Trump took 160 million from Soros, and was accused of money laundering with Soros

[Madmick]

In other words, pretty much left vs. right.

No, I think his words were better. I think it wiser to leave them alone.

7 of the 10 richest men in America (Soros isn't one of them at #16) are leftists.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

 

[Jack V Savage]

No, I think his words were better. I think it wiser to leave them alone.

7 of the 10 richest men in America (Soros isn't one of them) are leftists.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

That's pretty irrelevant to the point.

The left is on the side of labor (regardless of the financial position of individual people who hold their positions) and the right is on the side of capital. That's almost by definition.

 

[Madmick]

That's pretty irrelevant to the point.

The left is on the side of labor (regardless of the financial position of individual people who hold their positions) and the right is on the side of capital. That's almost by definition.

It's not at all irrelevant to the point unless you're a leftist determined to misrepresent those who believe the "capital" position will produce better overall wealth and economic health for all as anti-"labor".

Unions concentrate wealth and power no differently, but as they are the lamprey, not the shark, they don't care if anybody keeps swimming. They'll just find a new host.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It's not at all irrelevant to the point unless you're a leftist determined to misrepresent those who believe the "capital" position will produce better overall wealth and economic health for all as anti-"labor".

If you think that, say, eliminating taxation on capital (as Rubio, allegedly one of the sane Republicans) makes workers better off relative to capital, I have a bridge to sell you. And you'd still be left-leaning in terms of your sentiment if you favored it for that reason; just not intelligent about it.

Unions concentrate wealth and power no differently, but as they are the lamprey, not the shark, they don't care if anybody keeps swimming. They'll just find a new host.

OK... Not sure how that fits into the discussion, but your opposition to labor organization is noted.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Citizens United isn't an opposition movement to campaign finance reform.

Oh. So CU supports campaign finance reform? And is using its resources to try and implement it?

But I see that unnecessary "correction" was just an excuse to insinuate I was a racist. And an enabler of the right-wing.

You hit all the marks. Keep up the good work you warped little Clinton shill.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to demean the help for failing to iron my Che Guevara t-shirt. Then it's off to the club to hit the links with my fellow men of leisure.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Oh. So CU supports campaign finance reform? And is using its resources to try and implement it?

Really?

I said that it wasn't an opposition movement to campaign finance reform. It has a completely unrelated mission (basically, to elect Republicans--so one you support). That doesn't mean that it supports campaign finance reform. It's like if you said that the Golden State Warriors were campaign finance reform opposition, and I said, "no, they're a basketball team," I wouldn't be saying that they support campaign finance reform. Get it?

Now if you'll excuse me I have to demean the help for failing to iron my Che Guevara t-shirt. Then it's off to the club to hit the links with my fellow men of leisure.

Too bad we can't give partial likes... That's not so far from how I actually picture you.

 

[ultramanhyata]

It's not at all irrelevant to the point unless you're a leftist determined to misrepresent those who believe the "capital" position will produce better overall wealth and economic health for all as anti-"labor".

The confusion concerning a left/right equivalency only occurs if one doesn't understand the context of the statement; that context being the contemporary, American political system.

Of course there is a wide chasm between the left and the right in abstract. Or according to social and economic theory.

Unions concentrate wealth and power no differently, but as they are the lamprey, not the shark, they don't care if anybody keeps swimming. They'll just find a new host.

As susceptible as unions can be to corruption, today's union leaders do not wield anything even remotely approaching the power and influence of a Koch, Soros, Adelson, etc.

 

[Madmick]

If you think that, say, eliminating taxation on capital (as Rubio, allegedly one of the sane Republicans) makes workers better off relative to capital, I have a bridge to sell you. And you'd still be left-leaning in terms of your sentiment if you favored it for that reason; just not intelligent about it.

If you think that income tax rates holds a linear relationship to effective tax rates on the ultrawealthy, or to production of revenue as a percentage of the GDP, then the University of Chicago has about a hundred studies to sell you.

OK... Not sure how that fits into the discussion, but your opposition to labor organization is noted.

As I espoused no such view your inability to comprehend the written word is duly noted.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If you think that income tax rates holds a linear relationship to effective tax rates on the ultrawealthy, or to production of revenue as a percentage of the GDP, then the University of Chicago has about a hundred studies to sell you.

As I espoused no such view your inability to comprehend the written word is duly noted.

That last line is funny given that I commented specifically on taxes on capital gains.

So the chart is irrelevant to the discussion, in addition to being extremely misleading (for one thing, income taxes aren't the only taxes, but I could go on--doesn't say anything about tax expenditures is another big issue with that--just a numbery type display to fool rubes; and I see that the source is the FEE).

