sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
No. It's called the progressive tax system and it's been in place for over 100 years. But if Trump wants to scream about the unfairness of the high tax rate of people with 500 million + in assets, he should run some serious ads about it. Should be a winning strategy. BTW - the Brookings Institute could not find one single family farm that would fall into that category.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
This would effect like 10 people in the USA. Come on man.
The estate tax is meant to keep obscene wealth in control.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Here is something one of my friends posted on Facebook this morning. I haven't done the math myself, but this is fucked up if true! "Hillary has proposed a 65% estate tax. Here is what that would do for the -----family. When I'm gone If the ranch was valued at $1,000.000 My wife would owe the government $650,000. She would have to sell a ranch that has been in my family since 1902. She would then owe income tax on the $1,000,000. At the current tax rate she would owe the IRS $396,000. She would have no home, no car, and no income and still owe the IRS $46,000."
BULLSHIT!!!
Family farms are exempt up to like $7million.
In your example your wife would owe the government NOTHING. She wouldn't have to sell....if she did sell she would owe NOTHING...because at date of death the land gets valued at fair market assuming you are the owner when you die.
How do you believe that crap?
I never said I believed it, just said fucked up if true, then the less condescending poster above you showed me that it is in fact not true... Chill pill dude! For fuck sake!
Here is something one of my friends posted on Facebook this morning. I haven't done the math myself, but this is fucked up if true! "Hillary has proposed a 65% estate tax. Here is what that would do for the -----family. When I'm gone If the ranch was valued at $1,000.000 My wife would owe the government $650,000. She would have to sell a ranch that has been in my family since 1902. She would then owe income tax on the $1,000,000. At the current tax rate she would owe the IRS $396,000. She would have no home, no car, and no income and still owe the IRS $46,000."
It's exactly false. Under her proposal, the 65% tax is for family farms valued between 500 million and a billion. If your friend has a billion dollar family farm, then he's fucked. I feel horrible for him. Here's what's relevant for him "Family farms worth less than $3.5 million or $7 million from a couple would be exempt from Clinton’s estate tax."
Correct, I hadn't even heard of it until I saw the comment this morning. I wouldn't say I was shocked, just annoyed with all the mis-information being spewed by...well...all politicians. I'm pretty sure people would be able to find loopholes with that particular issue to sidestep that estate tax regardless of the farm value though. These are the hot topics in my neck of the woods, lol
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business. It would essentially make that estate value at 65% less and give some larger corporation (such as Trump's, for instance) a bargain once the family business could no longer function. But, again, I'm sure there are plenty of loopholes and some estate lawyers would make a fortune. Imagine having a 65% tax blankety thrown at your retirement...that would hurt. I know it would effect a very small percentage of farm estates, but ouch for them!
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
Eddiec is right... you're better than this. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
At this point it's really a non issue for me. I'm not supporting his words or using this post as a way of excusing him. Obviously I think most of Ttumps words are horrible, but it's also a part of his message- the non-PC message. The whole sistuation is a bit out of control and people are being overly sensitive, in my opinion, because she was probably on a contract, trump on the other hand doesn't know how to handle the situation and only makes matters worse for himself (if that's even possible at this point).
To be clear the only reason I posted it is because it's interesting that Clinton would use that particular women considering that part of her history. To many Hispanics, such as myself, the world of narcos has completely ruined what was once an amazing country. We take that far more serious then comments about someone's weight. I don't know if the trump camp is even aware of this yet (her history with narcos), but I imagine he can turn the convo around real quick if he exposes her for that. Trust me, anyone involved with ruining a great country like Mexico will quickly be challenged on those fronts. She may not be a drug Trafficker, but the fact that she was involved with one, especially one like this moron, will be questioned for their involvement in the drug world over being questioned on whether they were forced to exercise due to a beauty pageant contract.
