, surfing...etc.

one day, someone approaches you, or posts something on your favorite chat board, saying that your favorite waterway is being targeted by people who want to limit the boat size to 18 feet, no wake enhancement devices, no music, and a speed limit of 15 mph. Or better yet, no gasoline powered engines and no swimming. Knowing that you don't always see eye to eye on issues with this guy, you accuse him of getting his info from the notorious Kitty Kitty news station......you poo poo his concerns. You might even call him a fear monger and a variety of other names. You might question his education, up bringing, values, and quickly put him into a category for the old, fearful, southern redneck.....

Then one day, when you try to launch your beautiful new X45 or VLX, you are turned away. Prohibited from launching

Perhaps you should have addressed this guys fears, concerns. Perhaps it would have been good to have a real conversation about what he thought, or heard, or witnessed in other areas, instead of ignoring his fears and calling him names

Now, with the brink and mortar real estate, family businesses, culturally sensitive businesses....things get a bit more real than where you can boat

I understand if my fears and concerns aren't yours. But when you dismiss people's fears and concerns for to long, without real conversations and solutions....."What we've got here is failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach...
So, you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it!
Well, he gets it!
N' I don't like it any more than you men." *

cue the rest of Guns and Roses.....

Originally Posted by doublemwa

A lot of polls and analyst are historically accurate, and you still don't believe in them? It's no wonder you don't see the correlation of how a candidate spends campaign funds to their motivations of running the oval office.

You can stop trying to build a case that Hillary sucks, we all know it. Her favorably rating is lower than any recent president. She's still kicking the **** out of trump.

I know exactly why people run for president. It is YOU who has trouble understanding that Clinton got stinking rich from it. They all do it. Understand that and quit trying to point as Trump being the only one.

Originally Posted by fly135

So you want welfare to be social engineering of the family unit? You made that clear by justifying it with your position on the benefits of two parent families.

You seem to be waffling. When you mentioned that it used to be only for widows I'm guessing that you said because you like that idea. I've kind of thought that welfare was mostly for the children. I believe that it's much harder to get if you don't have kids. But you want to make it easier for two non working adults to get it.

See my viewpoint on this is that no matter what you do you are going to hit the double edged sword. If you give it for an extended period to non working adults then you will be accused of discouraging them from working. If you give it with limitations to two non working adults then you are accused to splitting up the family. This is the problem that politicians face so it's no surprise that they have to flip flop or blow with the wind according to how their constituents have been most recently manipulated by the media.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the secrecy that Clinton has been exhibiting could be related to right wing wingnuts led by Faux News to twist the truth to extremes. The initial lie about the Benghazi video was related to the last election. IOW it served no purpose except to try and keep the right wing media from using it as an accusation of Obama being weak on terrorism. Most of everything going on in politics is disputing the function of our govt. People are so hung up on the lies and secrecy problems that they themselves created by being completely mindless and manipulated that the public really has no relevant input on what govt ought to be doing.

You would think that 4 years of Faux News lying to them about Clinton's role in Benghazi would have taught somebody on the right something. But apparently not.

Wow....what a tangled weave you have woven for the basis of your reply. It is a fact that welfare was designed for a single widow. It is what it is. It morphed and it's current usage has destroyed low income families. I can not say that is an absolute fact, however the cause and effect seems reasonable as I knew of women in my home town that would get pregnant every so often as to keep a steady income. The stats of the black family unit are not under dispute. The single mother birth rate is well documented.

You take on the two edge sword show great growth on your part John. Where was that reasonable tone when you were attacking Bush?

Hillary released a lie about the video because she was afraid of Foxnews twisting it for politics? She is in hiding and being secret because of right wing twisting her words and actions? Wow...... She has some real leadership chops. Apparently the understanding of real leadership has left the realm of common sense. She lied and had a INNOCENT MAN dragged to jail saying his video caused an attack on her gun running operation in a hostile land. She also had classified information in a unsecure server in which you and I would be in PRISON. Are we really going to go with the "I did it because I was afraid of Fox News defense?

She may as well break out the Chewbacca Defense:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwdba9C2G14

Originally Posted by doublemwa

I'll save you the time and paraphrase this for you John: Cliff lives in his own fears, He likes Fox News because they placate him, facts and history do not have a place at the table.

Cliff's a blaring example of the damage that Trump has done to the GOP. The GOP is no longer the party of conservative values, but the party of less educated, older, white men only. Here is a news fact that didn't come from CNN, MSNBC, and certainly not Fox; The voting population is larger, more diverse (culturally and socially), more educated, and overall younger. So in Honky Tonk talk that means, youre not part of an enlightened minority, you're part of group that country is out growing.

All these coming from a group of people who love to quote a COMEDY CENTRAL show as news. Interesting webs we weave.

Education and younger usually tells me someone is full of themselves and full of ****. There is a reason leaders in companies are not 30 year olds. I don't trust a group that has to hope 18 year olds, retired people, illegal immigrants and Black Lives Matter hate groups show up to save their election.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

All these coming from a group of people who love to quote a COMEDY CENTRAL show as news. Interesting webs we weave.



Education and younger usually tells me someone is full of themselves and full of ****. There is a reason leaders in companies are not 30 year olds.

Except when it comes to politicians. Then newbs are better, right?

