|
USA at War With Itself
This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. |
USA at War With Itself
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. |
USA at War With Itself
|
USA at War With Itself
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. |
USA at War With Itself
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 17:24:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Pelosi and Schumer behaved like spoiled little children by refusing to meet with Trump, Ryan and McConnell, regardless of Trump's tweet. They were still invited. They just didn't want to be embarrassed in front of the cameras. I agree with BAO that nobody is really trying to negotiate in good faith ... none of them. Congress just has been, who is in the leadership, for at least 25 years. There has been little actual bipartisan work on anything even close to being controversial. |
USA at War With Itself
|
USA at War With Itself
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/2/17 12:00 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Why do you think he has that homemade tiki bar. :) |
USA at War With Itself
On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. And you've posted no speculation about Trump? |
USA at War With Itself
On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. People with far more knowledge on the subject than any of us have said it. If you really believe the only motive the russians had was screwing Hillary, you are naive. I agree if she had won, weakening her was advantageous but Trump won and weakening him is just as important to them. What part of that is hard to believe for you? ... or BAO? |
USA at War With Itself
In article ,
says... On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. People with far more knowledge on the subject than any of us have said it. If you really believe the only motive the russians had was screwing Hillary, you are naive. I agree if she had won, weakening her was advantageous but Trump won and weakening him is just as important to them. What part of that is hard to believe for you? ... or BAO? If the Trump clown-show had any brains at all, they wouldn't have advertised this love of Russia and Putin until he was President. Then Putin would have had an effective friend in the White House. Trump was too much an arrogant putz for that. Now Trump and Putin are ****ed. Trump can't do **** for Putin. Just talking to him raises suspicion, as it should. A weak Trump is the worst thing from the Russian viewpoint. Trump is asshole enough to admire Putin. Of course even the Russians didn't believe we'd be stupid enough to elect Trump. What part of that is hard to believe for you? You should quit pimping for Trump and Putin. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/2/17 9:04 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. People with far more knowledge on the subject than any of us have said it. If you really believe the only motive the russians had was screwing Hillary, you are naive. I agree if she had won, weakening her was advantageous but Trump won and weakening him is just as important to them. What part of that is hard to believe for you? ... or BAO? If the Trump clown-show had any brains at all, they wouldn't have advertised this love of Russia and Putin until he was President. Then Putin would have had an effective friend in the White House. Trump was too much an arrogant putz for that. Now Trump and Putin are ****ed. Trump can't do **** for Putin. Just talking to him raises suspicion, as it should. A weak Trump is the worst thing from the Russian viewpoint. Trump is asshole enough to admire Putin. Of course even the Russians didn't believe we'd be stupid enough to elect Trump. What part of that is hard to believe for you? You should quit pimping for Trump and Putin. And forget not that Trump knew Flynn lied to the veep and the FBI before he pressured Comey to go easy on his former national security director. Smells like obstruction of justice. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/2/2017 9:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/2/17 9:04 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. People with far more knowledge on the subject than any of us have said it. If you really believe the only motive the russians had was screwing Hillary, you are naive. I agree if she had won, weakening her was advantageous but Trump won and weakening him is just as important to them. What part of that is hard to believe for you? ... or BAO? If the Trump clown-show had any brains at all, they wouldn't have advertised this love of Russia and Putin until he was President.Â* Then Putin would have had an effective friend in the White House. Trump was too much an arrogant putz for that. Now Trump and Putin are ****ed. Trump can't do **** for Putin.Â* Just talking to him raises suspicion, as it should. A weak Trump is the worst thing from the Russian viewpoint. Trump is asshole enough to admire Putin. Of course even the Russians didn't believe we'd be stupid enough to elect Trump. What part of that is hard to believe for you? You should quit pimping for Trump and Putin. And forget not that Trump knew Flynn lied to the veep and the FBI before he pressured Comey to go easy on his former national security director. Smells like obstruction of justice. Meanwhile, the economy is booming and only getting better, wages are going up, consumer confidence is at an all-time high, the stock market is setting records daily and the general mood of half the nation is optimistic about the future. And that's all before the tax act is signed into law. The other half of the nation are still dwelling in Hillary's loss, "Russia, Russia, Russia" (ad nauseam) and consumed by deep, dark conspiracy theories perpetuated by those who work to control their minds. Not healthy for the mind and soul Harry (and BAO). |
USA at War With Itself