Hope that kind of makes some sense. I am in no way making excuses for trump. This is more about Clinton's gamble in using this women with such a history. There are also other parts of her history which will look bad and make people feel less sorry for her.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure. Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol It's frustrating.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure. Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol It's frustrating.
No offense taken, there's a reason I am not an accountant and I will be the first to admit it, lol. I rely on my accountant to decipher tax code. I just brought it up so I would personally gain a better understanding of what is/is not trying to be passed, as any voter should.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure. Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol It's frustrating.
No offense taken, there's a reason I am not an accountant and I will be the first to admit it, lol. I rely on my accountant to decipher tax code. I just brought it up so I would personally gain a better understanding of what is/is not trying to be passed, as any voter should.
Then it's a useful question and I'm glad you asked it. If this was a reason for you to vote for Trump, then I hope you can reconsider.
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure. Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol It's frustrating.
No offense taken, there's a reason I am not an accountant and I will be the first to admit it, lol. I rely on my accountant to decipher tax code. I just brought it up so I would personally gain a better understanding of what is/is not trying to be passed, as any voter should.
Yeah, I wasn't talking about you at all, I just wanted to be sure you knew that. I was more venting about people I deal with in real life. I didn't know about her estate tax plan at all lol
sooooo if you work real hard and create a land empire(paying taxes along the way) and it moves from generation to generation(taxes being paid along the way) then generation X decides to sell for $500+ million and the government gets 65%......our government needs to be reclaimed by the people in a big way don't ya think ?
Godfather.
Yeah, I would say that's equally fucked up. 65% estate tax would destroy the operations of an estate worth $500 mil. and would potentially put a lot of people tied to it out of business.
But that's a corporation, not a family farm. I guarantee anything with employees and worth over a half million is going to be incorporated. And that means shares, even if private, which would not be subject to this tax. As I pointed out, the Brookings Institute (this is a centrist think tank) could not find one farm that would qualify for the tax.
Then why is it even being proposed if there would be no one effected? Smoke and mirrors for her constituents? Why direct it specifically at farms, why not hold all other corporations/estates, including hers and all the celebrities that make that in 2 months, to the same standard?
It is not a tax plan aimed at farms. It's a tax plan for the super wealthy. Trump took a tax plan and applied to farms because he was in Iowa or wherever he was. It's a tax plan aimed at the super wealthy. And again, your friend completely misinterpreted it at even another level. The 65% tax rate applies to the portion that EXCEEDS $1 billion, not the entire amount. Anything under a billion is taxed at the existing rate. It's just like any other marginal rate. Here's a summary from US News which is not exactly liberal.
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure. Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol It's frustrating.
No offense taken, there's a reason I am not an accountant and I will be the first to admit it, lol. I rely on my accountant to decipher tax code. I just brought it up so I would personally gain a better understanding of what is/is not trying to be passed, as any voter should.
Then it's a useful question and I'm glad you asked it. If this was a reason for you to vote for Trump, then I hope you can reconsider.
I still do not like either candidate, I think they both have shitty foreign policy/relationships and are both poor representations to a nation with a great pool of really intelligent people. The whole process has turned into a sporting event. Some of the issues that directly effect me would be gun control, abortion, insurance, social issues (I am a sociologist), and safety for my family. If someone asked me if I trusted putting my life in the hands of either candidate...I would shrill. That being said, I have a lot of military and police family/friends that I am truly frightened for in that their lives are pretty much in the hands of politicians that seem to lack any moral standards when it comes to the lives of every day American citizens or people if the world in general. I like to keep my voting choices somewhat ambiguous as many people from both sides tend to draw major assumptions and conclusions about people based on that (as can be seen time after time on AMT) and I am sure I have been guilty several times as well... I have a hard time, though, with anyone that says either of these candidates will be a good leader compared to some of the great leaders that I know personally and those that sit on the sidelines. Personally, I am libertarian-minded in that I put way more faith in my neighbors and people in general than I do in these faux "leaders". Anyone that knows me knows that I am a survivalist, debt free, and cautious with my trust...I think that often highly contributes to who I vote for in the grand scheme of things. Just like how someone that has never left the confided of a city has certain perceptions that guide how they vote. This tax issue specifically sounds like more of the same smoke and mirrors and probably won't make any difference in who I vote for, I just wanted a better grasp of what was going on.
