inb4 "Sanders is washed up" from the right-wing group here. He has made a lot of valid points and has been right on a lot of things. His voting record has also shown that he has the best interest for the people in mind.
What's better in your mind?
2100 jobs shipped overseas which equals $0.00 of additional tax revenue
Or
1000 jobs stayed, 1100 jobs shipped overseas, which equals to $5,000,000ish of additional tax revenue?
Remember, those are the only 2 choices. If you demand that all jobs stay, then they automatically go overseas and you lose!
I choose neither and re-negotiating our free trade agreements.
I'm cautiously optimistic about the deal... waiting to see what into it before I go one way or the other...
^
This is how I feel.
If it is more of the same in terms of keeping companies in a state/country that has been done before (no or limited state taxes, land grants, employee taxes paid directly back to companies, etc) than it is nothing new and really not helpful. It continues the serious problem in the US of companies holding taxpayers hostage by threatening to leave.
When is Rooks going to implement the VR chatrooms that he promised? P&R would be way better if we had to glance at each other awkwardly while people are arguing.
Wanna see something even more surprising? Overlay a map of proclaimed "sanctuary cities" over that map savel.
Its like the majority of the people in those cities share the same opinion on illegal immigrants or something.
Are you really using that point to argue about illegals voting? Because that is pretty dumb.
Why is it dumb? Plenty of people have suggested it. I guess should we humor the whole Russian hacking scheme instead?
No one is going to suggest illegals don't vote right?
Both of those conclusions are unintelligent and uninformed. Both parties in this instance have no definitive proof of either action, nor or any legitimate reason to suspect that anything occurred other than the fact that the lost the election or in the republicans case, those cities.
I find it funny how you are quick to parallel your own argument with the Russian hacker argument without realizing how hypocritical it is.
Except there are actual hurdles rob havkig a voting machine via the internet.
the current implementations of it are basically handouts, and that's never going to work long term.
yeah the sticky wicket in forcing corporations to reinvest their windfall in america instead of private islands with hookers and blackjack goes against our core priciples of government intervention...
Obama is actually as much black as he is white, his mother is Stanley Ann Dunham and is extremely white. The Democrats purposefully kept the focus off his mother and on his father in an attempt to promote his "blackness" for the sake of votes. Whenever someone would point out that Obama is just as white the response was "Shut up you, he's black because that's more useful to us".
Yeah that was totally the Dems putting focus on his Kenyan Muslim father the last 8yrs in order to secure the black vote.
It actually was, which is what makes it so funny. The liberals focused so much on his black father that everyone just assumed his mother was black too. The conservatives saw that his father was not from USA, and since he was "all Black" they just assumed, the the Democrats wanted everyone to, that his mother was also black. The result was that everyone argued over his "birth certificate" being a short form certified copy and not over the fact that since his mother was an American he was a Natural Born Citizen anyway. The Democrats could of easily dismissed that entire nonsense by merely pointing at a picture of his mother at home or university and saying "see natural born citizen regardless of country of birth". But nope can't do that cause then people might think "wait he's not really black enough" and kinda ruin their moment.
Back in 2008 while the conservatives here were trying to argue against his nationality, I made the above argument that he was most certainly a Natural Born Citizen regardless of his father due to who his mother was. The liberals just kinda ignored it entirely and pressed on with the whole "your just racist" counterargument to the conservatives. Was really irrational to watch.
the current implementations of it are basically handouts, and that's never going to work long term.
yeah the sticky wicket in forcing corporations to reinvest their windfall in america instead of private islands with hookers and blackjack goes against our core priciples of government intervention...
and who is going to say no to blackjack
Lol they aren't Bond villians but companies are extremely careful about domestic reinvestment due to liberal policies. They would like to grow, open a few new offices or attempt to expand but the risk of having to commit to long term payroll liabilities and unions is enough to made them decide to expand outside the USA.
Unions alone area huge reason to avoid expanding into anyplace that doesn't have Right To Work laws.
It's illuminating instead to have this conversation about whether someone is black enough.