The really sad thing is how daily show viewers are better informed than Fox News viewers. What's up with that? http://www.poynter.org/2012/survey-n...formed/174826/

Originally Posted by ord27

here you go...

how about: you're someone that watches the main stream news outlet. You enjoy boating, wakeboarding, surfing...etc.

one day, someone approaches you, or posts something on your favorite chat board, saying that your favorite waterway is being targeted by people who want to limit the boat size to 18 feet, no wake enhancement devices, no music, and a speed limit of 15 mph. Or better yet, no gasoline powered engines and no swimming. Knowing that you don't always see eye to eye on issues with this guy, you accuse him of getting his info from the notorious Kitty Kitty news station......you poo poo his concerns. You might even call him a fear monger and a variety of other names. You might question his education, up bringing, values, and quickly put him into a category for the old, fearful, southern redneck.....

Then one day, when you try to launch your beautiful new X45 or VLX, you are turned away. Prohibited from launching

Perhaps you should have addressed this guys fears, concerns. Perhaps it would have been good to have a real conversation about what he thought, or heard, or witnessed in other areas, instead of ignoring his fears and calling him names

Now, with the brink and mortar real estate, family businesses, culturally sensitive businesses....things get a bit more real than where you can boat

I understand if my fears and concerns aren't yours. But when you dismiss people's fears and concerns for to long, without real conversations and solutions....."What we've got here is failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach...
So, you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it!
Well, he gets it!
N' I don't like it any more than you men." *

cue the rest of Guns and Roses.....

Now we're talking politics. For democracy to work it takes both sides, equally. To be heard. My issue is when someone's fears don't involve some combination of either facts, history, or at least a base for solid argument. With that mantra all 24/7 news has some degree of ****. Look how long it takes investigative pieces to hit live TV outlets, including CNN.

I get your analogy of boat size limit and collateral effects. But as a small business owner myself the fears of a liberal agenda are just unfounded. I don't know when it became the Republican thought process that all things from the left must be fought, but it is crushing the party.

I pay my share in taxes, employee both local and offshore people, donate to a local orphanage, mentor in BBBS, organize, sponsor and operate an annual charity that created $15K last year. That being said; I have a real hard time when a candidate, his constituents and overall party begin rallying against welfare, immigrants, and free trade.

So in this election of "who's the worse candidate" Given Bush's White House Email scandal I don't really give a **** about Hillary's emails. It worked for Bush, so why is everyone so ass hurt with Hillary?

Benghazi - Are you kidding me..... Under Bush/Powell there were 13 embassy attacks that left 60 dead. Obama/Hillary leave us with 1 and it's still a point of contention. Get a real issue.

Build a wall - is this another joke? Did everyone forget the secure fence act of 2006? It failed miserably.

My entertainment in this thread, is the driven by people who actually think trump is a good candidate, or better than Hillary. Case and point, you can't dump on Hillary without dumping on your own party. On the flip, Trump's attempt is comical. If republican voters wanted the white house you had 16 other choices that would be ahead right now. But you all took Trump, why? That would give a Supreme court seat and a republican controlled house for at least 2 years. Just think how far conservatives could have pushed their agenda with no resistance. But instead, Trump with < 1% of women, < 1% of blacks, < 1% of hispanic votes and has brought Georgia into play for the Democrats. wow!

nucking futs!

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

I know exactly why people run for president. It is YOU who has trouble understanding that Clinton got stinking rich from it. They all do it. Understand that and quit trying to point as Trump being the only one.

Sit down the adults are talking. If Clinton lined her pockets with campaign donations you would loose your mind! I'm talking crash your low rider type of loose your mind.

If republican voters wanted the white house you had 16 other choices that would be ahead right now. But you all took Trump, why? That would give a Supreme court seat and a republican controlled house for at least 2 years

agreed

It's painful to even think about

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

All these coming from a group of people who love to quote a COMEDY CENTRAL show as news. Interesting webs we weave.

Education and younger usually tells me someone is full of themselves and full of ****. There is a reason leaders in companies are not 30 year olds. I don't trust a group that has to hope 18 year olds, retired people, illegal immigrants and Black Lives Matter hate groups show up to save their election.

Since when have "illegal immigrants" been allowed to vote?

And wake up and leave the cocoon Delta. There are plenty of "company leaders" that are in their 30's or younger. Daniel Ek, Mark Zuckerburg, David Karp, Dustin Moskovitz, Kevin Plank, Andrew Mason, and the list goes on and on.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Except when it comes to politicians. Then newbs are better, right?

The really sad thing is how daily show viewers are better informed than Fox News viewers. What's up with that? http://www.poynter.org/2012/survey-n...formed/174826/

Because Fox News people more than likely have jobs and to much of liberals dismay, most lilkely don't watch it as much as people like to say. I know where I came from, I did not and still do not have enough time to be watching all that crap. Young people are more than likely to know "stuff". Does not mean they have the ability to comprehend what they know and place it in proper perspective. History will tell you that story over and over.

I have a question. Why does the military want 18 year olds and not 30 year olds?

Originally Posted by doublemwa

Sit down the adults are talking. If Clinton lined her pockets with campaign donations you would loose your mind! I'm talking crash your low rider type of loose your mind.