On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 21:09:20 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/2/17 9:04 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:35:17 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/2/17 12:19 AM, wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? You have no knowledge of Putin's concerns. You've posted your same speculation about Putin 20 times here with no backup. People with far more knowledge on the subject than any of us have said it. If you really believe the only motive the russians had was screwing Hillary, you are naive. I agree if she had won, weakening her was advantageous but Trump won and weakening him is just as important to them. What part of that is hard to believe for you? ... or BAO? If the Trump clown-show had any brains at all, they wouldn't have advertised this love of Russia and Putin until he was President. Then Putin would have had an effective friend in the White House. Trump was too much an arrogant putz for that. Now Trump and Putin are ****ed. Trump can't do **** for Putin. Just talking to him raises suspicion, as it should. A weak Trump is the worst thing from the Russian viewpoint. Trump is asshole enough to admire Putin. Of course even the Russians didn't believe we'd be stupid enough to elect Trump. What part of that is hard to believe for you? You should quit pimping for Trump and Putin. And forget not that Trump knew Flynn lied to the veep and the FBI before he pressured Comey to go easy on his former national security director. Smells like obstruction of justice. How did he obstruct justice? Flynn talking to Russia after the election, during the transition, has not been proven to be illegal. Trump can easily say that was all he meant. If this is all they have, they don't have much. Flynn may have been dumb not assuming the FBI was asking a question they did not already know the answer to, just hoping he would say the wrong thing but the underlying act has not been proven to be illegal. The other smoking gun, Manafort, was not pointed anywhere near Trump. It was just a money case involving a deal that Trump was not involved in. |
USA at War With Itself
wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 23:00:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:05:34 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:28:51 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: This tax bill is going to pass without any Dem buy in. Done in secret without any Dem input. The U.S. Senate no is longer run by compromise. It's interesting watching the government devolve. It will only get worse from here. The fact that the dems want to impeach Trump and refuse to work with him at all is definitely not helping quell that divide. I certainly agree we are about as close to a civil war as any time in the last 150 years tho. Putin sure is winning this one. Pelosi and Schumer haven't talked of impeachment, and in fact have quelled that kind of talk. They know it's a non-starter. That is pretty much a new opinion since they know in is not going to be a winner, no matter how hard the big money like Steyer, big entertainment (all of them) and big news (everyone but Fox), want to push it. They haven't even convinced a lot of people in their delegation to STFU. Trump didn't want their input. He tweeted as much. Besides, McConnel wants no part of compromise. That predates Trump I agree that it was a boon to Putin when Trump was elected. That why he helped Trump. Crooked authoritarian rulers love each other. Putin didn't really care who won, he wanted to discredit the process and democracy in general. He won either way. We are fractured either way. I do think it is funny that you democrats ignore the "fake news" they were planting on social media but you are upset about facts that were revealed in the Email leaks. That is why you all deny the leaker might have been Seth Rich because he would have just been a whistle blower. We will never know because he was killed by an unknown assailant under mysterious circumstances. After all, the Clintons were at risk. **** happens. You shouldn't drink and post. Come on Harry, what part was wrong? That's Kevin Noble, not Harry Krause. |
USA at War With Itself
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/3/17 1:36 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. --- Your boy Trump and your political party promised lots of new factories, jobs, and increased wages as a result of the GOP Tax Scam. Virtually every sensible economist has called that promise bull****. Most of the tax savings will go to further enrich the rich. Heads on pikes...the only answer to runaway capitalism. |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500,
wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:30:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. === The only way to boost the middle class is to boost the economy. So how do you propose to improve the overall economy without benefiting the uppper class also? They are the owners (shareholders) as I'm sure you know. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/3/2017 1:36 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. When you only look at the dark side of things you end up being a Harry. |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/3/2017 1:59 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/3/17 1:36 PM, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****.Â* The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do.Â* They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners.Â* Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful.Â* As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners).