Trump's Final 100 days
Quote: rxwineI believe it's Paul Ryan, not McConnell/
Thanks for the clarification.
Well i dont agree with most of his political views but i could certainly live with a president Paul Ryan to the 2 choices in the white house right now
Quote: KeyserMany on the left have so much blind hatred and bigotry that they want to see the president impeached/removed from office at any cost.
That isn't a new thing. Happened with Obama for eight years, and to a lesser degree with Bush.
Quote:Do they not realize how devastating that would be to our economy and what it would do to the stock market? Retirement funds/401ks of hard working American families would take a very hard hit. Just look what happened to the market on Friday when the fake news from ABC hit the air!
Don't sell during a crash and you won't lose money. Wait for the correction. A stock market "crash" due to an impeachment won't last. The market only dipped a couple of months during Clinton's impeachment. I don't know about Nixon because there was a whole lot of other crap going on at the time that was affecting the market.
If a President is guilty of crimes, not impeaching him just because your 401k might temporarily take a hit is an absolutely terrible strategy.
Quote: KeyserThe hate, bigotry, and hypocrisy from the left is simply outrageous. Regardless of who the president is, Americans should want the president to succeed for the good of the country. Our enemies around the world want to divide us. They spend a great deal of money attempting to divide us via events like Ferguson by creating outrage and anger where it's unfounded. Don't do their job for them. Don't buy into the fake news.
Trump's idea of "success" is to dismantle government in all directions and divide Americans into warring factions of covetous and weakened splinters. His hundreds of insulting or misleading tweets and videos of dozens of speeches filled with lies and provocative, divisive meat to his base (which would seem to include you) are clear evidence of this.
It also seems clear, in looking at his many cabinet appointments and judicial nominations since, that Pence was chosen as a poison pill to further destroy America. A bootlicking lackey willing to do anything in order to eventually impose his extremely repressive social agenda was the first of many, and fits right in with incompetent and extreme agenda Secretaries and unqualified judges for the federal bench chosen only for their politics.
Your posts support a dangerous, foolish agenda, and a fair amount of projection, blaming the left for what the right is, in fact, doing by trying to divide us from within. The resemblance to Germany in the 1930's is uncanny and sad. I'm also strongly reminded of the Borg (from Star Trek); "resistance is futile" bellowed in the dim light of outer-space tiki torches.
Resistance is not futile. America has taken several steps backward into greed and xenophobia over society. Suggesting that is somehow justified by the balance in someone's account is a ridiculous and shallow misrepresentation of what built the America you claim to care about.
There is no way of knowing what any other President might have presided over in the stock market, but every economic indicator that was improving under Obama has either continued to improve or leveled off. So it's at least a fair bet that it would have continued, and without the divisive politics and senile statements, might have been better.
1) He will resign out of nowhere, shocking everyone. Bonus points for it being on Twitter.
2) He will die in office. Probably something like a heart attack.
3) A combination of 1 and 2. He will have a massive stroke or something be forced to resign.
Quote: TigerWuI predict three endings to the Trump presidency:
1) He will resign out of nowhere, shocking everyone. Bonus points for it being on Twitter.
2) He will die in office. Probably something like a heart attack.
3) A combination of 1 and 2. He will have a massive stroke or something be forced to resign.
I'll go with a fourth. The American people who happen to reside in 'important states'like Florida and Ohio will vote for whichever Democrat runs against Trump. In 2020.
Quote: KeyserIn Ferguson a black man charges a police officer, beats the hell out of him while trying to steal his gun, walks away and then charges again to f#@k him up again and is then shot. All of the witnesses (yes black) testify that this is what happened, and even a grand jury (again, largely black) acquits the officer. But what happens??? We get riots, Black Lives Matter nonsense, and gullible idiots, like Colin Kaepernick, taking a knee to help further polarize and destabilize the country.
There you have it. It just required some gullible, poorly educated, emotionally unstable people to have the desired effect.
These guys aren't black and they said Brown's hands were up. Your version of events doesn't coincide with witness reports here, AS SHOWN ON VIDEO. http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/us/ferguson-michael-brown-shooting-witnesses/index.html
ALL of the witnesses black? Wrong.
Charges again to f**k him up? Wrong.
The grand jury largely black? If 3 out of 12 is considered "largely", then yeah. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ferguson-case-racial-and-gender-makeup-of-grand-jury-revealed/
So if you're wrong on 3 out of 3 charges you make in this paragraph, maybe YOU are falling for the "fake news"? Gullible? Poorly educated?