Low rider? Adults are talking? Interesting how you hold yourself in such regard boy.

Tell me again how Clinton got so stinking rich? You cast a ton of stones for a candidate who's Clinton Foundation is under intense fire and being investigated by Obama's DOJ.

Originally Posted by wake77

Since when have "illegal immigrants" been allowed to vote?

And wake up and leave the cocoon Delta. There are plenty of "company leaders" that are in their 30's or younger. Daniel Ek, Mark Zuckerburg, David Karp, Dustin Moskovitz, Kevin Plank, Andrew Mason, and the list goes on and on.

Who are on those boards?

Illegals children vote and they have the same mind set as the parents and are interested in keeping the generations of families coming over illegally. In California you are automatically registered to vote with a drivers license. Illegals can get drivers license. If the slip through the cracks, oh well. It takes people to hand scrub lists and that does not happen in many areas.

Originally Posted by doublemwa

Now we're talking politics. For democracy to work it takes both sides, equally. To be heard. My issue is when someone's fears don't involve some combination of either facts, history, or at least a base for solid argument. With that mantra all 24/7 news has some degree of ****. Look how long it takes investigative pieces to hit live TV outlets, including CNN.

I get your analogy of boat size limit and collateral effects. But as a small business owner myself the fears of a liberal agenda are just unfounded. I don't know when it became the Republican thought process that all things from the left must be fought, but it is crushing the party.

I pay my share in taxes, employee both local and offshore people, donate to a local orphanage, mentor in BBBS, organize, sponsor and operate an annual charity that created $15K last year. That being said; I have a real hard time when a candidate, his constituents and overall party begin rallying against welfare, immigrants, and free trade.

So in this election of "who's the worse candidate" Given Bush's White House Email scandal I don't really give a **** about Hillary's emails. It worked for Bush, so why is everyone so ass hurt with Hillary?

Benghazi - Are you kidding me..... Under Bush/Powell there were 13 embassy attacks that left 60 dead. Obama/Hillary leave us with 1 and it's still a point of contention. Get a real issue.

Build a wall - is this another joke? Did everyone forget the secure fence act of 2006? It failed miserably.

My entertainment in this thread, is the driven by people who actually think trump is a good candidate, or better than Hillary. Case and point, you can't dump on Hillary without dumping on your own party. On the flip, Trump's attempt is comical. If republican voters wanted the white house you had 16 other choices that would be ahead right now. But you all took Trump, why? That would give a Supreme court seat and a republican controlled house for at least 2 years. Just think how far conservatives could have pushed their agenda with no resistance. But instead, Trump with < 1% of women, < 1% of blacks, < 1% of hispanic votes and has brought Georgia into play for the Democrats. wow!

nucking futs!

Yet again avoidance. Clinton had classified data on her server. I would be in jail. The US Government has pulled contracts from National Labs for misplacing a hard drive. It is not about running a server so quit lying about the facts.

I don't remember Bush placing some poor sap on national TV while he arrested him and blamed his video for the attack. That should scare the crap out of people but hey, authoritarianism is a democrat way of life. When you guys join the democrat party, when do you get the hoods? Is there a vetting process for proper hood attire?

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Wow....what a tangled weave you have woven for the basis of your reply. It is a fact that welfare was designed for a single widow.

Widow or single mom. Really not much difference when it comes to feeding and housing children.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

You take on the two edge sword show great growth on your part John. Where was that reasonable tone when you were attacking Bush?

My take on Bush has been totally reasonable. I didn't blame him for forbidding the govt from negotiating the price of drugs. I didn't bitch about him and Katrina. I never blamed him for crashing the economy or tripling the deficit except in the context of debating people who just blame Obama for everything because he's the current president. I only contended one thing about Bush... No Bush, No Iraq war. The congress vote demographic doesn't change that contention. You claim that no matter who was President we would have invaded. I consider that to be a ridiculous position.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Hillary released a lie about the video because she was afraid of Foxnews twisting it for politics? She is in hiding and being secret because of right wing twisting her words and actions? Wow...... She has some real leadership chops.

You really seem to have no idea how detrimental to our govt it is for partisan politics to depend on manipulating the public with BS. Not really surprised because all of your tin hat BS would put you squarely as a participant in such things.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

She lied and had a INNOCENT MAN dragged to jail saying his video caused an attack on her gun running operation in a hostile land.

Innocent? Did you ever even check out what his arrest was all about. Or did you just get all your info from your tin hat sources?

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

She also had classified information in a unsecure server in which you and I would be in PRISON. Are we really going to go with the "I did it because I was afraid of Fox News defense?

I'm going to go with the FBI Director explicitly said that "you" as in "John Doe" would not have gone to jail. He said it over and over.

Originally Posted by ord27

I understand if my fears and concerns aren't yours. But when you dismiss people's fears and concerns for to long, without real conversations and solutions....."What we've got here is failure to communicate.

Exactly. So when we tie HI/HC integrally to employment then ship the jobs overseas and people can't afford to see a doctor, pay rent, or feed their kids, they aren't going to care about somebody who can. Hence the need for intellectual honesty. The bottom line is that wealth is concentrating at the top with no apparent benefit to society. Not surprising that more and more people could give a crap how much of a rich person's income the govt takes. I think that you will also find that this country pays the most for the least amount of HC in return. When you don't care about people being excluded from the HC system by excessive costs, you are inviting people to not care about your problems as well.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Yet again avoidance. Clinton had classified data on her server. I would be in jail. The US Government has pulled contracts from National Labs for misplacing a hard drive. It is not about running a server so quit lying about the facts.

