Who do you side with?

[franklin]

I think I've gone through this one before. Please tell me how the government has helped for instance a home owner make improvements in his own property to increase it's value, so that they can just turn around and take part of the capital you've gained when selling it. Give me a good reason for this to be justified. It's a blatant case of thievery that they legally get away with year after year.

Then they turn around and spend this tax money in stupid foreign interventions that haven't been approved in Congress and ****. Criminal activity in my book.

If it's your primary residence then home sales are tax free. If it's an investment property then you get to depreciate improvements.

 

[franklin]

A million times this.

Here is my crazy idea:

Bring everyone home. Cut the defense budget by 70%. Take 10% and send it Canada for being our buffer to the North. Send 10% to Mexico for being our buffer to the south. Take 10% and create a military that WE need...not the military the rest of the world needs.

Take that 70% and invest it in America. Raise taxes on those making over $400,000 (the 1%) and escalate back to where it was pre-Reagan.

Let's get people educated in a way that they can actually succeed after. Yeah, we may lose a few Walmarts. Bring back small business. Bring back competition. Get rid of this crony capitalism and allow people to compete.

I wouldn't vote for any of this nonsense.

 

[franklin]

Some might just want to smoke pot, stay out of the middle east, get abortions, tax the hell out of the rich, and stop bailing out banks and wall street

We agree on items 1, 2, and 5.

We didn't bail out the banks. We bailed out our economy (and Detroit). Backstopping the lifeblood of our economy has been the role of government since 1933. The banks fully repaid TARP, including General Motor's share they didn't pay back in full, and then some. Plus, they've been fined billions upon billions more over the last 6 years.

 

[franklin]

Some might just want to smoke pot, stay out of the middle east, get abortions, tax the hell out of the rich, and stop bailing out banks and wall street

Granted this is just for FIC, but the rich are paying a pretty good amount. Example is from 2013, but people who earned $250,000 and above paid 48.9% of FIC. The top 50% of wage earners paid 97% of FIC, and the top 1% paid 38%. In simple terms, the highest quintile of earners received 19 cents back for every dollar paid in federal taxes, the lowest received $18 for every dollar paid in federal taxes, and the middle was at $2.23 for every dollar paid. Now this is just FIC, and obviously there are other changes that could be made (capital gains for one), but I think the popular rhetoric that the rich aren't taxed highly is a little misguided.

I've been saying for several years that we need to let the Obama 58.67% increase on capital gains settle in before doing anything. Now that we have solid numbers, we're seeing the rich pay much, much more in taxes prior to Obama. Both as a % and overall #'s.

We are also at full employment yet we cannot cut a dime of federal spending? There is no balance in the tax teh rich stance. We did, now let's see how they avoid it and then adjust accordingly.

 

[colton]

I did this about 5 months ago and got Rubio. Did it again just now and still got Rubio.

Rubio 89%
Bush 86%
Cruz 84%
Trump 82% --> scary
Carson 78%
Bloomberg 76% --> would definitely consider voting for him as an independent if Trump gets the Republican nomination
Clinton 67%
Gary Johnson 66%
Sanders 61%

Bump.

Guess Gary Johnson isn't that great of a match for me.

 

[Miggs]

I've been saying for several years that we need to let the Obama 58.67% increase on capital gains settle in before doing anything. Now that we have solid numbers, we're seeing the rich pay much, much more in taxes prior to Obama. Both as a % and overall #'s.

We are also at full employment yet we cannot cut a dime of federal spending? There is no balance in the tax teh rich stance. We did, now let's see how they avoid it and then adjust accordingly.

This article's a year old but it gives some good insight into just how misleading (and to me, untrue) those unemployment numbers (purposefully) are.

https://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspx

 

[Deleted member 848]

This article's a year old but it gives some good insight into just how misleading (and to me, untrue) those unemployment numbers (purposefully) are.

https://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspx

this is the graph Gallup made with their interpretation of true unemployment

Can't see it dipping below 8% with all of the trade agreements in place.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I just retook this with the updated candidates. My results were 97% Clinton and 8% Trump. The others were scattered between the two with Stein coming in a close second and that Mormon guy that has gotten attention for some odd reason coming in really low at 28%. Not that who I was voting for has been in question for awhile since we got our nominees but this confirms that there is no chance I would vote for Trump when I disagree with him on almost every policy. The only things I completely agreed with him on from this quiz is requiring vaccines and limits on the amount donors can give candidates.

 

[colton]

I just retook this with the updated candidates. My results were 97% Clinton and 8% Trump. The others were scattered between the two with Stein coming in a close second and that Mormon guy that has gotten attention for some odd reason coming in really low at 28%.

Evan McMullin? That's who I'm currently planning to vote for. He's a good option for those of us who can't stand Trump nor Clinton, and whose views on the issues are moderate/conservative.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Evan McMullin? That's who I'm currently planning to vote for. He's a good option for those of us who can't stand Trump nor Clinton, and whose views on the issues are moderate/conservative.

Yes, that is the guy. So people are voting for him because he is extremely conservative, Mormon and not Climton/Trump? I guess I just dont see the appeal of him or why he has gotten any attention running as an independent. I just looked up and watched a few videos of him being interviewed he seemed perfectly fine and nice. He mentioned his religion and how that shapes his decisions as part of almost everyone of his decisions. Based off that I am guessing he is just popular among Mormons and no one else? Is he planning to run for a position in Utah and just getting his name out there?

 

[colton]

Yes, that is the guy. So people are voting for him because he is extremely conservative, Mormon and not Climton/Trump?

Mormon has nothing to do with it, or at least not for me. I got interested in him before I even knew his religion, or that he had Utah ties. And I wouldn't say "extremely conservative", I'd say "moderately conservative". His stances on a number of issues (immigration, refugees, global warming, foreign policy, etc.) are more mainstream than e.g. the Tea Party movement. But yeah, the "not Clinton/Trump" thing is huge. If there were another candidate who is an alternative to Clinton & Trump I knew of, that was moderately conservative--or even moderate, period--I'd certainly give them consideration.

I guess I just dont see the appeal of him or why he has gotten any attention running as an independent. I just looked up and watched a few videos of him being interviewed he seemed perfectly fine and nice. He mentioned his religion and how that shapes his decisions as part of almost everyone of his decisions. Based off that I am guessing he is just popular among Mormons and no one else?

Last I heard he was polling at 2-3% nationwide, which is well behind Johnson but ahead of Jill Stein. So it's got to be more than just Mormons. Seems to me that he's the logical choice for all of the Republicans who for various reasons can't or won't support Trump.

Is he planning to run for a position in Utah and just getting his name out there?

Don't know what his future plans are. He's never been in politics before. From the interviews I've seen, it sounds like he himself was a "never Trump"er, who got fed up with having no good alternative, so when people approached him about a possible run he said yes.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Evan McMullin? That's who I'm currently planning to vote for. He's a good option for those of us who can't stand Trump nor Clinton, and whose views on the issues are moderate/conservative.

I just did it again and was 94% Evan.