Biden to Propose New Minimum Tax on Wealthiest Americans

[JohnnySavage]

Its a full employment program for CPAs and Lawyers.

 

[LittleDixie]

I'll just pay my taxes with unrealized dollars.

 

[icanhelp1]

There's a reason it was in quotes. Hillary may be as crooked as a dog's hind leg but at least she's not a blithering idiot. Republicans are nothing more than knuckle dragging, race baiting, anti-science, corporate boot lickers. Nothing to be proud about.

And yet most dark money funding for democrats comes from corporatist and large corporations in the sum of billions of dollars.

Race baiting? LMFAO Turn your TV on and watch the woke tv mob puke racism every day, day after day * white privilege * White people bad* CRT * REPARATIONS * white supremacist behind every tree: while BLM and ANTIFA burn down blue democratically run shitholes whining 'DEFUND THE POLICE".

You're conflating *anti-science* with the need for democrats to impose their totalitarian rule over their subjects based their on hypocritical *good for thee not for me* I'm above all you cretins.

Democrat politicians are the most vile, corrupt, self serving, double standard, anti-american liars since the founding of our country. Our laws are an impediment to their agenda so they just don't follow them. Biden has broken so many laws he's antithetical to our republican form of government and should be brought up on charges of treason.

Hopefully soon a vaccine for TDS will be available.

 

[Gorgoroth]

So who you gonna vote for? The Socialists?

That's a Democrat vote.

 

[Gorgoroth]

No, look up the definition to materialism.

Peck isn't much for definitions, he likes to just make up and assign words his own personal definition based on whatever is convenient for him in the moment.

Capitalism is one of the best, he uses it as a synonym for "Da boogieman!!!" when it's just free commerce..... which he considers evil and wrong because he's an anti-American socialist.

The Dems and the Pubs are both owned by the corporations. The difference is that the Dems are not wholly owned.

Half a loaf is better than none.

You keep telling that lie peck, it's just a lie though.... 100% USDA Prime bullshit.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Where to begin? I guess the first thing is that we do not live in a Democracy. Secondly, the government is not the people, the government is a small group of narcisists and wannabe saviors who won a popularity contest and now believe that they are wise enough to run everyone's life. The government is a parasite.


You think my ideas are Randian?! Wow, that's a great compliment! Thank you.

I enjoy investigating different points of view. What I look for are facts that can be documented and insights and conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts. Ayn Rand and you present no facts, only value assumptions presented as though they are Absolute Truths.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Rand fancied herself a philosopher, but she wasn't.

Ayn Rand claimed to be an Aristotelian philosopher. Her use of Aristotle was nothing more than intellectual name dropping. Ayn Rand got her ideas from Herbert Spencer, William Graham Sumner, and Friedrich Nietzsche.

 

[LittleDixie]

I enjoy investigating different points of view. What I look for are facts that can be documented and insights and conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts. Ayn Rand and you present no facts, only value assumptions presented as though they are Absolute Truths.

Do you believe that Soviet style Communism was good for the people?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Ayn Rand claimed to be an Aristotelian philosopher. Her use of Aristotle was nothing more than intellectual name dropping. Ayn Rand got her ideas from Herbert Spencer, William Graham Sumner, and Friedrich Nietzsche.

Every once in a great while, this place surprises me. Having someone interject Herbert Spencer....in correct context even!....into a discussion makes this site enjoyable.

Well played.

 

[pecksniff]

That's a Democrat vote.

If only!

 

[pecksniff]

Do you believe that Soviet style Communism was good for the people?

What has that nonsequitur to do with any of this? You are not, I hope, one of those RW idiots who cannot distinguish Communism from democratic socialism from left-progressive social democracy from ordinary New Deal/Great Society liberalism.

 

[RobDownSouth]

What has that nonsequitur to do with any of this? You are not, I hope, one of those RW idiots who cannot distinguish Communism from democratic socialism from left-progressive social democracy from ordinary New Deal liberalism.

<BoBoMode>
Hurr Durr! Errybody knows government is a binary choice between Ayn Rand/Freedumb and Totalitarian/Authoritarian/Communism!
</BoBoMode>

 

[LittleDixie]

What has that nonsequitur to do with any of this? You are not, I hope, one of those RW idiots who cannot distinguish Communism from democratic socialism from left-progressive social democracy from ordinary New Deal/Great Society liberalism.

Well, you are jumping in the middle of a conversation I was having with The_Trouvere. They said that they "look for... facts that can be documented and insights and conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts."

I was about to point out that Ayn Rand got an extremely close look at Soviet style Communism, and she experienced a very real set of facts that led her to develop insights and conclusions drawn logically from those facts.

I was hoping that we could first all agree that Soviet style Communism was not good for the people. And since it is completely unrelated to your Democratic Socialism, you should have no problem whatsoever giving an honest appraisal to this totally different economic and political movement.

 

[pecksniff]

Well, you are jumping in the middle of a conversation I was having with The_Trouvere. They said that they "look for... facts that can be documented and insights and conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts."

I was about to point out that Ayn Rand got an extremely close look at Soviet style Communism, and she experienced a very real set of facts that led her to develop insights and conclusions drawn logically from those facts.

I was hoping that we could first all agree that Soviet style Communism was not good for the people. And since it is completely unrelated to your Democratic Socialism, you should have no problem whatsoever giving an honest appraisal to this totally different economic and political movement.

The problem with it was not that the state owned and managed the productive property, the problem was that the state was undemocratic and authoritarian.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Do you believe that Soviet style Communism was good for the people?

No.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Well, you are jumping in the middle of a conversation I was having with The_Trouvere. They said that they "look for... facts that can be documented and insights and conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts."