I don't remember Bush placing some poor sap on national TV while he arrested him and blamed his video for the attack. That should scare the crap out of people but hey, authoritarianism is a democrat way of life. When you guys join the democrat party, when do you get the hoods? Is there a vetting process for proper hood attire?

Let it go rice rocket, you're out of your league. Bush deleted 5 Million emails, 5 MILLION internal emails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_W...il_controversy

You live in California, the most liberal state in the country!

Originally Posted by ord27

If republican voters wanted the white house you had 16 other choices that would be ahead right now. But you all took Trump, why? That would give a Supreme court seat and a republican controlled house for at least 2 years

agreed

It's painful to even think about

Yeah man, I hate it for you guys. I might be liberal but that does not mean I didn't want a good election. A small part of me even believes that some democratic candidates didn't run against Hillary because Trump was leading the Republican primaries. If Biden, Bloomberg, or anyone else would have run on the liberal ticket this would be a historical loss.

Instead we have the special olympics of elections! You know what I'm talking about Delta, Handi-can right?

Originally Posted by doublemwa

Let it go rice rocket, you're out of your league. Bush deleted 5 Million emails, 5 MILLION internal emails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_W...il_controversy

You live in California, the most liberal state in the country!

Rice Rocket? Do you even know what you are saying? so tell me boy, New York is not a liberal pos place? Have not seen people locked up for a number of years for having a gun in the city. More of your jack boot laws. I do live in California and I can see first hand how liberal politics screws poor people and drives the price of producing out of the state.

Originally Posted by doublemwa

Yeah man, I hate it for you guys. I might be liberal but that does not mean I didn't want a good election. A small part of me even believes that some democratic candidates didn't run against Hillary because Trump was leading the Republican primaries. If Biden, Bloomberg, or anyone else would have run on the liberal ticket this would be a historical loss.

Instead we have the special olympics of elections! You know what I'm talking about Delta, Handi-can right?

Must be special olympics time. It drew you into this forum....

Originally Posted by doublemwa

Let it go rice rocket, you're out of your league. Bush deleted 5 Million emails, 5 MILLION internal emails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_W...il_controversy

You live in California, the most liberal state in the country!

Bush did not have classified info on his...... I guess level of law breaking does not compute to absolutists.

Widow or single mom. Really not much difference when it comes to feeding and housing children.

It does matter. One of those can make a living at it and they do. It also makes it our problem with crime, raising non contributors to society.

My take on Bush has been totally reasonable. I didn't blame him for forbidding the govt from negotiating the price of drugs. I didn't bitch about him and Katrina. I never blamed him for crashing the economy or tripling the deficit except in the context of debating people who just blame Obama for everything because he's the current president. I only contended one thing about Bush... No Bush, No Iraq war. The congress vote demographic doesn't change that contention. You claim that no matter who was President we would have invaded. I consider that to be a ridiculous position.

I say that is reasonable. Yes, based on what the democrats said before and after, plus the continuation of funding when the democrats had the power of the purse; I absolutely believe they would have gone.

You really seem to have no idea how detrimental to our govt it is for partisan politics to depend on manipulating the public with BS. Not really surprised because all of your tin hat BS would put you squarely as a participant in such things.

After all you guys with Bush, support for BLM types, and all the hateful crap democrats been spewing I don't really care. Crap is getting real.

Innocent? Did you ever even check out what his arrest was all about. Or did you just get all your info from your tin hat sources?

Enlighten me. I remember the event.

I'm going to go with the FBI Director explicitly said that "you" as in "John Doe" would not have gone to jail. He said it over and over.

I beg to differ. I know for a fact I would have.

Again, come in for entertainment and it never fails to roll.

Fun season.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

Who are on those boards?

Illegals children vote and they have the same mind set as the parents and are interested in keeping the generations of families coming over illegally. In California you are automatically registered to vote with a drivers license. Illegals can get drivers license. If the slip through the cracks, oh well. It takes people to hand scrub lists and that does not happen in many areas.

That is just hyperbole. The DNC is not counting on the "illegal" vote, the "BLM" vote, etc. That is just fodder for right-wing talk radio.

The last few pages has really been some excellent bickering, well done to all involved.

Why don't we just pause to see what common ground there is?

1. Both Hilderbeast and Drumpf are both woefully unsuitable for office.
2. The system is broken.

Anything else?

Originally Posted by wake77

That is just hyperbole. The DNC is not counting on the "illegal" vote, the "BLM" vote, etc. That is just fodder for right-wing talk radio.

They don't need them, there's plenty of dead people who will gladly vote for the Democratic Nominee even if they were registered Republicans when they were alive.

Originally Posted by cwb4me

They don't need them, there's plenty of dead people who will gladly vote for the Democratic Nominee even if they were registered Republicans when they were alive.

When Trump loses this election, just like when Romney lost the election, just like when McCain lost the election, it will have absolutely nothing to do with voter fraud. After what happened in FL in 2000, I still laugh everytime the GOP tosses the "voter fraud" accusation.

