Of course, I would say it's hideously incorrect to characterize Bernie as a "liberal." He's not.

"Of course, Trump represents conservatives."

Really? Then why isn't he Besties with Liz Cheney?

Trump represents himself. And for some reason, he has created a cult of personality that some gravitate towards. Including "liberals"

Iirc, something like 10% of disgruntled Bernie supporters voted for Trump in 2017.

If talking politics is disruptive at work, management should put an end to it. Regardless of which side of the aisle the speech was supporting.

My office is full of people who range from those who dislike Trump, to those who hate him. None of them are progressives, but if you're a Trump supporter-if you think Trump represents conservatives, you would probably label them as such.

"I know two Gen Z who didn't cast a vote for Harris because of her backing the Israel policies of "Genocide Joe"."

Did they vote for Trump? Or just not vote?

"Meanwhile, upwards of 75,000 Palestinians were murdered."

A question to the group, and potential Dem voters in particular, how important an issue is the Israel/Hamas conflict to you? Is there anything Harris could have done with regard to this conflict changed your vote? Should she have sided with the "from the river to the sea" crowd, stayed out of it, or taken another path?

"Is it possible that Trump intends to hit critical infrastructure rather than directly kill people with a strike?"

It sounds like that's what he means. Unless nukes start flying tonight.

But that is certainly not what he said.

Very little he says is coherent nowadays.

I know that when I plan on committing genocide, I post something stating as much.

"Do you mean the regressive VAT should fund regressive tax cuts for the rich? At least you have math on your side, if that's what you're saying."

I mean that a VAT taxes things that people want. And people always want things.

Tax on income can be avoided. It's basically voluntary.

Why do you think every other western country has a VAT?

"... and also focusing upon giving multi-trillion tax cuts to the wealthy ..."

I've been saying it for a long time...the US needs to implement a VAT. Like every other western country.

The only way you can avoid a VAT is by not buying things that have a VAT.

Does this mean I don't have to pay FICA taxes anymore?

Does this mean I don't have to pay FICA taxes anymore?

"I'm so glad I'm getting the f*&^ out of here."

Where ya off to?

The whole concept of Palestine is a western creation.

"From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free." Is an anti colonialism slogan."

From the river to the sea is a call for the destruction of Israel.

"Israel wouldn't ever have come to exist as a country if it weren't for the Zionist extremists."

Sure they would. The British created Israel. They tried to create Palestine as well, but it was rejected by the Arabs.

"Especially when it's Israelis saying it. They use the same slogan, is it anymore "inclusive' coming from them?"

Nope.

Israel's long-term problem, once it has solved the "from the river to the sea" problem, is getting rid of the extremists within their own country. At the moment, they seem to revere the Haredim.

For those that want to occupy Palestine, I recommend they try and Occupy Palestine, TX. See how well that works out, given that the Haredi refuse military service and generally lack the balls for any sort of wetwork.

It would appear that it's not a lot different on the left.

"From the river to the sea" is not exactly a call for inclusivity.

#22 I'm hearing that even the TSA Pre-Check at ATL is hours long. Clear has been shut down.

I was supposed to have been travelling from LAS to FRA tomorrow AM. Global events altered my travel plans.

I got lucky, I suppose.

#11

Are you familiar with a drummer named Paul Leim?

BTW, Europe is chock full of different healthcare policies. It's not like the US has to start from scratch.

"THAT's who'd suddenly turn against the idea, and join a coordinated effort among a whole bunch of wealthy interests: Insurance, Pharma, Hospitals, etc."

That would be me. I might be the only person here who has been subject to a government-operated healthcare system.

I don't remember it being that bad before COVID, but from spring of 2020 until I retired in August of 2023, the US military healthcare service was almost useless. Appointments for non-flyers were non-existent. You would just go to the ER at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. Even for me as a flyer, appointments had to be made weeks in advance.

Then I retired, getting a private plan through Cigna Global. On the Tuesday after I retired, I called the general provider I had chosen. They asked if I could come in Thursday. I started laughing because it seemed so crazy.

I'm not against a government plan for those who want it, any more than I am against people who want to fly Spirit Air because it is cheap. But don't expect First Class service unless you're willing to pay first class prices. And that seems to be a big rub. That the quality and timeliness of the person buying the first-class ticket should be the same as that of the person buying the Spirit Air ticket.

"Hell, I can create a situation where someone is bringing in $46,000,000 and paying NO income tax. But if I represent that as routine...well, I've left out the salient part, haven't I?"

That's why the reported numbers are averages.

I've also noticed you're making no attempt to argue the data presented, why?

"His claim is off by almost 200%. That's one big-effing hair!"

Do you disagree with the Tax Foundation's data? Cool. Refute it.

And Eberly is right, you are getting emotional about this. Why?

"Read his statement; nothing about a spouse or kids. Just regurgitated crap, based on a table he didn't understand."

The enlighten me.

Does Table 1 not say that the average tax rate for the bottom 50% of taxpayers, or those making less than $46,637, is 3.3%?

Yes or no?

"And you're welcome to challenge his version with your version."

It's not my version, it's the IRS's version. It's the Tax Foundation's version.

I can't honestly take credit for their work or bear any responsibility for mistakes they have made.

But I have yet to see Danforth present a contradiction to any data provided in the study.

...Other than he may think it is unfair. What I must assume he is doing is providing a "critical" assessment of tax policy, where the study is not to present a picture of what the tax structure is, but to provide a subjective analysis on what it should be. That's fine. Just don't conflate subjectivity with objectivity.