Democrats officially the "party of the elite rich"

Author: Greyparrot
FJB

Posts

Total: 85
#61
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Thats not how that law works. It's literally only been applied to providing images of naked adults engaging in sex. It's not illegal to allow your kid to watch gore otherwise the passion of the christ would have gotten parents locked up. 

It's also not illegal to expose children to nude adults in non sexual ways and this is why parents in nudist colonies are not in prison. Consult a lawyer and the first amendment please
#62
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I am not bothered to prove you wrong. Do what you want, crying First Amendment in court will cover you.
#63
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
That would never make it to court even if it was actual gore and not just some barely visible head wrapped in a bag
#64
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
He'll even if it were illegal you should fight against that sort of tyranny as opposed to supporting fascism
#65
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
don't really care to be honest.

I literally quoted the law. You would be super against showing sexual content to underage people right? Why are you okay showing gory violent content to them?
#66
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
First of all. I don't agree that this website is for children. I do believe that teenagers should be allowed here but that they should proceed with caution. So no I don't think a single child clicked on that link. I do believe that we should operate on the site with the assumption that our entire audience is adults. 

If children see content not intended for them, that is not my problem. Porn is illegal, gore is not. However it would be unethical to target children with images of gore. It is not unethical for them to find an adult oriented website like this one and then click on a gore video. 

It should also be noted that I kept the link in clear text so that way o ly people who were personally okay with seeing gore would click it. 
#67
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
@Wylted (or whoever)

If you really believe that rich people tend to vote blue, then would you want to raise taxes on disproportionally blue voters to subsidize red voters?

If not, then you support rich blue voter's right to keep what they earned.
#68
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
Back to the original topic...

Are you aware that anti monopoly and anti predatory laws to stop mega corporations destroying smaller competitors with underhanded tactics are internationally, regardless of culture, pushed by the left wingers of any given nation?

As in the reason they exist in any nation that has them is always the left wing. The right wing now support it too, yet they all owe the left wing for fighting for it.
#69
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Are you aware that anti monopoly and anti predatory laws to stop mega corporations destroying smaller competitors with underhanded tactics are internationally, regardless of culture, pushed by the left wingers of any given nation?
Perhaps but let's go back to my premises and conclusions

Premise- adding regulations lead to less competition in the marketplace (I gave examples)

Premise 2.

Conclusikn- so avoiding regulation will  keep competition high

WTF writing this out it seems off. Premise 1 is correct but I am not sure how to connect Premise 1 to he conclusion or what hidden Premise was there. 

The point being address my premises or the flaws in my conclusion 
#70
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
@Wylted (or whoever)

If you really believe that rich people tend to vote blue, then would you want to raise taxes on disproportionally blue voters to subsidize red voters?
No, my concern would be more about what th effects of the tax policy would be not in who they harm, and I would limit rich people here to the billionaire power brokers. The koch brother type is rare most billionaires seem to lean left and my speculation is that regulations and interventionist policies help them control things better. 

If not, then you support rich blue voter's right to keep what they earned.
I mean yeah. Why should a rich Democrat not be allowed to keep his money. If he wants his income going to social causes, he can donate it. Even if all.billionaires were democrats I don't think it has any impact on this belief.  To me it's about what is most beneficial for society and I think they could male a better impact with the money than politicians
#71
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
If wealthy people vote for and financially support Democrats, why was the Republican Party so focused on cutting the taxes of the wealthy in 2017? 

You see why your opinion is not credible?


#72
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
If wealthy people vote for and financially support Democrats, why was the Republican Party so focused on cutting the taxes of the wealthy in 2017? 
Because cutting their taxes leads to more prosperity down stream. For the democrats yes it is about punishing people who vote republican but this is really about creating financial prosperity.  I would read through the articles from Mises.org to clear up why this works but it works. 

#73
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
I just saw a poll that showed among billionaires nearly 50% voted for Biden while 35% voted for Trump
#74
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
Less regulation (not that there is no such thing as too much) leads to less genuine competition. You're just peddling a lie.

Without regulation, Nike and Adidas or whoever you can think of, can sell at temporary loss if need be and do all kinds of things, sweatshops as a bare given, and not being even slightly afraid of competitors rising up.

They sell at breakeven or loss to drive the competition to bankruptcy as their competitor has to sell higher, then they ramp up the price afterwards to make up for it.

That is one of many things available in unregulated markets and the elite rich are absolutely the tier of wealth most capable of exploiting this.
#75
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
I just gave you examples. Prior to the FDA 80% of our food supply came from local companies, now less than 10 companies control most of the American food supply. 