If you want to get serious about this completely unrelated issue, think about the things that affect income-tax revenue (isolating that) relative to GDP: rates; nominal growth (inflation plus real income growth), which puts more people in higher brackets; and tax expenditures. Any of those individual things can have an effect that wash out the others (or they can reinforce each other). If the claim is that reducing rates increases nominal growth to the point that revenue increases, that requires a very different kind of evidence (and, hint, serious looks into that question don't support that conclusion at all).

 

[ultramanhyata]

Really?

I know exactly what Citizens United is and how it came to be the poster boy for opposition to campaign finance reform. I wanted to make a quick point about the Orwellian nature of the name, given its association. Calling it a "movement" was a sort of poetic license that got me there, minus typing out the backstory.

I think you just wanted to be anal about it.

Too bad we can't give partial likes... That's not so far from how I actually picture you.

The irony of your perception is that you are the only one of the two of us who has ever claimed to be an upper middle class adult living in an expensive home in a high rent district.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The irony of your perception is that you are the only one of the two of us who has ever claimed to be an upper middle class adult living in an expensive home in a high rent district.

Upper middle class isn't a major executive with a place in the mountains, friend. So, yeah, I'm not in your zip code.

 

[Madmick]

That last line is funny given that I commented specifically on taxes on capital gains.

LMFAO, so the left isn't staunchly and perpetually for higher income taxes?

No, the chart is relevant, and clearly devastating, which is why you did what you always do when confronted with an overwhelming truth. Have a good day, Jack. Keep fighting for the little guy-- I mean girl!!!

 

[klnOmega]

He's a democrat plant.

 

[Jack V Savage]

LMFAO, so the left isn't staunchly and perpetually for higher income taxes?

You're changing the subject. My point was about capital vs. labor.

No, the chart is relevant, and clearly devastating, which is why you did what you always do when confronted with an overwhelming truth. Have a good day, Jack. Keep fighting for the little guy-- I mean girl!!!

Er, when I see bullshit, I call it out (and even though you were unfamiliar enough with the subject to be fooled by the chart, I'm pretty sure my explanation was simple enough for you to understand). And you're doing what you do when that happens--running, attacking and declaring victory. Do-si-do.

 

[Rational Poster]

If you think that income tax rates holds a linear relationship to effective tax rates on the ultrawealthy, or to production of revenue as a percentage of the GDP, then the University of Chicago has about a hundred studies to sell you.

As I espoused no such view your inability to comprehend the written word is duly noted.

That's a nice chart but, it's not really showing the whole picture.

How many people actually fit into the highest tax bracket in 51-63 vs the high tax bracket in 97-02?

I think it wouldn't take much effort to prove that there are more people in higher tax brackets today vs 63, thus a larger pool of revenue to draw from. That's not even getting into the differences in GDP then vs now.

 

[m52nickerson]

No, I think his words were better. I think it wiser to leave them alone.

7 of the 10 richest men in America (Soros isn't one of them at #16) are leftists.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

This does not disprove labor vs capital is left vs right. You are only looking at 10 out of how many very wealthy people, and even they don't represent capital.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Upper middle class isn't a major executive with a place in the mountains, friend. So, yeah, I'm not in your zip code.

My dad was VP of manufacturing for a mid-size company in a mid-size US city. He owned one house. And the local ski club we belonged to when I was a kid had members who were plumbers, construction workers, cops, etc.

But feel free to keep adding layers to the bullshit cake that is my troll bio you sick jack-off.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Of course it was!! Can't you take a joke?

I laughed, audibly
It's my new standard response

 

[ultramanhyata]

Really. I'd actually prefer an anti vaxxer like Stein than either of the 2 turds that are representing dem/pub.

When did Stein become an "anti-vaxxer"?

In fact, in the last thing I read, Stein was taking flack from a certain segment of the vaccine choice crowd because she stated there was no scientific evidence linking vaccines with autism.

(The Green Party does have some weird, pro-homeopathy plank in their platform. Which is pretty flaky, IMO.)

 

[Jack V Savage]

That's a nice chart but, it's not really showing the whole picture.

How many people actually fit into the highest tax bracket in 51-63 vs the high tax bracket in 97-02?

I think it wouldn't take much effort to prove that there are more people in higher tax brackets today vs 63, thus a larger pool of revenue to draw from. That's not even getting into the differences in GDP then vs now.

Among other problems, yeah. The chart was put out by a capital lobbying organization to try to trick rubes into being fatalistic on taxes. Not even relevant to the discussion, but really misleading.

My dad was VP of manufacturing for a mid-size company in a mid-size US city. He owned one house. And the local ski club we belonged to when I was a kid had members who were plumbers, construction workers, cops, etc.

But feel free to keep adding layers to the bullshit cake that is my troll bio you sick jack-off.