The losers are already preparing their excuses again. I wouldn't want to play a friendly game of beer league softball with any of the conservatives left posting in this forum thread. Probably walk out to find windows in my car broken. If you want to win, you have to bring better candidates that represent a wider range of Americans. Bringing the same candidate year after year that only appeals to 25% of the active voters; aka the extremists who show up to the GOP primaries (and are dying of old age rapidly) will not win an election no matter how many times you cry like babies about voter fraud. Bashing the poor will never make this any easier as the poor are an increasing portion of our population. Try figuring out ways we can help the poor become middle class instead of putting your boot on their necks. Then maybe they will vote for your GOP candidate. Much more effective than trying to make unconstitutional laws to prevent the poor from voting.

if we played beer league softball, and we were ahead by 10 runs, we'd have to give you 5......distribute the runs

nobody really wants Trump

but Clinton will be a disaster

again, conservatives can admit when their side is fubar, the left doesn't seem to have that ability

^^^Hilarious and all true!

Gary Johnson? Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Focused on individual responsibility/freedom and a balanced budget. He is the CEO of a medical pot company and the only candidate listed on the ballot that supports second amendment rights. He is a reasonable guy. He will lose, but it is time we start the ground work for a party of sanity. They are called representatives for a reason. Does Trump represent you?? Does Hillary represent you?? A wasted vote is one for someone who you don't believe in. And the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Somebody should tell Gary that you can simplify the tax code without going to a consumption tax.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Gary Johnson? Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Focused on individual responsibility/freedom and a balanced budget. He is the CEO of a medical pot company and the only candidate listed on the ballot that supports second amendment rights. He is a reasonable guy. He will lose, but it is time we start the ground work for a party of sanity. They are called representatives for a reason. Does Trump represent you?? Does Hillary represent you?? A wasted vote is one for someone who you don't believe in. And the lesser of two evils is still evil.

I've posted supporting him in this thread a couple times. Doesn't seem to resonate with anyone here. Johnson/Weld get my vote, at least I can vote with my conscience.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Gary Johnson? Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Focused on individual responsibility/freedom and a balanced budget. He is the CEO of a medical pot company and the only candidate listed on the ballot that supports second amendment rights. He is a reasonable guy. He will lose, but it is time we start the ground work for a party of sanity. They are called representatives for a reason. Does Trump represent you?? Does Hillary represent you?? A wasted vote is one for someone who you don't believe in. And the lesser of two evils is still evil.

The lesser of two evils is less evil. A wasted vote is a wasted vote. But you have a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that you made your point, while knowingly letting the more evil thing ruin what's left of this country. How's that for the honest common sense truth?

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Gary Johnson? Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Focused on individual responsibility/freedom and a balanced budget. He is the CEO of a medical pot company and the only candidate listed on the ballot that supports second amendment rights. He is a reasonable guy. He will lose, but it is time we start the ground work for a party of sanity. They are called representatives for a reason. Does Trump represent you?? Does Hillary represent you?? A wasted vote is one for someone who you don't believe in. And the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Yeah, I like him. Unfortunately, if he had a real campaign he just wouldn't get far in under public scrutiny. He would have a tough time with the evangelical vote given his pro-pot stance. He would have a hard time with the liberals because of his republican voting record. On the flip side, he would do well with minorities and independents. To really get in the race he just needs funding to run a proper campaign. Or take a page from Trump and become a raging dumpster fire and get billions in free media coverage.

Originally Posted by cwb4me

The lesser of two evils is less evil. A wasted vote is a wasted vote. But you have a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that you made your point, while knowingly letting the more evil thing ruin what's left of this country. How's that for the honest common sense truth?

What's left? You have a nice boat, nice truck, an amount disposable income, what beef do you have with the way things have been going for the past 8 years? Not to mention your state senator is on the liberal ticket at VP!

Originally Posted by doublemwa

what's left? You have a nice boat, nice truck, an amount disposable income, what beef do you have with the way things have been going for the past 8 years? Not to mention your state senator is on the liberal ticket at vp!

more more more more.

Originally Posted by cwb4me

The lesser of two evils is less evil. A wasted vote is a wasted vote. But you have a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that you made your point, while knowingly letting the more evil thing ruin what's left of this country. How's that for the honest common sense truth?

That is point. Gary steals from both sides--almost equally. You are caught in the perfect trap that the Democrats and the Republicans want. Don't let your fear of the other team guide your decision making. Choose who you think is right for the job. If that is Trump, cool. If that is Hillary, cool. But if you dislike them both, still voting for them when a better representative (for you) exists, you've throw your vote out the window.

When we are under the presidency of a Washington crony or a mad man, at least I can sleep saying that I voted against that. And maybe I helped to lay the groundwork that will help us all escape this rotten deal.

I don't really dislike Hillary, but I don't believe she is even close to the best we have to offer. Her detractors have no credibility after repeatedly investing in lies, and no ideas about how to make America a better nation. Gary isn't a viable choice because he has no chance of winning. Not sure why that point is disregarded by Johnson supporters. To be a Johnson supporter you really have to have little inclination about whether Trump or Clinton wins. That isn't the case with me. Trump in no way should ever be President.