I'm not telling police they have to treat everyone like their constitutional rights are equal. That's what the Constitution tells them. Same as Sherriff Arapaasscrap who Trump pardoned. You have to treat the people like they have Constitutional rights before you find out if they are legal or illegal. If you don't like it, go find another job.
Physical evidence that included DNA evidence, supported the Officer. Washington Post
Quote: SteverinosThese guys aren't black and they said Brown's hands were up. Your version of events doesn't coincide with witness reports here, AS SHOWN ON VIDEO. http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/us/ferguson-michael-brown-shooting-witnesses/index.html
That video is pretty bad quality, but the pink and green shirted men look more black than anything else.
Quote: SteverinosALL of the witnesses black? Wrong.
I believe a huge majority of the witnesses were black, perhaps not all.
Quote: SteverinosCharges again to f**k him up? Wrong.
?
Eyewitness accounts aren't as accurate as people seem to think they are. AKA: They can be wildly inaccurate, even while eyewitnesses 100% believe what they're saying. IE: The Alan Mendelson 18 yos-in-a-row syndrome.
#PantsUp,Don'tLoot
"How come black people always protest so violently!"
(Black person sits quietly in protest)
"HOW DARE YOU!!!!"
Quote: RSeyewitnesses 100% believe what they're saying. IE:
Police also subject to same inaccuracies.
Quote:Trump has perhaps unwittingly played into a cutting-edge strategy in the legal pursuit of sexual misconduct — claims of defamation that were used against comedian Bill Cosby and in a lesser-know New York case, argued by two lawyers who are now representing Zervos.
The defamation suit filed in January in the New York State Supreme Court by Zervos, a short-lived contestant on "The Apprentice," has reached a critical point, with oral arguments over Trump's motion to dismiss scheduled for Tuesday, after which the judge is expected to rule on whether the case may move forward.
If it proceeds, Zervos's attorneys could gather and make public incidents from Trump's past and Trump could be called to testify, with the unwelcome specter of a former president looming over him: It was Bill Clinton's misleading court testimony — not the repeated allegations of sexual harassment against him — that eventually led to his impeachment.
"It's almost a train you can't stop going down the tracks, said Joseph Cammarata, who represented Paula Jones against Clinton and, more recently, represented seven Cosby accusers in a defamation suit. "It opens him up to have to answer questions about sexual relations, other relationships, what might have been said, to open up your whole life."
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/28871-trumps-final-100-days/277/#post616167
Quote: rxwineIn other news
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/28871-trumps-final-100-days/277/#post616167
Well since trump cant tell truth from his own fiction its probably a safe bet he perjurs himself and gets impeached
Hallelujah
Why not just dome us in with 10 foot thick bullet/bomb proof glass.
Quote: TigerWuI still don't understand why people got upset about Colin taking a knee to protest. What's even more confusing is nobody even cared up until a few months ago, despite the fact he started protesting almost a year and a half ago.
"How come black people always protest so violently!"
(Black person sits quietly in protest)
"HOW DARE YOU!!!!"
Bending the knee is showing great respect
Thats what Game of Thrones is all about in a nutshell
Bending the knee. Who is and who isn't
Quote: IbeatyouracesJust saw the the travel ban was upheld by the S.C.
I feel SO MUCH safer already.
Between 1975 and 2015, 3,024 people were killed in the U.S. from foreign terrorists. 98.6% of those deaths happened on 9/11. So, if you exclude 9/11, Stephen Paddock killed more people in one day than Islamic terrorists did in 40 years. Since 9/11, foreign-born terrorists have killed approximately one American per year. Foreign and domestic Islamic terrorists kill an average of 6 Americans per year.
Lifetime odds of dying from:
A foreign-born terrorist attack: 1 in 45,808
A refugee terrorist: 1 in 46,192,893
An illegal immigrant terrorist: 1 in 138,324,873
In America, you are more likely to be killed by a tornado, earthquake, shark, dog, bees, or an asteroid than a (EDIT: refugee or illegal immigrant) terrorist.
What a stupendous waste of time and probably money. But at least it riles up the base, right?
Quote: TigerWuI feel SO MUCH safer already.
Between 1975 and 2015, 3,024 people were killed in the U.S. from foreign terrorists. 98.6% of those deaths happened on 9/11...
Bush and Cheney were foreign terrorists?? Odd.
