Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL a Dem pundit is on TV defending illegal immigration saying that they work 2-3-4 as many as 5 jobs to live the American dream, and here you are claiming there are no jobs to be had.
There isn't. It's not a claim. As you note, illegals hold 4-5 of them.
Where are all the people on welfare going to find jobs? You can hold positions if you are able to defend them. Seems you aren't.
If the media would check Dem talking points, the evidence that Dems are the party of the rich is easy to find. The deeper you dig into the rich R's compared to the rich D's are, tells you a lot about the values of the two parties.
Look at who votes Democrat:
See a pattern here?
- Those who want money from the govt (bureaucrats, teachers, welfare recipients), they're the Dems.
- People who deal in the arts, entertainment and social science - unproven ideas are Democrats.
- The guys who sell sizzle (celebrities),
- the guys in strike-it-rich businesses (Wall St. and high tech and class-action lawyers).
- Lawyers are the single biggest donor block, 4:1
- government bureaucrats,
- teachers,
- union members, and above all, government unions.
- academia,
- entertainment and the media
- welfare recipients
Generally Vote R ....
- Doctors supported the Republican 5:1
- Small business owners vote Republican.
- Registered nurses vote Republican.
- Married women vote Republican.
- Farmers vote Republican.
- The military and engineers and national security experts are Republican.
I agree with some of what you say but you are really overgeneralizing and I am sure you know it. For example, not all government workers always vote for the Democrats.
Having said that, the Republicans historically had the reputation of being the party of the rich, at least since the New Deal in the 1930s. Whether that is fair or not, or just media propaganda, is debatable. What is not debatable is the Republicans have the habit of giving the Democrats ammunition as this combined corporate and billionaire tax cut does.
High property taxed states that voted Trump in 2016 either have no income tax(Texas) or lower cost of housing compared to the northeast or west coast(GA,WI, NE, MI). You people are ignoring the fact that tax brackets are going down despite the SALT cap, so complaining about a property tax hike of $100 when your income tax gets cut by $200(which may not include the child tax credit and the elimination of the alternative minimum tax) doesn't make any sense.
"B-but the debt"...Where were you for the last 8 years? When this expires(hopefully it becomes permanent) it'll add up to 2 trillion. The debt increased by 10 trillion during Obama's term. Spending is the bigger problem.
Maybe it is the right thing because it spurs economic growth and could actually increase revenue to the us treasury and not reduce it.
Look at what happened with President Kennedy's tax cut opf 1963.
Do you have a problem with those numbers, are they wrong?
Now go and ask me about Reagan's trickle down tax cut of 1982. Go ahead, ask how much that added to the deficit.
You cannot compare the tax cuts passed by Johnson but named after Kennedy (who proposed them) to the nonsense of Reagan, GWB and now His Orangeness.
The Revenue Act of 1964 was classic demand side tax reform. Much of what has come out of GOP ever since has been the other way; supply side (or trickle down) tax reform that gives most of the benefits to the wealthy and corporations. This under the mistaken and often proven incorrect idea that money flows down, which it largely hasn't.
You people who keep going on about the virtues of tax cuts and liking recent actions to those of 1964 on the economy seem to forget or are ignorant that it wasn't just the Kennedy tax reform alone that juiced things; but the massive government spending that also followed. This included Medicare which among other entitlement programs Mr. Ryan now has a hard on to cut which is the second part of his Ayn Rand inspired wet dream.
Maybe it is the right thing because it spurs economic growth and could actually increase revenue to the us treasury and not reduce it.
Look at what happened with President Kennedy's tax cut opf 1963.
Do you have a problem with those numbers, are they wrong?
Now go and ask me about Reagan's trickle down tax cut of 1982. Go ahead, ask how much that added to the deficit.
When you give someone with $5 million dollars a tax cut, they don't go out and spend it. They can already afford to buy whatever it is they want. This wasn't done to spur spending. It was done to further prop up wall street as that is the only thing important today.
Reagan worked as a president because he made people feel good about the country again and brought people together. His approval ratings were very high. He didn't win 525-13 for nothing. Trump didn't even win, Hillary lost. Trump doesn't even try to bring the country together. He can only win by dividing and that is not how a country turns itself around.
I agree with some of what you say but you are really overgeneralizing and I am sure you know it. For example, not all government workers always vote for the Democrats.
Oh my goodness, no. I know my information is only anecdotal, but around the DoD, the regular employees (not appointees) appear to be overwhelmingly for the republicans, election after election. Either that or the republican voters are the most vocal. I'm not sure why this "fact" that government workers are inherently Democrat keeps getting brought out. Honestly, the *should* be, but the most definitely aren't.
Reagan worked as a president because he made people feel good about the country again and brought people together. His approval ratings were very high. He didn't win 525-13 for nothing. Trump didn't even win, Hillary lost. Trump doesn't even try to bring the country together. He can only win by dividing and that is not how a country turns itself around.
His approval ratings were nearly as bad as Trump's(if you believe these polls are legit) in 82 into early 83. When his policies actually kicked in and folks realized he wasn't just an insane Hollywood actor his approval went up. And yes, Trump did try to bring the country together after being elected and sworn in but he realized that nearly half of the voting block will hate his guts no matter what he says so what's the point?
His approval ratings were nearly as bad as Trump's(if you believe these polls are legit) in 82 into early 83. When his policies actually kicked in and folks realized he wasn't just an insane Hollywood actor his approval went up. And yes, Trump did try to bring the country together after being elected and sworn in but he realized that nearly half of the voting block will hate his guts no matter what he says so what's the point?
No he didn't. You can claim it all day but he's never made an attempt to do so and I do not believe his ego would allow it even if he wanted to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