I seriously hope that you don't believe that cartoon that you posted.
That's the biigest bunch of propaganda, brain washing crap ever. And Fox news gets made fun of?

Whoever believes that ****, honestly doesn't understand anything about wage hiearchy or small business margins


biggest farce ever
keep drinking the coolade

I doubt that most people are interpreting that cartoon as referring to small business owners.

Originally Posted by ord27

I seriously hope that you don't believe that cartoon that you posted.
That's the biigest bunch of propaganda, brain washing crap ever. And Fox news gets made fun of?

Whoever believes that ****, honestly doesn't understand anything about wage hiearchy or small business margins


biggest farce ever
keep drinking the coolade

What is wrong about it? I'm sure people had the same logic you have when minimum wage was introduced. Money changes. Minimum wage should change with it as well. I have a hard time trusting somebody about wage hierarchy when they can't even spell it. You're saying that people sitting on billions of dollars while others can't even eat let alone have money to spend on goods isn't a negative for the economy? I know small business owners so I know how you think and can respect your opinion on how much a minimum wage effects you, but saying that the cartoon isn't true is a tad ridiculous.

Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal

I have a hard time trusting somebody about wage hierarchy when they can't even spell it.

Wouldn't have gone there. Not really thinking he doesn't know how to spell it just because he left out a letter.

Originally Posted by fly135

Wouldn't have gone there. Not really thinking he doesn't know how to spell it just because he left out a letter.

Whoever believes that ****, honestly doesn't understand anything about wage hiearchy or small business margins


biggest farce ever
keep drinking the coolade

Assuming only makes an ass out of you and me. It works both ways. He assumed I don't know anything from a simple cartoon. I assume he doesn't know anything due to a misspelling. Nor does he know how to use commas.

Originally Posted by ord27

I seriously hope that you don't believe that cartoon that you posted.
That's the biigest bunch of propaganda, brain washing crap ever. And Fox news gets made fun of?

Whoever believes that ****, honestly doesn't understand anything about wage hiearchy or small business margins


biggest farce ever
keep drinking the coolade

Part of the fox news narrative is small business are no different than big business...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-low-...illion-a-year/

This is the single fact pushed across the aisle. I just picked the first link but it is a well documented case against big employers. Again, having grown in a house hold supported by small business, and now a small business owner I understand margins. So when someone ask for a higher min wage, there is room to move.

Selling drugs out of your moms basement doesn't make you a small business owner.

you're right
I misspelled a word, while I was typing, while I was doing a handful of other things at the same time.

I must be an idiot, with no first hand knowledge of anything

I'm sorry to have waisted you're tyme

What Cliff isn't taking into account is the fact that when minimum wage rises, so does the number of people who can afford to eat at his restaurant. A rising tide lifts all boats. History supports this over and over again in absolutely every situation.

Once again Cliff, your enemy is Applebees. Your enemy is NOT your employees. Your employees who you love to take a dump on are the only reason you have a business. Without them, you're just the former owner of a business that is soon to be in the hands of the bank and another loser in the unemployment line because you can't run your business without them. You need your employees more than they need you.

I don't dump on my employees. I treat them very well. To say otherwise, or to suggest that I think that some employees are my enemy.....is just more liberal name calling and dribble

I don't expect you to agree or to change your point of view

Also, there are just as many studies out there that suggest raising the minimum wage (more than doubling it) costs jobs and forces some small businesses to shut down, or move

I know the realities in my world. I have to. I own one restaurant that has been around over 50 years. I have been involved in that success for nearly 40 of those years

Your theoretical comments only make me realize how naive you are when it comes to wages, government intrusion and small business

no offense meant or taken

and, by the way, for me, it's not the current $7.25 an hour pay that is worrisome. The only people that I pay $7.25/hour to, are no- experience, brand new hires (usually kids). Once they show that they can do the job as expected, they get a raise. This usually takes 2-4 weeks

Where the problem is, is with the guy who currently makes $15 an hour. The wage that "yall" currently declare as a living wage. In his mind, he makes twice the minimum now, and will expect twice the minimum then. That's $30 an hour for those keeping score.

Those that make $20 an hour, will expect much more too.
Employees who were making a living wage, at positions meant for full time work, are now making up to twice what they were making. All of this because someone in a suit somewhere decided that jobs that were never meant to be career jobs, or even held for very long, should pay enough to live on. It's ridiculous.

Let the market dictate. I have very little turnover. I do, because I treat them better than the Applebees down the street treats their staff....

relating to this thread:

I don't know how Trump would actually handle this issue if he is elected. It scares me a little. I'm hoping that he will be pro small business

Hillary and a democratically controlled house, would raise the wage to $30 if they could, mandate retirement and medical ....and extend unemployment.
Hillary,Obama without an opposing congress, Pelosi, and all of the other loonies, scare the piss out of me

Cliff, my salary hasn't increased with the minimum wage. at all. And I have no expectation that it will. Your point is a good one that there will be some necessary increases over minimum, but it's not going to instantly mean doubling everyone's salary.

Is the 20 an hour guy going to quit his skilled job (presumably with potential for advancement) to go to a crappy minimum wage job? yuck.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Cliff, my salary hasn't increased with the minimum wage. at all. And I have no expectation that it will. Your point is a good one that there will be some necessary increases over minimum, but it's not going to instantly mean doubling everyone's salary.

