Uhm.. what was the classified dogs name again? Lol
And when is Nth Korea stopping their nuke build up? Double lol
He certainly decided to make USA foreign policy as stupid as he is... lol
Last edited:
The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter joepistole
- Start date
- Status
And when is Nth Korea stopping their nuke build up? Double lol
He certainly decided to make USA foreign policy as stupid as he is... lol
Trump has changed his position in the same speech or even in the same paragraph, multiple times.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
so did you.only worse about much more important circumstance.
When you have no reasonable argument, attack the poster.
My 'circumstance' is more important than POTUS? Well look at me!
That's not what they posted.
They posted that it is difficult to be decisive without a moral compass.
And they pointed out that Trump is almost comically erratic in his decision making, so that his "decisiveness" is worthless - impetuosity rather than resolution.
Last edited:
Vociferous
Valued Senior Member
Hey, if you think "reasonable thinker" must mean "agrees with you", you've already decided to hold a view that precludes you understanding others. That makes you the obtuse one, and there's no accounting for mental fixedness or just plain stubbornness.
Why can't you back up your claims with any facts at all?
Federal personal income tax directly addresses your: "Very rich people pay similar to lower tax rates than poor people, on average, in the US."
Your "effective, or real, tax rates" is undefined arm-waving.
Bare assertion without refute is fallacious.
Then cite a real world example already. A "competent" businessman who pays $15 minimum wage, does NOT cut hours, jobs, or benefits, AND does NOT pass the extra overhead on to the customers (or if he does, said customers are happy to pay it and sustain those practices for several years). Otherwise, you're counterexample is juts more arm-wavery.
Who disputed that? Your initial claim, that you've been mealymouthed in supporting for many posts now, was:
LOL! So you tried to claim that "low wages often reduce productivity", but once you FINALLY got around to trying to support it, the best you could do was "lower class productivity has increased, in the US, much faster than lower class wages." Priceless. If anything, you've proven your own claim wrong. Hilarious!
Ahem. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/apr/27/obama-birth-certificate-timeline/
"a computer-generated document that says he was born in Honolulu" is not a "long-form birth certificate", and your own source (if you read it) says that wasn't released until 2011.
The left wanted impeachment before Trump even took office.
Various people and groups assert that U.S. president Donald Trump has engaged in impeachable activity both before and during his presidency, and talk of impeachment began before he took office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Donald_Trump
The real world exists outside of your bubble, mate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Donald_Trump
Everyone else has failed the Rorschach test that exposed their paranoia.
you not making sense!
I asked:
and you reply with something about having to agree with me...
Try again with out the paranoia....
What would a reasonable thinker believe..concerning Trumps refusal to allow his tax returns to be made public as is traditionally the case for those who gain the office of POTUS?
I can think of a few possible innocent reasons, can you?
Vociferous
Valued Senior Member
Asked and answered, but you didn't accept that answer because, presumably, it didn't fit your definition of "reasonable". That's your problem.
Uh, that was not posted in any such support, and it does not contradict the claim. Comprehension problems? I can help, if you can be more specific about your difficulties.
Low wages do reduce productivity, quite often. Nothing you posted there addresses that claim, and it's common knowledge ( as well as common sense: low wages increase turnover, increase absenteeism, reduce health, curtail skill acquisition, increase employee theft, reduce employee contributions of means and techniques, and so forth. Employees must pay for the means of getting to work, maintaining good health, and the like - with less money, they spend less on such things. Dental care, in particular, affects job performance in subtle and often overlooked ways.
I did. Try reading the post.
No, it's not.
Not even if one fixes your illiterate piece of gibberish, there, with terms that make some kind of sense. You don't mean "refute", you don't mean "fallacious", and the assertion was not bare - it was based on having quoted your post.
My assertion was accurate, or "true".
That wasn't the claim - not even close. You have to read the posts, not just quote them, to reply relevantly.
It's usually the fraction of one's total yearly income that one uses to pay taxes in a given year. Sometimes - because even though more trouble it estimates the burden more accurately - it's the fraction of one's yearly income after subtracting some kind of minimum per capita subsistence income. Always, the payroll deductions for SS etc are counted as taxes; often, the employer contributions as well. (that alone places a lot of rich people lower on the tax rate scale than the poor).
Either way, the US rich pay a lower rate than the poor. In the second and more accurate formulation, a lot lower.
Is that somehow a difficult concept for you?
Last edited:
Obama released his legal, standard, identity confirming birth certificate in 2008.
For cause.
Remember - you quoted:
"Paranoia"? Yet another word you apparently need to look up in a decent dictionary.
Or maybe "evidence"?
That's a possibility. Are you sure you know what "evidence" is? Trump frequently includes evidence of his having committed various crimes when he talks on television, and when he posts on Twitter. He admitted to firing Comey to prevent him from investigating Trump's Russian ties and possible vulnerabilities, for example.
Last edited:
Vociferous
Valued Senior Member
Then you still have yet to support that claim.
Your "common knowledge" and "common sense" obviously only mean that you patently refuse to actually support any of your claims. Yawn.
Which one are you talking about now?
It means that you cannot deny them or argue against them without appearing ridiculous - which is my first guess why you haven't dealt with them yet, instead posting irrelevancies.
Either that or - as noted above:
A question for you:
IF Trump is found guilty of the allegations made what do you think should happen?
Vociferous
Valued Senior Member
"low wages often reduce productivity"
Try to keep up.
No, they're just run-of-the-mill bare assertions that you cannot support, hence zero supporting arguments. And as such, there's no need to refute what hasn't been supported.
Which allegations? They keep changing.
pick one...
What should happen to Trump if found Guilty in impeachment proceedings in the Senate?
Keeping in mind the significance of what is happening...
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
has he chosen an apprentice yet ?
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
There is no question as to what would happen. He would be removed from office.
and every one in his administration past and present would have a tell all book or two to write...lol
And there's no need to bring in "support" to refute the manifestly false as it stands - like this:
You don't know what an effective tax rate is? That explains your posting of irrelevancies like the Federal personal income tax tables.
Ok: Effective tax rates are the taxes actually paid divided by the wealth (denominated in currency, usually) actually received: the percentage of one's yearly income - all of it, in all forms - one pays in taxes for that year - all of them, in all forms.
All of my posts are reality based, like that. That protects me from posting the Federal personal income tax tables as evidence for the wealthy actually paying that percentage of their yearly income in taxes, which would be embarrassing.
It also removes the complication of the rich having much more control over the manner and timing in which they receive income and pay taxes. Gross income, total taxes - kiss.
I did support that - listed a few mechanisms, argument, etc. I didn't put much effort into the obvious, of course - what for?
Meanwhile:
Are you denying that - claiming it isn't true that people are often less productive when paid less - or are you just trolling the thread by demanding other people do work while you generate crap you never intend to endorse (because, as I noted, it would make you look dumb and ignorant)?
Because if you aren't, there's no point in me doing work; and if you are, I need something that stupid in a plain, simple, declarative statement you can't weasel out of somehow.
- - -
They don't. They keep accumulating.
Trump is being well and truly buried, here - the only remaining question is what to do about the guy. He is the President, after all - he has a lot of power, a bent toward gratuitous cruelty against the vulnerable, and a loyal base of thugs. As with Al Capone in Chicago - everybody knows, everybody fears.
- Status