I was about to point out that Ayn Rand got an extremely close look at Soviet style Communism, and she experienced a very real set of facts that led her to develop insights and conclusions drawn logically from those facts.

I was hoping that we could first all agree that Soviet style Communism was not good for the people. And since it is completely unrelated to your Democratic Socialism, you should have no problem whatsoever giving an honest appraisal to this totally different economic and political movement.

The Bolshevik takeover was a catastrophically wrong turn for Russia, and the American Left. If the German government had executed Lenin and Trotsky, rather the putting them on a train to Russia, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of Russia under Alexander Kerensky would have continued to exist. It would have continued to fight Germany, and it would have continued to lose battles. Nevertheless, Germany was soon to surrender to the Western allies anyway. With hundreds of thousands of soldiers on the Russian front, the German surrender would have happened sooner. Territory Russia lost to Germany would have been restored. The Russian Civil War would not have happened. The Provisional Revolutionary Government would have evolved into a representative democracy, that probably would have been left leaning.

In the United States the Soviet government was a horrible example of socialism. During most of its existence the Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States. This enabled American conservatives to appeal to nationalism to oppose the left.

 

[Gorgoroth]

If only!

You can pretend otherwise but it's a fact.

<BoBoMode>
Hurr Durr! Errybody knows government is a binary choice between Ayn Rand/Freedumb and Totalitarian/Authoritarian/Communism!
</BoBoMode>

Rob is projecting again.

Probably mad for getting bitch slapped about for being an anti-American authoritarian and open borders lunatic.

The problem with it was not that the state owned and managed the productive property

Yes it was.

, the problem was that the state was undemocratic and authoritarian.

No... because democracies go down in flames, often authoritarian ones all the time.

Letting a bunch of fucking retards run the country based on their fee fees for "fairness" doesn't ever go very well.

 

[pecksniff]

You can pretend otherwise but it's a fact.

The fact is that the Democratic Party in its present formation is indistinguishable from what it was under that damned neoliberal DLC DINO Bill Clinton. It's about as far from socialism as the Libertarian Party is.

 

[LittleDixie]

The problem with it was not that the state owned and managed the productive property, the problem was that the state was undemocratic and authoritarian.

It's weird that I say "Soviet style Communism" and you hear "Democratic Socialism".

 

[Gorgoroth]

The fact is that the Democratic Party in its present formation is indistinguishable from what it was under that damned neoliberal DLC DINO Bill Clinton.

You mean when (D)'eez were all buddy buddy with Trump.... who is a Clinton type neo-liberal ??

They have moved so far to the left of that they consider neo-liberalism "fascism" and racist.

You are fucking high, sell your 2+2=9 kool-aid to some useful idiot who's dumb enough to buy that rejection of reality.

It's about as far from socialism as the Libertarian Party is.

LMFAO!!

That must be why there are so many card carrying socialist in it, and the (D)'s have accepted a socialist platform

 

[pecksniff]

It's weird that I say "Soviet style Communism" and you hear "Democratic Socialism".

You asked about Soviet Communism. My response is, what's wrong with it is that it was not democratic socialism.

 

[Gorgoroth]

You asked about Soviet Communism. My response is, what's wrong with it is that it was not democratic socialism.

LOL.... what's wrong with it is that it's socialism.... the socialism is the bad part.

That's why socialism as a national economic system has a 100% perfect FAIL record.

 

[LittleDixie]

The Bolshevik takeover was a catastrophically wrong turn for Russia, and the American Left. If the German government had executed Lenin and Trotsky, rather the putting them on a train to Russia, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of Russia under Alexander Kerensky would have continued to exist. It would have continued to fight Germany, and it would have continued to lose battles. Nevertheless, Germany was soon to surrender to the Western allies anyway. With hundreds of thousands of soldiers on the Russian front, the German surrender would have happened sooner. Territory Russia lost to Germany would have been restored. The Russian Civil War would not have happened. The Provisional Revolutionary Government would have evolved into a representative democracy, that probably would have been left leaning.

In the United States the Soviet government was a horrible example of socialism. During most of its existence the Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States. This enabled American conservatives to appeal to nationalism to oppose the left.

I don't know much of anything about the poliics in that time or how it all played out, you seem to know much much more than I do on that.

The point I was trying to make was that Ayn Rand lived through that. She was there and her family felt the weight of it. She experienced first hand some of the arguments that she brings up in her books. In Atlas Shrugged, she takes great pains to give the antagonists a fair hearing - they have motives and an internal logic, even if the reader can see how they have come to the wrong conclusion. She is definitely setting things up to make her points, but she is taking her life experience and dramatizing it to show the conclusions she has come to.

Isn't that the same kind of thing you do?

 

[pecksniff]

You mean when (D)'eez were all buddy buddy with Trump.... who is a Clinton type neo-liberal ??

They have moved so far to the left of that they consider neo-liberalism "fascism" and racist.

Neoliberalism = economic libertarianism.

That must be why there are so many card carrying socialist in it, and the (D)'s have accepted a socialist platform

That ain't this platform.

 

[LittleDixie]

You asked about Soviet Communism. My response is, what's wrong with it is that it was not democratic socialism.

I asked if Soviet style Communism was good or bad and you responded with:

What has that nonsequitur to do with any of this? You are not, I hope, one of those RW idiots who cannot distinguish Communism from democratic socialism from left-progressive social democracy from ordinary New Deal/Great Society liberalism.

That sounds to me like you were getting defensive. The thing is that I don't think anyone is talking about Democratic Socialism until you brought it up, and you brought it up when I mentioned Soviet style Communism.

Peck, that is telling.