The misinformation caused by social media is fucking dangerous as hell.
Yeah it is, and when you reacted strongly to the initial post from PJ POWER, I immediately assumed that frustration or anger was about that. These kinds of lies are constantly being disseminated on social media, and MILLIONS of people gobble it up as fact, and start disseminating the false information as fact themselves. It's like wild fire. In front of their children, no less, who then start building their own world views on half-truths and complete bullshit. It is SCARY, and I think one of the bigger threats to society today, TBH.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
The misinformation caused by social media is fucking dangerous as hell.
Yeah it is, and when you reacted strongly to the initial post from PJ POWER, I immediately assumed that frustration or anger was about that. These kinds of lies are constantly being disseminated on social media, and MILLIONS of people gobble it up as fact, and start disseminating the false information as fact themselves. It's like wild fire. In front of their children, no less, who then start building their own world views on half-truths and complete bullshit. It is SCARY, and I think one of the bigger threats to society today, TBH.
I fully agree, but would like to also point out that this trend is not specific to one political party. The memes going back and forth is what drives my crazy these days and is a sure way to get unfollowed if not unfriended on social media.
The misinformation caused by social media is fucking dangerous as hell.
Yeah it is, and when you reacted strongly to the initial post from PJ POWER, I immediately assumed that frustration or anger was about that. These kinds of lies are constantly being disseminated on social media, and MILLIONS of people gobble it up as fact, and start disseminating the false information as fact themselves. It's like wild fire. In front of their children, no less, who then start building their own world views on half-truths and complete bullshit. It is SCARY, and I think one of the bigger threats to society today, TBH.
I fully agree, but would like to also point out that this trend is not specific to one political party. The memes going back and forth is what drives my crazy these days and is a sure way to get unfollowed if not unfriended on social media.
That's true to an extent. The liberal memes I see don't even approach the level of the GOP memes though.
The tax subject is big with the GOP...because it's complicated and people just don't understand it.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
The misinformation caused by social media is fucking dangerous as hell.
Yeah it is, and when you reacted strongly to the initial post from PJ POWER, I immediately assumed that frustration or anger was about that. These kinds of lies are constantly being disseminated on social media, and MILLIONS of people gobble it up as fact, and start disseminating the false information as fact themselves. It's like wild fire. In front of their children, no less, who then start building their own world views on half-truths and complete bullshit. It is SCARY, and I think one of the bigger threats to society today, TBH.
I fully agree, but would like to also point out that this trend is not specific to one political party. The memes going back and forth is what drives my crazy these days and is a sure way to get unfollowed if not unfriended on social media.
No it's not, but one party is definitely a LOT guiltier than the other, and I'm sure you can guess which one I mean, lol. But I'm not really talking parties only. Just fucking trolls on the Internet with an agenda are the worst perpetrators. People are largely allowing massive delusional losers who think they're clever make up their facts for them. And, of course, there is the media... and yeah, it is largely the right wing wacko branch of the media pulling this shit. Like those online polls about Trump winning the debate for instance, and then right wing media very loudly making it seem like they mean something other than how fucking screwed up and manipulative the campaign and online polls are. That was a culmination of the Trump campaign, idiotic Trump supporters, and mainstream right wing media.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I saw a post by a right wing "friend" of mine on facebook yesterday where he was complaining about how lopsided the debate questions were against Trump.
Most replies agreed but one guy said something like "He cooked his own goose...he just can't control himself from saying stupid things" and that led to a tirade from someone else about Benghazi, i.e. why wasn't Benghazi brought up...Hillary should have to answer for that, etc.