Prior to glass Steagull most banking was local banks now most are large chain banks

In the wild west days of the internet, there was a larger diversity of sites, people didn't sit on just 5 or 6 sites all day like Twitter, tiktok and instagra.

You haven't responded to my examples at all
Topic's author
#76
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@RationalMadman
It's a bit hard to explain the results of that graph I posted, but I suppose it has a lot to do with the consolidation of power.
#77
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
Because cutting their taxes leads to more prosperity down stream. 
That’s nonsense. Trickle down economics has never worked. It did not work under Trump even before Covid hit.

For the democrats yes it is about punishing people who vote republican
The Republicans tax reform punished blue state Americans to reward the 1%.

The SALT cap created a double tax on blue state Americans- paying taxes on money that was taxed.

My taxable income increased by 40,000 dollars thanks to Republicans. union dues (I pay 4000 a year) are no longer tax deductible thanks to them.
My effective tax rate went up 5% while millionaires and billionaires got a tax cut

Prior to glass Steagull most banking was local banks now most are large chain banks
Glass-Steagall was created to separate investment banking from commercial banking. Its repeal at the behest of Republicans was a key cause of the financial crisis of 2008.
#78
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,641
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Republicans officially the "party of Slovenian sex workers."
#79
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,492
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
That’s nonsense. Trickle down economics has never worked. It did not work under Trump even before Covid hit.
Trump is not a proponent of austrian economics though his policies are certainly less interventionist than anyone on the left and we don't know the effects of trumps policies because the left literally shut down the entire economy to save 0.05% (the death rate of 75 year olds and above) of boomers. 

The SALT cap created a double tax on blue state Americans- paying taxes on money that was taxed.
You re literally a proponent of double taxing. Is it not true that you would see capital gains taxed, dividends of those business owners also taxed and then also have the businesses themselves taxed and then consumers at the point of sale taxed? This is like a quadruple tax. 

union dues (I pay 4000 a year) are no longer tax deductible thanks to them
That's absurd that you belong to a union. When I was a teenager I was a part of the UCFW UNION and it took me less than a month to realize I could get a 35% raise and skip out on union dues by switching to a grocery store that had no union. 

What jobs even still have unions. Electricians and cops? It's just dumb to accept union dues which have no impact on how much you get paid. 

Glass-Steagall was created to separate investment banking from commercial banking. Its repeal at the behest of Republicans was a key cause of the financial crisis of 2008
My understanding is that banks took risks they knew they shouldn't have because they assumed idiots would bail them out with tax payer money. 

And even if the repeal of Glass Steagull cause this it would change the fact that there was more competition in banking prior to all of the 20th century regulations
#80
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
No, my concern would be more about what th effects of the tax policy would be not in who they harm
What negative effects would exist from taxing the globalists more?

We had that tax code in the Eisenhower years.  We got the interstate.

To me it's about what is most beneficial for society and I think they could male a better impact with the money than politicians
That's a good point.  Politicians use the money for war; rich people use it for better things than genocide.


#81
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 389
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
-->
@Greyparrot
@IwantRooseveltagain



The irony of the blatant hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Dems whine about the GOP giving tax breaks to the rich, and yet they are benefiting from it.

The Dems, historically, have been so corrupt it is beyond belief. 
#82
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Amber
The Dems, historically, have been so corrupt it is beyond belief. 
Gee, would you care to expound on this statement? Or are you just going to say it’s common knowledge?

Topic's author
#83
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
Dems whine about the GOP giving tax breaks to the rich, and yet they are benefiting from it.

Yep, Pelosi has been in politics for 35 years, and has done nothing to reform insider trading in Congress in any of those years.
#84
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Dems whine about the GOP giving tax breaks to the rich, and yet they are benefiting from it.
Do you two idiots not see how your accusation is not an effective criticism of democrats?

Wealthy Democrats, like Warren Buffet, are critical of Republican tax cuts for the rich because Buffet knows he doesn’t need a tax break, and these kind of tax breaks will not do anything to stimulate or improve the overall US economy.

26 days later

Topic's author
#85
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WyIted
You re literally a proponent of double taxing. Is it not true that you would see capital gains taxed, dividends of those business owners also taxed and then also have the businesses themselves taxed and then consumers at the point of sale taxed? This is like a quadruple tax. 

It is a quadruple tax. At what point does the share actually become fair?