|
Post by aubrey on Feb 4, 2018 16:12:25 GMT
The point of it is that people in the top tax bracket got a hell of a lot more than $1.50 a week - they got millions, billions in some cases. And here is Paul Ryan (who has just been given $500,000 by two of the largest beneficiaries, the Koch brothers (pronounced Cock), as well as his own massive tax cut) boasting about how good it is for low rate tax payers, who will be losing a lot more than they gain. Ryan has already deleted the tweet. What's wrong with that? The top tax bracket people by definition earn a lot more and pay an hell of a lot more tax so it's logical that they should get the greater tax cuts. The same people that create the wealth, and jobs It's only the green eyed who envy this The only people I'm jealous of are those who have never heard The Fall or read MR James. This jealousy thing is crap, Bryan, and you know it is: when no one on the average wage can afford to buy a house in London because of all the flats for millionaires that are bought as investment, and just left empty, driving up the prices of all London property in the process, when wealth has been systematically redistributed towards the wealthy over the part 40 years - but that's not redistribution, is it? That's just natural, a natural law: and anything trying to stop it is communism. The high rate tax payers do not create wealth: that is created by the people who work for them: there would be no wealth at all without that. You want dependency culture? How about the billions used to bail out banks? How about the infrastructure that keeps all those corporations profitable? How about people like Branson - and all the rest - happy to use a country's infrastructure, as well as its system of education, its health system, its roads, its police, etc, to keep his profits healthy without having to train his workers, or provide health insurance - and all the rest of it - and yet still not pay for it? How is that ok? Do come off it, Bryan.
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Feb 4, 2018 16:14:46 GMT
The point of it is that people in the top tax bracket got a hell of a lot more than $1.50 a week - they got millions, billions in some cases. And here is Paul Ryan (who has just been given $500,000 by two of the largest beneficiaries, the Koch brothers (pronounced Cock), as well as his own massive tax cut) boasting about how good it is for low rate tax payers, who will be losing a lot more than they gain. Ryan has already deleted the tweet. What's wrong with that? The top tax bracket people by definition earn a lot more and pay an hell of a lot more tax so it's logical that they should get the greater tax cuts. The same people that create the wealth, and jobs It's only the green eyed who envy this These are massive tax cuts in a country that can't afford health care for millions of its population, that that has a massive homelessness problem (but it's not a problem if you're not homeless, right?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2018 17:02:15 GMT
What's wrong with that? The top tax bracket people by definition earn a lot more and pay an hell of a lot more tax so it's logical that they should get the greater tax cuts. The same people that create the wealth, and jobs It's only the green eyed who envy this The only people I'm jealous of are those who have never heard The Fall or read MR James. This jealousy thing is crap, Bryan, and you know it is: when no one on the average wage can afford to buy a house in London because of all the flats for millionaires that are bought as investment, and just left empty, driving up the prices of all London property in the process, when wealth has been systematically redistributed towards the wealthy over the part 40 years - but that's not redistribution, is it? That's just natural, a natural law: and anything trying to stop it is communism. The high rate tax payers do not create wealth: that is created by the people who work for them: there would be no wealth at all without that. You want dependency culture? How about the billions used to bail out banks? How about the infrastructure that keeps all those corporations profitable? How about people like Branson - and all the rest - happy to use a country's infrastructure, as well as its system of education, its health system, its roads, its police, etc, to keep his profits healthy without having to train his workers, or provide health insurance - and all the rest of it - and yet still not pay for it? How is that ok? Do come off it, Bryan. You should try thinking outside the Momentum box I said before that I was going to leave you in your little world, I will now do that as I fear for your blood pressure
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Feb 4, 2018 19:53:00 GMT
I have nothing to do with Momentum.
That allowing the rich to take all the wealth thing has been tried; it leads to massive poverty and a fractured society (the wealthy constantly afraid of revolution, passing ever more draconian laws against assembly and free speech - see the 6 Acts of the Regency, the Tolpuddle Martyrs, the Peterloo Massacre, etc.
The arguments against taxation were just the same then: "wealth makers", etc. It was mendacious bollocks then and it's mendacious bollocks now.
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Feb 4, 2018 19:54:43 GMT
The first punch at that Rees Mogg affair was thrown by one of Moggs's supporters.
He's so brave that he did not hit the man who was talking to Rees Mogg, but went after his girlfriend instead. That's what all Conservatives are like, do you think? Cowards who hit women?
|
|
|
Post by honeybear on Feb 6, 2018 9:37:08 GMT
Wall Street is in meltdown.I wonder if Blowshisown Trump will be taking credit for this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2018 9:39:52 GMT
Wall Street is in meltdown.I wonder if Blowshisown Trump will be taking credit for this. I suspect it will be down to the usual money makers, they drive the value of stocks down - buy them all up cheaply - then sell when they rise again One day they will lose out as stocks fail to rise in time, and there is another crash. But that affect us all
|
|
|
Post by norty on Mar 14, 2018 16:21:51 GMT
Job security is zilch with Trump at the helm, I think though that Rex Tillerson will be pleased to be gone. Tillerson was a big eyeroller aperently when he disagreed with a Trump idea.
🙄
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Jun 24, 2018 8:31:02 GMT
No one in Trump's organisation thought to register this name:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2018 10:51:01 GMT
No one in Trump's organisation thought to register this name:
There is a picture doing the rounds of cages like these that were used in 2014 when Obama was president
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Jun 24, 2018 12:51:21 GMT
They were different; they were for unaccompanied children, not children who had been forcibly separated from their parents: both Trump and Pence have said that this is a new policy.
Besides, the left, even democrats, campaigned and demonstrated against many of Obama's policies; this is the first time that any republican has said a thing about this,though of them support everything he does.
His order stopping the policy does not explain how it will work, or how the 3000+ children affected will be reunited with their parents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2018 16:19:43 GMT
They were different; they were for unaccompanied children, not children who had been forcibly separated from their parents: both Trump and Pence have said that this is a new policy.
Besides, the left, even democrats, campaigned and demonstrated against many of Obama's policies; this is the first time that any republican has said a thing about this,though of them support everything he does.
His order stopping the policy does not explain how it will work, or how the 3000+ children affected will be reunited with their parents.
But somebody must have separated them. Maybe the parents trying the Calais dodge Trump would claim it was all him, until it all rebounds on him
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Jun 24, 2018 18:06:17 GMT
It was children who had arrived without parents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2018 20:10:32 GMT
It was children who had arrived without parents. I suppose it must be the same as Calais to here, if the child can get in I think the parents can then follow
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Jun 25, 2018 12:28:20 GMT
It was children who had arrived without parents. I suppose it must be the same as Calais to here, if the child can get in I think the parents can then follow
|
|