Hasn't she answered for that already? People are so ignorant I just can't take it.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I saw a post by a right wing "friend" of mine on facebook yesterday where he was complaining about how lopsided the debate questions were against Trump.
Most replies agreed but one guy said something like "He cooked his own goose...he just can't control himself from saying stupid things" and that led to a tirade from someone else about Benghazi, i.e. why wasn't Benghazi brought up...Hillary should have to answer for that, etc.
Hasn't she answered for that already? People are so ignorant I just can't take it.
Yeah, it's maddening. Like head-exploding levels of frustration.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I saw a post by a right wing "friend" of mine on facebook yesterday where he was complaining about how lopsided the debate questions were against Trump.
Most replies agreed but one guy said something like "He cooked his own goose...he just can't control himself from saying stupid things" and that led to a tirade from someone else about Benghazi, i.e. why wasn't Benghazi brought up...Hillary should have to answer for that, etc.
Hasn't she answered for that already? People are so ignorant I just can't take it.
Yeah, it's maddening. Like head-exploding levels of frustration.
You guys should make a baby. We need less ignorant people in the world.
It's pretty telling when people are drilling holes in their new iPhones for headphone jacks based on a video they saw on social media, lol
Oh man, lol. When I saw that story I actually looked it up on Snopes to see if it was true that people were really falling for it. I thought maybe the claim that anyone was actually doing it was fake ..... and found that Snopes only bothered to confirm that getting a headphone jack by drilling a hole in your iPhone was false. SMH. (Stupidest thing Apple ever did btw)
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
It's pretty telling when people are drilling holes in their new iPhones for headphone jacks based on a video they saw on social media, lol
Oh man, lol. When I saw that story I actually looked it up on Snopes to see if it was true that people were really falling for it. I thought maybe the claim that anyone was actually doing it was fake ..... and found that Snopes only bothered to confirm that getting a headphone jack by drilling a hole in your iPhone was false. SMH. (Stupidest thing Apple ever did btw)
Apple has done very few smart things since Jobs died.
The misinformation caused by social media is fucking dangerous as hell.
Yeah it is, and when you reacted strongly to the initial post from PJ POWER, I immediately assumed that frustration or anger was about that. These kinds of lies are constantly being disseminated on social media, and MILLIONS of people gobble it up as fact, and start disseminating the false information as fact themselves. It's like wild fire. In front of their children, no less, who then start building their own world views on half-truths and complete bullshit. It is SCARY, and I think one of the bigger threats to society today, TBH.
I fully agree, but would like to also point out that this trend is not specific to one political party. The memes going back and forth is what drives my crazy these days and is a sure way to get unfollowed if not unfriended on social media.
No it's not, but one party is definitely a LOT guiltier than the other, and I'm sure you can guess which one I mean, lol. But I'm not really talking parties only. Just fucking trolls on the Internet with an agenda are the worst perpetrators. People are largely allowing massive delusional losers who think they're clever make up their facts for them. And, of course, there is the media... and yeah, it is largely the right wing wacko branch of the media pulling this shit. Like those online polls about Trump winning the debate for instance, and then right wing media very loudly making it seem like they mean something other than how fucking screwed up and manipulative the campaign and online polls are. That was a culmination of the Trump campaign, idiotic Trump supporters, and mainstream right wing media.
Yeah, I'm not sure it is so one sided. I've seen some pretty jacked up shit coming from both. It probably depends on one's own political leaning as to how innocent one or the other side acts on social media. Look at the primary Bernie vs Hillary timeframe for PLENTY examples. I witness plenty of nazi fearmonging from the Hillary supported media towards Bernie and still see Bernie media supporters using the same talking points and memes as Trump supporters...whether they are accurate or not. Too large of a social media platform for shit not to be flung from all directions... On a side note, Yay for freedom of speech!!!