Quote: SOOPOOI'll go with a fourth. The American people who happen to reside in 'important states'like Florida and Ohio will vote for whichever Democrat runs against Trump. In 2020.
Yeah, this is more likely.
Assuming the tax scam passes and becomes law, every single 2018/2020 Democratic candidate in OH, MI, PA, etc. needs to run on this:
"Trump stole your state/local tax deduction and mortgage interest deduction to give millionaires a tax cut. I will fight to bring them back."
Quote: IbeatyouracesJust saw the the travel ban was upheld by the S.C.
Why not just dome us in with 10 foot thick bullet/bomb proof glass.
I'm don't think it was upheld. It was put in effect temporarily, pending legal arguments and a decision. So that may change. Not sure what the schedule is.
Quote:Lawyers: Trump Too Busy to Face Woman's Defamation Lawsuit
President Donald Trump's lawyers say he should be immune from a New York defamation lawsuit filed by a former contestant on his reality TV show 'The Apprentice' in part because he's too busy and important.
Yeah, how is he going to get a quick 9 holes in while dealing with that? Busy busy busy, that Trump. Maybe he could donate some of the time he uses making a mockery of the Presidency to be in court.
Probably won't have time for an impeachment either.
https://www.usnews.com/news/entertainment/articles/2017-12-05/judge-weighs-suit-by-woman-who-says-trump-made-advances
2024: Ben Shapiro. As a libertarian. #Winning
First off your state elections are 10x more important than this circus puppet federal election. If you knew anything about this country's legal structure of how laws are passed, you wouldn't give a rats ass about which puppet you're electing. The people you're electing in your state will be the ones representing you in Congress when it comes to pass legislation and state laws will be the laws that will affect 95% of your life. Sure, the federal election and federal gov't has its purpose such as military and other small types of legislation such as copyright and bankruptcy laws etc., but that will impact maybe 5% of your life going forward.
Secondly and lastly, the purpose of my post and maybe it's due to sheer ignorance or not knowing any better due to all this misguided b.s on TV being fed to you, BUT the real problem in this country IS THE FEDERAL RESERVE. If all of you drones just care about which puppet is in office, but dont give a rats ass about a private central bank issuing paper out of thin air depreciating the very dollar you work so hard for every day, resulting in massive inflation, then there really is no hope for any of you. You have a private central bank issuing paper out of thin air AND CHARGING INTEREST to the govt for creating it out of nothing. Do you guys realize our very own government can print money INTEREST FREE. So why the hell do we have a private central bank in existence depreciating our hard earned money. Inflation is the silent tax destroying this country and everyone's individual wealth.
99% of this country's citizens don't even know where their hard earned personal income tax dollars go, it goes to pay the INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT, it doesn't go to highway construction, it doesn't go to building schools, it doesn't go to ANY of that. Property taxes pay for the schools and indirect excise taxes such as the tax on gasoline pay for the roads. Lastly, the corporate income tax goes to pay for the military defense. None of your income tax dollars go to pay for services taxpayers expect from government.
END THE FED and everything will go back into its place. 1913 was the turning point in this country's history where America went down the drain. America used to be the wealthiest country and one of the strongest nations in the world, and now it's a debt machine. Everything revolves around debt now and our youth is taught to think that credit is such a wonderful thing, it's all completely backwards. "Look at this great new house I bought (mortgaged)", "Look at this brand new 50k car I bought (loan)", "Look at all these things I 'own' and now im in debt the rest of my life, but who cares my credit score is 800. So sad and pathetic. The government also reversed the words of debit and credit to add to the confusion. Credit is supposed to mean you have money, but now credit means you owe money and debit is supposed to mean debt, but it now means you have money. This is all cleverly by design.
All of this about who's republican, who's democrat, who's conservative, gun control, global warming, its ALL B.S to distract you from the real problem in this country and that's the private central bank in existence that our founding fathers worked so hard to prevent. But when you got such an uneducated public, this is what happens.
Quote: ZenKinGThe government also reversed the words of debit and credit to add to the confusion. Credit is supposed to mean you have money, but now credit means you owe money and debit is supposed to mean debt, but it now means you have money.
This is just nonsense. You need to read this, because you are seriously oversimplifying and misunderstanding some complicated financial terms. There is no "government conspiracy" to redefine words to get people to spend money and go into debt. That's preposterous.
EDIT: You're right about local elections being extremely important, though. Probably more so than federal. And that's something that a lot of people ignore.
