Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jimjamesak
    replied
    Originally posted by Scarlet View Post
    Why wouldn't it be illegal if she leaked them?

    And also, I get everything he did was legal based on the laws at the time. And that there are many others that did the same that are very rich, etc. The issue to me is, all those many others are not. Running. For. President. He is.
    Because her name is on them.

    Leave a comment:


  • GrinCDXX
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Scarlet View Post
    Why wouldn't it be illegal if she leaked them?
    Because they are also her tax returns.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scarlet
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Why wouldn't it be illegal if she leaked them?

    And also, I get everything he did was legal based on the laws at the time. And that there are many others that did the same that are very rich, etc. The issue to me is, all those many others are not. Running. For. President. He is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rover
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Moving on from La-La Land...rumors are flying Marla Maples leaked Donald's taxes negating the "it was illegal" meme
    Yeah, you need to take Scooby's idiocy in small doses or else its contagious.

    The Marla Maples angle would be pretty funny.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Moving on from La-La Land...rumors are flying Marla Maples leaked Donald's taxes negating the "it was illegal" meme

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Rover View Post
    Progressive tax policies I'd like to see enacted.

    1) Capital gains taxed as regular income for individuals.
    2) New higher tax tier for incomes over 1M a year.
    3) Lift income cap on Social Security.
    Massive tax increase with "Better question, who will vote to tax all income equally? How will that effect businesses large and small? What are the unintended consequences of your plan? " thrown in.

    No go.

    My effective rate needs to be more than Romney to fund the government.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rover
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Progressive tax policies I'd like to see enacted.

    1) Capital gains taxed as regular income for individuals.
    2) New higher tax tier for incomes over 1M a year.
    3) Lift income cap on Social Security.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    You realize just saying it isnt true doesnt actually make it untrue dont you?

    Just answer his point...how will your tax plan fund the government?

    Better question, who will vote to tax all income equally? How will that effect businesses large and small? What are the unintended consequences of your plan?

    You're right. Keep it the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    No.

    And this is why there is no hope. None.
    You realize just saying it isnt true doesnt actually make it untrue dont you?

    Just answer his point...how will your tax plan fund the government?

    Better question, who will vote to tax all income equally? How will that effect businesses large and small? What are the unintended consequences of your plan?

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Rover's point is correct though, your plan wont meet the burden needed to fund the government. We cant do it now with this plan what makes you think more money will come in under yours?

    All you are doing is starving the beast...who are you Ted Cruz?
    And this is why Congress is the way it is. You don't know that's correct anymore than I know what the exemption should be. Read alfablue's post below. The rates go down after a million? Why? Capital is revered while labor is shat on. Why?

    You telling me changing that isn't going to increase revenue? Or, actually, based on what you and Rover are saying things are just fine the way they are. Cause even though we want to tax the rich more if we do the middle and lower class can't have a tax break because it won't fund the government.

    What a joke.
    Last edited by ScoobyDoo; 10-03-2016, 10:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    Well, then tell Rover to stop pretending that the missing income in my plan is coming from not taxing the rich enough. Cause that just ain't true.
    Rover's point is correct though, your plan wont meet the burden needed to fund the government. We cant do it now with this plan what makes you think more money will come in under yours?

    All you are doing is starving the beast...who are you Ted Cruz?

    Leave a comment:


  • aparch
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    ... Drumpf didnt lose a billion in 2008, that would be forgivable. He lost it in 1995 when the market was in full bull mode. ...
    Adjusted for inflation, he lost 1.5 Billion in today's dollar.

    Leave a comment:


  • alfablue
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    Wrong. The current tax system is killing the middle class and benefiting the rich more than Sica and my tax plan.
    The big problem with the current tax system is 1) capitol gains loopholes- which benefits those with means and 2) loopholes for rich special interest- which benefits those with means. Go look at the tax data, and you see that over $1M, net tax rates go DOWN. Get make all income taxable equally with the current structure, and we will be in much, much better position.

    Kills me that "unearned" income pays less tax than earned income. And now we see that the real estate groups have such massive loopholes that one can avoid paying any tax with one big loss in a year. Crazy.

    THAT is what we should be railing about- the system that made Don so rich in the first place. He's done nothing for anyone but himself- just like his entire industry. Which is an industry that has more than once taken down our economy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    But he's earned most of it back? He didn't quit, either. One loss doth not a season make.
    No but a loss to an FCS team could tank your National Title hopes. Drumpf didnt lose a billion in 2008, that would be forgivable. He lost it in 1995 when the market was in full bull mode. That is like Alabama losing to Mt. Union.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    That would be great, in the land of make believe where it rains bourbon and everything is tastes like bacon. Problem is in the real world that has as much a chance of happening as I do of being the starting QB for the Vikes tonight...
    Well, then tell Rover to stop pretending that the missing income in my plan is coming from not taxing the rich enough. Cause that just ain't true.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X