I agree that these things are not connected at all. I've always contended that the housing crisis came down to one thing and everyone in the process was complicit (buyers, agents, underwriters, brokers, traders), and that was the creation of unique mortgage products designed to get anyone into any home. Interest only loans, stated income loans, short term arms, etc. These were all products that eventually blew the whole thing up.
Comments
BTW - the Brookings Institute could not find one single family farm that would fall into that category.
The estate tax is meant to keep obscene wealth in control.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Imagine having a 65% tax blankety thrown at your retirement...that would hurt. I know it would effect a very small percentage of farm estates, but ouch for them!
To be clear the only reason I posted it is because it's interesting that Clinton would use that particular women considering that part of her history. To many Hispanics, such as myself, the world of narcos has completely ruined what was once an amazing country. We take that far more serious then comments about someone's weight. I don't know if the trump camp is even aware of this yet (her history with narcos), but I imagine he can turn the convo around real quick if he exposes her for that. Trust me, anyone involved with ruining a great country like Mexico will quickly be challenged on those fronts. She may not be a drug Trafficker, but the fact that she was involved with one, especially one like this moron, will be questioned for their involvement in the drug world over being questioned on whether they were forced to exercise due to a beauty pageant contract.
Hope that kind of makes some sense. I am in no way making excuses for trump. This is more about Clinton's gamble in using this women with such a history. There are also other parts of her history which will look bad and make people feel less sorry for her.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-09-28/hillary-clintons-estate-tax-proposal-is-entirely-reasonable
Doesn't it get old explaining to people (libertarians particularly) how marginal tax rates work? Man, I get tired of it for sure.
Libertarians tend to think of themselves as more informed than anyone else, and the only people who understand economics, and then they come at you raving about "why should I own a business at all if Bernie is going to take 90% of what I make, no business can survive that!!" and I have to patiently explain how taxes work lol
It's frustrating.
I didn't know about her estate tax plan at all lol
www.headstonesband.com
Interestingly...very few are defending his morning tweets. They clearly weren't prepared for that at all.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I still do not like either candidate, I think they both have shitty foreign policy/relationships and are both poor representations to a nation with a great pool of really intelligent people. The whole process has turned into a sporting event. Some of the issues that directly effect me would be gun control, abortion, insurance, social issues (I am a sociologist), and safety for my family. If someone asked me if I trusted putting my life in the hands of either candidate...I would shrill. That being said, I have a lot of military and police family/friends that I am truly frightened for in that their lives are pretty much in the hands of politicians that seem to lack any moral standards when it comes to the lives of every day American citizens or people if the world in general.
I like to keep my voting choices somewhat ambiguous as many people from both sides tend to draw major assumptions and conclusions about people based on that (as can be seen time after time on AMT) and I am sure I have been guilty several times as well...
I have a hard time, though, with anyone that says either of these candidates will be a good leader compared to some of the great leaders that I know personally and those that sit on the sidelines. Personally, I am libertarian-minded in that I put way more faith in my neighbors and people in general than I do in these faux "leaders". Anyone that knows me knows that I am a survivalist, debt free, and cautious with my trust...I think that often highly contributes to who I vote for in the grand scheme of things. Just like how someone that has never left the confided of a city has certain perceptions that guide how they vote. This tax issue specifically sounds like more of the same smoke and mirrors and probably won't make any difference in who I vote for, I just wanted a better grasp of what was going on.
The tax subject is big with the GOP...because it's complicated and people just don't understand it.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Most replies agreed but one guy said something like "He cooked his own goose...he just can't control himself from saying stupid things" and that led to a tirade from someone else about Benghazi, i.e. why wasn't Benghazi brought up...Hillary should have to answer for that, etc.
Hasn't she answered for that already? People are so ignorant I just can't take it.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
(Stupidest thing Apple ever did btw)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/30/clintons-claim-that-the-bush-tax-cuts-played-a-large-part-in-sparking-2008-recession/
This nonsense gets repeated a lot.
On a side note, Yay for freedom of speech!!!