Quote: rsactuaryI believe ZK might be confusing terms from banking with other financial terms. For instance... when you deposit money into your bank account, the teller might say "I will credit your account". That sounds like more $$ for you, therefore credit is a better thing. The term is really referring to the bank's perspective of the balance sheet. A credit is increasing the liability of the bank. So credit has always meant to be owing and ZK is just wrong.
Whether I'm reaching or not for a conspiracy, I dont want that to cloud my original post and what I said in there. Nonetheless, you dont think a debit card and credit card should have reversed meanings? If I have money from my bank account it should not symbolize the word 'debt' or have any form of the word debt in it.
Debit cards should be called credit cards and credit cards should be called debit cards.
Quote: ZenKinGWhether I'm reaching or not for a conspiracy, I dont want that to cloud my original post and what I said in there. Nonetheless, you dont think a debit card and credit card should have reversed meanings? If I have money from my bank account it should not symbolize the word 'debt' or have any form of the word debt in it.
Debit cards should be called credit cards and credit cards should be called debit cards.
No they shouldn't. The terms are correct. Re-read my post.
Quote: ZenKinGWhether I'm reaching or not for a conspiracy, I dont want that to cloud my original post and what I said in there. Nonetheless, you dont think a debit card and credit card should have reversed meanings? If I have money from my bank account it should not symbolize the word 'debt' or have any form of the word debt in it.
Debit cards should be called credit cards and credit cards should be called debit cards.
A Line of Credit has been a financial instrument for hundreds of years. It's not called a loan because it works differently from a loan. Interest is only paid on money that is withdrawn from the line of credit, as opposed to a principal amount with a loan.
The large amounts of revolving consumer credit line's is a somewhat new thing, which I think technology allowed to become so ubiquitous. It is a debt, but credit is certainly the correct term for it.
The word debit means to remove an amount of money from an account, and that term has also been used for hundreds of years.
Quote: gamerfreakA Line of Credit has been a financial instrument for hundreds of years. It's not called a loan because it works differently from a loan. Interest is only paid on money that is withdrawn from the line of credit, as opposed to a principal amount with a loan.
The large amounts of revolving consumer credit line's is a somewhat new thing, which I think technology allowed to become so ubiquitous. It is a debt, but credit is certainly the correct term for it.
The word debit means to remove an amount of money from an account, and that term has also been used for hundreds of years.
The point is the 'words' when talking about a debit card and a credit card are not used properly and should be reversed. Credit cards should be called debit cards or in fact should be called debt cards; and debit cards should be called credit cards. If it's my money, it's my credit, so why is the card called a debit card signifying debt? I dont owe the bank anything. Same logic to credit cards. It's not my credit, it's the credit card companies credit and so it should be a debit card because i owe them the debt for supplying me with the capital.
Now whether the gov't had an agenda by doing by wording it this way is another story, but I'm leaning on it was done purposely. Just look at what happened to the word 'liberal' over time. A liberal back then such as Thomas Jefferson was called a classic liberal and it was someone who believed in complete freedom over government with only the government there to protect our rights. A liberal now means completely the opposite. Hmm, what a coincidence. It's like they're purposely trying to confuse us about America's history, maybe because back then actual 'freedom' existed and now we're one step closer to a communistic police state.
Quote: MaxPenBecause Debt is Money.
It's all gone full circle now, right back to my original post.
Quote: ZenKinGThe point is the 'words' when talking about a debit card and a credit card are not used properly and should be reversed. Credit cards should be called debit cards or in fact should be called debt cards; and debit cards should be called credit cards. If it's my money, it's my credit, so why is the card called a debit card signifying debt? I dont owe the bank anything. Same logic to credit cards. It's not my credit, it's the credit card companies credit and so it should be a debit card because i owe them the debt for supplying me with the capital.
"To debit" in the sense of a "debit card" means to take money away from an existing account. When you use a debit card, you are taking money out of your account and exchanging it for goods or services.
"To credit" in the sense of a "credit card" means the lending institution is crediting, or giving, you money to use. You then owe that lending institution the amount they credited you.
The words "credit" and "debit" have multiple meanings depending on the context, and you are latching on to one specific definition and trying to use it in the wrong context.
Quote: TigerWu"To debit" in the sense of a "debit card" means to take money away from an existing account. When you use a debit card, you are taking money out of your account and exchanging it for goods or services.
"To credit" in the sense of a "credit card" means the lending institution is crediting, or giving, you money to use. You then owe that lending institution the amount they credited you.
