Discussion in 'The War Room' started by armbarboy, Jan 6, 2015.
I thought that was going to be a shitty article given the title of this thread, but it was actually hilarious. Good find.
I am a tax pro and we are going to have fee increases this year for the extra work that is involved and the people that receive the credit will have an even larger fee due to the extra forms.
NY Times is just a rag. How can anyone use THAT as a source?!?!? It's clearly a racist, Southern paper.
I'm not surprised though. Liberals like spending OTHER people's money. Also further evidence that if you don't contribute to society you shouldn't have a vote on those who build and produce.
This is why you need to look at data when you make policy decisions. On an individual level, everyone is trying to get what's best for them, even if it leads to objectively worse outcomes for everyone.
It's too crazy to make up. People should seriously read the whole article. Full of laughs.
Which is why restraining the power of the state is so important.
hahahaha... I... hahahaha!
Actually, that is a situation where coordinated action is appropriate.
Does anyone, on any side of the discussion, think that policy should be driven by what's best for the pockets of Harvard professors? No. Not even Harvard professors (when it is abstract).
This is correct. Just like policy shouldn't be driven by what's best for a political party's leadership. Such as our bloated defense spending.
Um, OK. I think most people can agree with that, though I'm not really sure what it has to do with this discussion.
Policy should be driven by what is best for the Oligarchy. Always. If you take exception to that, well consider yourself flagged for extra monitoring.
Is defense spending good for the Oligarchy? Damn right it is.
It's you can't trust people thus you need constraints. Even the noble, altruistic, enlightened, erudite, Hahvahd scholars. It's all academic til it hits you in the pocket.
Good to see you being more open with your positions. What other policies are good for the "oligarchy"? Tight money, low public debt, weaker safety net, doing nothing about climate change. Any others?
It's good for all of us. We don't want another 9-11, now do we?
Have we become so barbaric that we will subject the elite of Harvard to less than elite service? Heaven forbid.
and conservatives like giving other people's money to the rich.
People underestimate how nationalism has replaced religion and tribalism as the tool that dynastical families manipulate the low IQ sheep in supporting a society that exploits them. The flag is th new bible.