Is the 20 an hour guy going to quit his skilled job (presumably with potential for advancement) to go to a crappy minimum wage job? yuck.

What you do is erode the buying power of the $20 an hour guy. Then cause inflation in certain sectors of the economy.

Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal

What is wrong about it? I'm sure people had the same logic you have when minimum wage was introduced. Money changes. Minimum wage should change with it as well. I have a hard time trusting somebody about wage hierarchy when they can't even spell it. You're saying that people sitting on billions of dollars while others can't even eat let alone have money to spend on goods isn't a negative for the economy? I know small business owners so I know how you think and can respect your opinion on how much a minimum wage effects you, but saying that the cartoon isn't true is a tad ridiculous.

Here is just one more example of where hypocrisy meets douchebaggery. Talk about glass houses. Total douche. Oh that's real impressive that you KNOW small business owners. Try being one before opening your pie hole as though you a know thing about their plight. Oh, and "effects" in the context you used, starts with an "a". You get less than a zero for that post. Please tell us you were drunk.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

What you do is erode the buying power of the $20 an hour guy. Then cause inflation in certain sectors of the economy.

I've never heard that one. Must have been on your GED test or was it University of Phoenix Econ? I'm kidding, only joking.

But really, when you get an online degree do you print it off yourself or do they mail you one on card stock?

I'm not an economist, so forgive my simpleton's approach, but for someone like Cliff (restaurant owner) isn't it better if more people at the bottom have a little more money than if a few people at the top have a lot more money? I mean one rich guy can only buy so many pizzas, even if he's a glutton. But 100 families can buy a lot of pizzas with an extra $100 a week.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

isn't it better if more people at the bottom have a little more money than if a few people at the top have a lot more money? I mean one rich guy can only buy so many pizzas, even if he's a glutton. But 100 families can buy a lot of pizzas with an extra $100 a week.

I prefer pizza that not many people can afford. That way I feel better about myself when I eat it. I like to know that I am superior to others because I earned it.

I don't want these damn liberals taking away that feeling of superiority from me. How do I feel good about myself if I am not able to be above others?

Originally Posted by wakemitch

I prefer pizza that not many people can afford. That way I feel better about myself when I eat it. I like to know that I am superior to others because I earned it.

Sometimes the truth is best expressed with sarcasm.

Originally Posted by markj

Here is just one more example of where hypocrisy meets douchebaggery. Talk about glass houses. Total douche. Oh that's real impressive that you KNOW small business owners. Try being one before opening your pie hole as though you a know thing about their plight. Oh, and "effects" in the context you used, starts with an "a". You get less than a zero for that post. Please tell us you were drunk.

You caught me with the affect. Definitely not saying I was drunk, the only reason I brought up spelling and grammar in the first place was to show how ridiculous it was to make an assumption somebody doesn't know anything based off posting a cartoon. I didn't actually think he was unfit to comment on small business due to a spelling mistake, just showing it goes both ways making statements like that.

Again you come in guns blazing talking douchebag this douchebag that. Your argument is the same argument people use when somebody brings up valid points in sports and their response is "You've never played so you don't understand". Considering you have never held office, you don't know have any grounds on speaking about the election. . You should really try getting your point across without the personal attacks.

Originally Posted by doublemwa

I've never heard that one. Must have been on your GED test or was it University of Phoenix Econ? I'm kidding, only joking.

But really, when you get an online degree do you print it off yourself or do they mail you one on card stock?

I must really get to you. All you do is personnel attacks. I think that is kind of against forum rules if I am not mistaking.

I think that is a good thing knowing you are loosing your mind over facts. If someone is stuck at $20 and hour and you give a person who formally made $7 and now makes $15, the products in reach of the $20 an hour guy will go up in price. You seem to forget, just like in healthcare, if there is money to be captured; the product costs will rise to capture it. Whether it is services or manufactured goods. It definitely will be the employers of the now $15 an hour worker. It will hurt the $30 an hour guy as well. Not everyone is rich like you where it does not change because you have spare cash. For the ones trapped in that price point, the market adjusts to capture that money.

If you don't think it does, then why do costs go up as wages go up? By your thought process, everyone should be at today's wage while we are at 1988 prices.

Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal

You caught me with the affect. Definitely not saying I was drunk, the only reason I brought up spelling and grammar in the first place was to show how ridiculous it was to make an assumption somebody doesn't know anything based off posting a cartoon. I didn't actually think he was unfit to comment on small business due to a spelling mistake, just showing it goes both ways making statements like that.

Again you come in guns blazing talking douchebag this douchebag that. Your argument is the same argument people use when somebody brings up valid points in sports and their response is "You've never played so you don't understand". Considering you have never held office, you don't know have any grounds on speaking about the election. . You should really try getting your point across without the personal attacks.

FYI... You used 'affect' incorrectly......

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

I'm not an economist, so forgive my simpleton's approach, but for someone like Cliff (restaurant owner) isn't it better if more people at the bottom have a little more money than if a few people at the top have a lot more money? I mean one rich guy can only buy so many pizzas, even if he's a glutton. But 100 families can buy a lot of pizzas with an extra $100 a week.