The words "credit" and "debit" have multiple meanings depending on the context, and you are latching on to one specific definition and trying to use it in the wrong context.
You're not understanding the point. It's not used in the PROPER WAY that it should be and all it does it subconsciously make people forget the true essence of what 'credit' means as well as the oddly suspicious word 'debit' that is eerily similar to the word 'debt', which obviously was done purposely.
Why should a credit card refer to the one giving me the money and not the consumer itself? After all, these cards are FOR the consumer to USE. Everything is backwards. Credit cards should be what debit cards are now and debit cards should be what credit cards are now.
Quote: ZenKinGYou're not understanding the point. It's not used in the PROPER WAY that it should be and all it does it subconsciously make people forget the true essence of what 'credit' means as well as the oddly suspicious word 'debit' that is eerily similar to the word 'debt', which obviously was done purposely.
Why should a credit card refer to the one giving me the money and not the consumer itself? After all, these cards are FOR the consumer to USE. Everything is backwards. Credit cards should be what debit cards are now and debit cards should be what credit cards are now.
I'm understanding the point completely. You're wrong.
Quote: ZenKinGYou're not understanding the point. It's not used in the PROPER WAY that it should be and all it does it subconsciously make people forget the true essence of what 'credit' means as well as the oddly suspicious word 'debit' that is eerily similar to the word 'debt', which obviously was done purposely.
IT IS BEING USED IN THE PROPER WAY! Did you even read that Wikipedia article I linked to? It explains everything about debits and credits. Very informative.
And "debit" sounds like "debt" because they come from the same Latin root word, "debere." There's nothing odd or suspicious about it.
Quote:Why should a credit card refer to the one giving me the money and not the consumer itself?
It DOES refer to the consumer! You, the consumer, are being credited with money to use how you see fit.
You are making a huge mountain out of this tiny molehill.
Quote: TigerWuIT IS BEING USED IN THE PROPER WAY! Did you even read that Wikipedia article I linked to? It explains everything about debits and credits. Very informative.
And "debit" sounds like "debt" because they come from the same Latin root word, "debere." There's nothing odd or suspicious about it.
It DOES refer to the consumer! You, the consumer, are being credited with money to use how you see fit.
You are making a huge mountain out of this tiny molehill.
Not to beat a dead horse, even though we have already, BUT your argument is referring to the consumer indirectly rather than directly. If I have a credit card today, that is implying "I OWE" someone when in reality, if "I" have a credit card, it's MY card, that should mean "I HAVE THE MONEY". Do you get it now? It should not be referring to the company 'crediting' me with money. It's my card, not theirs, im the one using it.
On the other hand, IF I owe someone something, then it's a DEBT and should be called a debit card, or better yet a DEBT CARD and forget about the word 'debit'. The gov't didnt want to go ahead and just call it a DEBT card as then none of it would make sense and so they invented the word DEBIT.
You seem to be stuck with today's terms and cannot grasp away from it. Forget what you've learned and try to see where I'm coming from.
Quote: ZenKinGNot to beat a dead horse, even though we have already, BUT your argument is referring to the consumer indirectly rather than directly. If I have a credit card today, that is implying "I OWE" someone when in reality, if "I" have a credit card, it's MY card, that should mean "I HAVE THE MONEY". Do you get it now? It should not be referring to the company 'crediting' me with money. It's my card, not theirs, im the one using it.
On the other hand, IF I owe someone something, then it's a DEBT and should be called a debit card, or better yet a DEBT CARD and forget about the word 'debit'. The gov't didnt want to go ahead and just call it a DEBT card as then none of it would make sense and so they invented the word DEBIT.
You seem to be stuck with today's terms and cannot grasp away from it. Forget what you've learned and try to see where I'm coming from.
YOU don't have one dime of a credit card. They can shut it down in the next 10 minutes and leave you embarrassed the very next time you use it. They are extending you credit based on your promise to pay and your track record. They charge you interest on the money they lend you by extending that credit.
On a debit card, YOU have whatever funds you have credited to your account. When you use the card, the amount is debited against your balance that is ALREADY in there. You had that money at some point and chose to deposit it in an account that could be debited through a debit card, rather than by check or an in-person withdrawal.
Quote: beachbumbabsYOU don't have one dime of a credit card. They can shut it down in the next 10 minutes and leave you embarrassed the very next time you use it. They are extending you credit based on your promise to pay and your track record. They charge you interest on the money they lend you by extending that credit.
