ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:I hope it shuts down and never comes back. All businesses in the USA should choose right now to not pay taxes anymore. They can't prosecute everyone and nobody will prosecute if they are not getting paid.
Take back the country now
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
He's right jew nose.CAA Flagship wrote:
Yeah I'm sure that is the endgame.houndawg wrote:SDHornet wrote:Starve the beast!
Let it crash and burn and replace it with a Parliament.
This is beautiful
SDHornet wrote:Yeah I'm sure that is the endgame.houndawg wrote:
Let it crash and burn and replace it with a Parliament.
This is beautiful
Agreed. Trump is gone by Jan 2021, or sooner, or even if a miracle occurs (neutral on the positive/negative of miracle), just four more years after that. Chuck's going nowhere. He was here for the last shutdown, he's here for this one, and he's got at least another 10-15 years in the Senate ahead of him, if not a little more. Trump is bit a blink of time - Schumer is like an epoch.89Hen wrote:Chuck Schumer FAR more a detriment to the US than Trump could ever be.
89Hen wrote:Chuck Schumer FAR more a detriment to the US than Trump could ever be.
So you're saying he could catch up to Chuckie?Chizzang wrote:89Hen wrote:Chuck Schumer FAR more a detriment to the US than Trump could ever be.
Oh, I don't know... Trump is still dialing in his insanity
we've got 3 more years to see just how nutballs he can really be
Chuckie is a bit player89Hen wrote:So you're saying he could catch up to Chuckie?Chizzang wrote:
Oh, I don't know... Trump is still dialing in his insanity
we've got 3 more years to see just how nutballs he can really be
Chizzang wrote:Chuckie is a bit player89Hen wrote: So you're saying he could catch up to Chuckie?
Trump is a beloved lunatic in the White House
There's no comparison
Let's wait and see if we have a nuclear war or not.89Hen wrote:Chuck Schumer FAR more a detriment to the US than Trump could ever be.
So, you agree that Chuck is far more a detriment to the US than Trump...short of nuclear war???JohnStOnge wrote:Let's wait and see if we have a nuclear war or not.89Hen wrote:Chuck Schumer FAR more a detriment to the US than Trump could ever be.
Too soon to tell.Col Hogan wrote:So, you agree that Chuck is far more a detriment to the US than Trump...short of nuclear war???JohnStOnge wrote:
Let's wait and see if we have a nuclear war or not.
No. There's a "...could ever be..." in the question. Besides, I think Donald Trump being President of the United States is already more a detriment to this country than Chuck has been. Nothing this bad has ever happened to the United States in terms of who they put into positions of authority. This is really bad. This is like getting in a taxi and noting that the driver is really, really drunk. I'm not talking about like a 0.08 BAC. I'm talking like something like a 0.20. It's absolutely nuts. Again: We have a totally unqualified, mentally ill, totally dishonest person in what is the most powerful single position in our government. It is absolutely stupid to have this situation.Col Hogan wrote:So, you agree that Chuck is far more a detriment to the US than Trump...short of nuclear war???JohnStOnge wrote:
Let's wait and see if we have a nuclear war or not.
Except that he managed to get Congress to fix the corporate tax rate, returning business capital back to the US - that's bigly yuge...JohnStOnge wrote:No. There's a "...could ever be..." in the question. Besides, I think Donald Trump being President of the United States is already more a detriment to this country than Chuck has been. Nothing this bad has ever happened to the United States in terms of who they put into positions of authority. This is really bad. This is like getting in a taxi and noting that the driver is really, really drunk. I'm not talking about like a 0.08 BAC. I'm talking like something like a 0.20. It's absolutely nuts. Again: We have a totally unqualified, mentally ill, totally dishonest person in what is the most powerful single position in our government. It is absolutely stupid to have this situation.Col Hogan wrote:
So, you agree that Chuck is far more a detriment to the US than Trump...short of nuclear war???
Save your breath. JSO does not know what that means, or it's impact on America.Rob Iola wrote:Except that he managed to get Congress to fix the corporate tax rate, returning business capital back to the US - that's bigly yuge...JohnStOnge wrote:
No. There's a "...could ever be..." in the question. Besides, I think Donald Trump being President of the United States is already more a detriment to this country than Chuck has been. Nothing this bad has ever happened to the United States in terms of who they put into positions of authority. This is really bad. This is like getting in a taxi and noting that the driver is really, really drunk. I'm not talking about like a 0.08 BAC. I'm talking like something like a 0.20. It's absolutely nuts. Again: We have a totally unqualified, mentally ill, totally dishonest person in what is the most powerful single position in our government. It is absolutely stupid to have this situation.
It's bigly yuge for some, we'll see if it is for the country as a whole years from now. 40% of tax receipts used to come from corporate taxes, now it's 10%. I can see the argument for that but you have to either 1) replace that revenue elsewhere (EG: Reagan's tax increases on the middle class) or cut spending which neither side is good at. Then there's the history of deregulation and high end tax cuts followed by a crash thing. We've seen that movie a few times.Rob Iola wrote:Except that he managed to get Congress to fix the corporate tax rate, returning business capital back to the US - that's bigly yuge...JohnStOnge wrote:
No. There's a "...could ever be..." in the question. Besides, I think Donald Trump being President of the United States is already more a detriment to this country than Chuck has been. Nothing this bad has ever happened to the United States in terms of who they put into positions of authority. This is really bad. This is like getting in a taxi and noting that the driver is really, really drunk. I'm not talking about like a 0.08 BAC. I'm talking like something like a 0.20. It's absolutely nuts. Again: We have a totally unqualified, mentally ill, totally dishonest person in what is the most powerful single position in our government. It is absolutely stupid to have this situation.
The word "either" implies that there are only two ways to narrow the gap. There are other ways that the gap is filled including wage increases, productivity, and transaction velocity.kalm wrote:It's bigly yuge for some, we'll see if it is for the country as a whole years from now. 40% of tax receipts used to come from corporate taxes, now it's 10%. I can see the argument for that but you have to either 1) replace that revenue elsewhere (EG: Reagan's tax increases on the middle class) or cut spending which neither side is good at. Then there's the history of deregulation and high end tax cuts followed by a crash thing. We've seen that movie a few times.Rob Iola wrote: Except that he managed to get Congress to fix the corporate tax rate, returning business capital back to the US - that's bigly yuge...
I'm not saying it won't work, but to continue JSO's analogy, we're sort of betting on the cab driver somehow, some way getting us to our destination despite the .20 BAC.