You're not too far off from a KPI of the economy called The Velocity of Money. It's a measurement of the Fed uses to time how long it takes for currency to go out into the system and then come back. The faster the velocity of money, to a point, the better the economy. On the flip, to fast means lower credit ratings and higher expenditure.

Think of the rich who sit on large sums of money. While it may keep money markets moving, it dose not buy a lot of pizza.

Originally Posted by doublemwa

You're not too far off from a KPI of the economy called The Velocity of Money. It's a measurement of the Fed uses to time how long it takes for currency to go out into the system and then come back. The faster the velocity of money, to a point, the better the economy. On the flip, to fast means lower credit ratings and higher expenditure.

Think of the rich who sit on large sums of money. While it may keep money markets moving, it dose not buy a lot of pizza.

So what you are confirming is a good stock market is not a indicator of the health of the American worker?

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

So what you are confirming is a good stock market is not a indicator of the health of the American worker?

The stock market is an example of how govt money can inflate prices above the level of the free market. If tax deductions for pension contributions were eliminated, as in the case of Johnson's consumption tax, the market would tank. And a lot of govt employees would see their defined benefit pensions in big trouble. Along with a lot of tanked 401Ks and IRAs.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

I'm not an economist, so forgive my simpleton's approach, but for someone like Cliff (restaurant owner) isn't it better if more people at the bottom have a little more money than if a few people at the top have a lot more money? I mean one rich guy can only buy so many pizzas, even if he's a glutton. But 100 families can buy a lot of pizzas with an extra $100 a week.

How does it pan out though? Everyone is making $15 an hour. Cliff has to pay his people that now, so he has to absorb that cost. Usually by raising prices. They other people who pay that now have to raise their prices to compensate for the wage increase. So did any of them really make out? What if they decide they don't want any more pizza's than they bought before?

What about the $30 an hour person? They are not getting a raise. Now everything that they used to go buy is now more expensive so they now have to choose to not buy as much of the un-needed items because they can not afford it.

What about rents? Most people in that space are not home buyers where they have at least stabilized their out going expenditures. Rental property people know how much cash is in the market. They will raise rent to capture it.

Originally Posted by fly135

The stock market is an example of how govt money can inflate prices above the level of the free market. If tax deductions for pension contributions were eliminated, as in the case of Johnson's consumption tax, the market would tank. And a lot of govt employees would see their defined benefit pensions in big trouble. Along with a lot of tanked 401Ks and IRAs.

I think that depends. People know they need to retire. I think they will still save. Would would happen is the economy would be hurt because their would be less money in the free market.

In California, I don't think it would change anything. The housing market is so insane that it would just change how much money rich people were making off their multiple housing investments. Out here it is not how much money you make, it is when you bought your house. If you rent, you are in a perpetual life of being screwed as they are pressing and pressing on the lower classes because they are always maximizing rents.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

I must really get to you. All you do is personnel attacks. I think that is kind of against forum rules if I am not mistaking.

I think that is a good thing knowing you are loosing your mind over facts. If someone is stuck at $20 and hour and you give a person who formally made $7 and now makes $15, the products in reach of the $20 an hour guy will go up in price. You seem to forget, just like in healthcare, if there is money to be captured; the product costs will rise to capture it. Whether it is services or manufactured goods. It definitely will be the employers of the now $15 an hour worker. It will hurt the $30 an hour guy as well. Not everyone is rich like you where it does not change because you have spare cash. For the ones trapped in that price point, the market adjusts to capture that money.

If you don't think it does, then why do costs go up as wages go up? By your thought process, everyone should be at today's wage while we are at 1988 prices.

Here you go:
This ones tells you that you're wrong on min income driving inflation, which in economic terms is direct correlation of "purchasing power"
https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/.../200230pap.pdf

This shows inflation rates have slowed
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/unit.../inflation-cpi

This one shows that purchasing power has been unchanged since 1979
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...d-for-decades/
"But after adjusting for inflation, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power as it did in 1979 "

I doubt you've read any of the above so i'll paraphrase it for you, just like other post. Inflation is driven by a complex set of variables. Only one of which is min wage.

As for personal attacks, i'll ask you again. You live in one of the healthiest economies in the country that is run top to bottom by liberal polices. Now I'm not saying all is good in the liberal world, but what aspect of it can't you grasp? I wouldn't be on your case so much if you were not factually wrong as much as you are.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

I think that depends. People know they need to retire. I think they will still save. Would would happen is the economy would be hurt because their would be less money in the free market.

So why would the govt give a tax deduction to get people to do what they would do anyway? People do need to save and retire. But it's pretty obvious that the govt felt the need to put mechanisms in place to coerce them into doing it. You have to pretty much ignore both human psychology and economics to believe that the stock market would not be affected by eliminating tax deductions for investing in plans.

If a consumption tax were adopted, then the only reason left for putting money in a pension plan is if the employer still contributes to a plan only if you do. The lack of a federal income tax obsoletes these plans that are based around IRS rules. So the major reason for implementing these plans in the first place is out of the picture and I suspect employers would gravitate away from offering benefit matching. What would be the penalty for cashing out? 401ks charge fess and are impossible to get out of except by quitting your job.

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

FYI... You used 'affect' incorrectly......

Did you not realize I was admitting defeat on that? Haha, I should have been more careful after calling somebody out eh?