On a debit card, YOU have whatever funds you have credited to your account. When you use the card, the amount is debited against your balance that is ALREADY in there. You had that money at some point and chose to deposit it in an account that could be debited through a debit card, rather than by check or an in-person withdrawal.
Once again, I UNDERSTAND how it works. My whole point is the words are not being used properly to mean what it really means. I do not want to debate this anymore and hopefully people know where I was coming from originally. Everything is backwards. Just look at what they did to the word liberal. It doesn't even mean what it used to mean back in the 18th century. Just like the word credit doesn't mean what it should mean when using these cards.
Quote: ZenKinGNot to beat a dead horse, even though we have already, BUT your argument is referring to the consumer indirectly rather than directly. If I have a credit card today, that is implying "I OWE" someone when in reality, if "I" have a credit card, it's MY card, that should mean "I HAVE THE MONEY". Do you get it now? It should not be referring to the company 'crediting' me with money. It's my card, not theirs, im the one using it.
You DON'T have the money if you're using a credit card. That's literally the entire point of it. The company is giving you money ON CREDIT to use, and then you pay them back at a later date.
Quote:On the other hand, IF I owe someone something, then it's a DEBT and should be called a debit card, or better yet a DEBT CARD and forget about the word 'debit'. The gov't didnt want to go ahead and just call it a DEBT card as then none of it would make sense and so they invented the word DEBIT.
"Debt" and "debit" are two different words with the same root etymology. You are conflating their use. "Debit" means to take existing money out of an account, which is exactly what you are doing when you use a debit card. I don't know how it can be explained any more clearly than that.
Quote:You seem to be stuck with today's terms and cannot grasp away from it. Forget what you've learned and try to see where I'm coming from.
I'm not stuck with today's terms. I'm using the words "credit" and "debit" as they have been used since the 15th century.
Buying with a debit card means the money is deducted( debited) right away.
Buying on credit hasn't changed in several thousand years. Nor has the system of banking your money and having your purchases debited.
I can't imagine ZK thinks debit and debt mean the same thing so I don't get his entire spiel unless this is evolving into his weekly rant .
Especially after the demise of PingPangPong....RIP
Quote: ZenKinG99% of this country's citizens don't even know where their hard earned personal income tax dollars go, it goes to pay the INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT, it doesn't go to highway construction, it doesn't go to building schools, it doesn't go to ANY of that. Property taxes pay for the schools and indirect excise taxes such as the tax on gasoline pay for the roads. Lastly, the corporate income tax goes to pay for the military defense. None of your income tax dollars go to pay for services taxpayers expect from government.
Oh, really?
You claim that none of the money I / we pay to the IRS is used for anything other than paying the national debt, and that only corporate income tax revenue is used to pay for our military defense.
Your post reflects a lack of understanding as to How Things Work, and a childish view of reality.
Why am I not surprised?
Might be time for you to go back to NJ, don a tin foil cap and scan the skies for chemtrails.
Tax Plan... $50k-$75k income paying roughly 4+ billion more in taxes in the next 10 years.... Over $1,000,000 income paying roughly 6 billion LESS in the next 10 years. Yep, really helping out the middle class!
Quote: MrVOh, really?
You claim that none of the money I / we pay to the IRS is used for anything other than paying the national debt, and that only corporate income tax revenue is used to pay for our military defense.
Your post reflects a lack of understanding as to How Things Work, and a childish view of reality.
Why am I not surprised?
Might be time for you to go back to NJ, don a tin foil cap and scan the skies for chemtrails.
You have a lot to learn. Luckily I'm here for you. Suggest you go look up the Grace Commission report that was headed by Peter Grace during the Ronald Reagan era. The objective was to balance the budget and find out where all the tax dollars are going. Guess what they found? None of the dollars taxpayers pay go to services taxpayers expect from government. Ouch. Maybe it's time for you to scan the skies for chem trails.
Quote: RomesHEY HEY HEY I come to this thread to read about the latest developments on the trash can fire that is Trumps presidency. Let's get off the debit/credit cards and back on the real task at hand... What the waste of breath moron who's a racist, rapist, and bigot is doing today.
Tax Plan... $50k-$75k income paying roughly 4+ billion more in taxes in the next 10 years.... Over $1,000,000 income paying roughly 6 billion LESS in the next 10 years. Yep, really helping out the middle class!
Would be nice to see a link backing up the above. Not that I really care either way. Just seems that way.