Â* All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. --- Your boy Trump and your political party promised lots of new factories, jobs, and increased wages as a result of the GOP Tax Scam. Virtually every sensible economist has called that promise bull****. Most of the tax savings will go to further enrich the rich. Heads on pikes...the only answer to runaway capitalism. Is a "sensible" economist a progressive liberal in your mind? |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 14:47:55 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:30:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. === The only way to boost the middle class is to boost the economy. So how do you propose to improve the overall economy without benefiting the uppper class also? They are the owners (shareholders) as I'm sure you know. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com You guys just don't get it. If *anything* benefits the upper class in *any* way, then it is *wrong*. Now what's so hard to understand. (I'll be surprised if Harry answers your question.) |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:30:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. And Richard pointed out the things you talked about enrich the stockholders, most of whom are not really rich. They are pensioners and 401k holders. |
USA at War With Itself
wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:30:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. And Richard pointed out the things you talked about enrich the stockholders, most of whom are not really rich. They are pensioners and 401k holders. I depend on my dividends to live a nice life. |
USA at War With Itself
wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 14:30:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 2:16 PM, wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:36:20 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 13:15:19 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/3/17 12:50 PM, Its Me wrote: On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 9:08:38 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: In fact, most corporate leaders queried have said they plan to use the cuts to further enrich themselves, buy back their stock, and payoff their shareholders. Bull****. The only "corporate leaders" who would say that are the liberals who want to discredit anything that Republicans do. They are the blood-sucking leeches on society. You're one lying sack-o-****, krause. Indeed, the Republicans are the blood-sucking leeches on society. The rich, in their opinion, don't control enough of the nation's wealth...they want it all. There have been several focus groups of corporate leaders and also surveys...and the overwhelming majority have no plans to build new factories, add lots of new hires, or raise wages. Here's one such article: "Major companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. say they’ll turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting President Donald Trump’s promise that his plan will create jobs and boost wages for the middle class." https://is.gd/GcU25z There are many such articles. Here's one from Forbes, well-known liberal publication. Poor little JackOff...knows nothing, proud of it. === The purpose of a business, any business, is to generate profits for the owners. Even you should know that from your failed attempts at being successful. As a by product, increased profits can be spent on business expansion, research and development, plant modernization, or returned to shareholders (owners). All of that benefits the overall economy sooner or later. Increased wages are a function of supply and demand, nothing else. Harry is a Marxist. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Profits, losses and market share are foreign concepts to him. If the government ran everything, distributing the proceeds equally to everyone regardless of actual contribution they make to the enterprise, he would be happy ... right up until they went the way of the Soviets and the South American communists. There you go again. My comment was that the tax cuts were only going to make the rich richer. It has nothing to do with marxism. And Richard pointed out the things you talked about enrich the stockholders, most of whom are not really rich. They are pensioners and 401k holders. About half of Americans own some stock through various means. Of those most of the stock is owned by the wealthy. Again, what is this marxist b.s. you are inagining? -- Posted with my iPhone 8+. |
USA at War With Itself
On Sun, 03 Dec 2017 22:23:31 -0500, wrote:
And Richard pointed out the things you talked about enrich the stockholders, most of whom are not really rich. They are pensioners and 401k holders. === Exactly, middle class people for the most part who worked for a living and managed to save a few bucks. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
USA at War With Itself
On 12/4/2017 9:52 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/4/17 9:48 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: I don't buy into your rosy scenario for the lower income groups, and, additionally, it doesn't seem likely the trillion dollar annual budget deficit that results from the GOP Tax Scam will be reversed if the economy improves. It will be difficult if not impossible to raise taxes to resolve federal spending and revenue imbalances. And the tax cuts are going to lead to massive cuts in social security and medicare, further shattering what is left of the safety net. And there will be less federal funds to stimulate infrastructure rebuilding, innovation, and disaster relief. Where did you get the "trillion dollar *annual* budget deficit resulting from the Tax Act? Last I heard was that if the economic stimulus resulting from the tax changes has *no* affect on the deficit (unlikely),Â* it may add $1.5 to $1.7 trillion (depending on House version vs Senate version) over a *ten* year period. My mistake...mind wandered while typing because I was reading some bloody awful commentary from Chuck Grassley. Right, it's only an addition to the deficit of 100+ billion a year. Chump change. Ok. Thought for a moment we were going to have to call another "Fake News" event and suspend you without pay for a month or two. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com