Liberals are the ones who played identity politics, don't get salty when it bites you in the ***. President is just as much a "White President" as a "Black President", he's of mixed ethnicity (which is a good thing BTW) and instead of using that to project a message of unity, Democrats used that to project a message of "we're so modern and progressive cause we just elected a Black President". The proceeded to keep pushing it for eight years, all the while alienating the rural white middle-class population. Alienating that population so much that they didn't even bother counting or researching them for polls, cause you know, "rural white people don't matter".
the whole idea is that decreasing tax burdens on corporations will increase their ability to invest and increase their business therefore creating more jobs and economic growth
The core problem with trickle-down, though, is that it's all carrot and no stick. Only one or the other doesn't work. All carrot, and there's little incentive to not just pocket the money as executive bonuses. All stick, and companies just leave.
KS and LA have been demolished by this; it can work, but the current implementations of it are basically handouts, and that's never going to work long term.
Like every theory out there, it's plausible if it's executed correctly.
If we can create a system where humans aren't involved, I'm 99% certain that it would work the way it was intended.
the whole idea is that decreasing tax burdens on corporations will increase their ability to invest and increase their business therefore creating more jobs and economic growth
The core problem with trickle-down, though, is that it's all carrot and no stick. Only one or the other doesn't work. All carrot, and there's little incentive to not just pocket the money as executive bonuses. All stick, and companies just leave.
KS and LA have been demolished by this; it can work, but the current implementations of it are basically handouts, and that's never going to work long term.
Like every theory out there, it's plausible if it's executed correctly.
If we can create a system where humans aren't involved, I'm 99% certain that it would work the way it was intended.
Humans are the reason we even need a solution to begin with.
the whole idea is that decreasing tax burdens on corporations will increase their ability to invest and increase their business therefore creating more jobs and economic growth
The core problem with trickle-down, though, is that it's all carrot and no stick. Only one or the other doesn't work. All carrot, and there's little incentive to not just pocket the money as executive bonuses. All stick, and companies just leave.
KS and LA have been demolished by this; it can work, but the current implementations of it are basically handouts, and that's never going to work long term.
Like every theory out there, it's plausible if it's executed correctly.
If we can create a system where humans aren't involved, I'm 99% certain that it would work the way it was intended.
Humans are the reason we even need a solution to begin with.
It's illuminating instead to have this conversation about whether someone is black enough.
Liberals are the ones who played identity politics, don't get salty when it bites you in the ***. President is just as much a "White President" as a "Black President", he's of mixed ethnicity (which is a good thing BTW) and instead of using that to project a message of unity, Democrats used that to project a message of "we're so modern and progressive cause we just elected a Black President". The proceeded to keep pushing it for eight years, all the while alienating the rural white middle-class population. Alienating that population so much that they didn't even bother counting or researching them for polls, cause you know, "rural white people don't matter".
And now Trumps elected President lol.
All I can see is someone salty about Obama's presidency trying to link gibberish together to make a point that doesn't exist.
Don't know why Obama's administration is any of your concern.
It's our problem, and now we fixed it by giving us a bigger problem to deal with.
It's illuminating instead to have this conversation about whether someone is black enough.
Liberals are the ones who played identity politics, don't get salty when it bites you in the ***. President is just as much a "White President" as a "Black President", he's of mixed ethnicity (which is a good thing BTW) and instead of using that to project a message of unity, Democrats used that to project a message of "we're so modern and progressive cause we just elected a Black President". The proceeded to keep pushing it for eight years, all the while alienating the rural white middle-class population. Alienating that population so much that they didn't even bother counting or researching them for polls, cause you know, "rural white people don't matter".
And now Trumps elected President lol.
All I can see is someone salty about Obama's presidency trying to link gibberish together to make a point that doesn't exist.
Don't know why Obama's administration is any of your concern.
It's our problem, and now we fixed it by giving us a bigger problem to deal with.
Wouldn't it be crazy if the president of the United States could effect the world by their decision and actions?