Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What's beyond dumb is that you're complaining simply because you don't like the outcome.

NO.

It that big enough for you to see it? I don't know how many times you have to be told that it's not about the outcome, it's about the system that is flawed. This isn't about winning or losing, it's about a gak system that desperately needs updating.

 Compel wrote:

 whembly wrote:

But the important thing is that the Red Team Won and we are just bitching about loosing a game of politics because we suck as playing Twittah or something. It's not about real world consequences, it's not about actual living breathing people being affected by politics. It's a fething game and the only things that matters is that your team got a score.

And as long as we argue with the players we are participating in their stupid game, so why do we keep on rolling the dice with them?

Well... you gotta admit, Democrats just got their teeth kicked in. So, they'll need to dust off, recalibrate and get back in the political thunderdome.

Most of the posts I've seen are (aside from the Hamilton and university things), are, for example, concerns over major players in the new administration thinking that electrocuting gay people is a really awesome idea that's worth funding.

 whembly wrote:

It's not like I'm shoving my shadenboner in everyone's face every chance I could...

 Frazzled wrote:


Lets not rehash this garbage all over again. If you want to change the EC put it up for Constitutional Amendment., until then quit yer bichin.

upporters of a plan for California to secede from the union took their first formal step Monday morning, submitting a proposed ballot measure to the state attorney general’s office in the hopes of a statewide vote as soon as 2018.

Marcus Ruiz Evans, the vice president and co-founder of Yes California, said his group had been planning to wait for a later election, but the presidential election of Donald Trump sped up the timeline.

“We’re doing it now because of all of the overwhelming attention,” Evans said.

The Yes California group has been around for more than two years, Evans said. It is based around California taxpayers paying more money to the federal government than the state receives in spending, that Californians are culturally different from the rest of the country, and that national media and organizations routinely criticize Californians for being out of step with the rest of the U.S.

The attorney general’s office will give the ballot measure a title and summary, and Evans said he hopes to begin collecting signatures to get it on the ballot in the spring. Qualifying ballot measures typically requires significant resources to pay signature gatherers, and Yes California doesn’t have major financial backing. But Evans said 13,000 people have volunteered to collect signatures.

“This is real,” Evans said. “We treat it seriously.”

Various groups have made noise about California forming its own country in the wake of Trump’s election this month, most prominently Silicon Valley financier Shervin Pishevar. But similar proposals have dotted the state’s political landscape for years. Yes California has tried and failed previously, and Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper was not able to get a proposal to split California into six states onto the 2016 ballot.

 sebster wrote:

 kronk wrote:
There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

You must be pretty irate about the new tax scheme Republicans are going to put through.

Mitochondria wrote:
Sebster - It is more than money, it is time that is a limiting factor. You can reach more people in the most efficient manner by sticking to high density population areas.

 Frazzled wrote:

supporters try to start the secession process. Frazzled has images of B52s carpet bombing the Hollywood sign.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-california-secession-calexit-htmlstory.html

upporters of a plan for California to secede from the union took their first formal step Monday morning, submitting a proposed ballot measure to the state attorney general’s office in the hopes of a statewide vote as soon as 2018.

Marcus Ruiz Evans, the vice president and co-founder of Yes California, said his group had been planning to wait for a later election, but the presidential election of Donald Trump sped up the timeline.

“We’re doing it now because of all of the overwhelming attention,” Evans said.

The Yes California group has been around for more than two years, Evans said. It is based around California taxpayers paying more money to the federal government than the state receives in spending, that Californians are culturally different from the rest of the country, and that national media and organizations routinely criticize Californians for being out of step with the rest of the U.S.

The attorney general’s office will give the ballot measure a title and summary, and Evans said he hopes to begin collecting signatures to get it on the ballot in the spring. Qualifying ballot measures typically requires significant resources to pay signature gatherers, and Yes California doesn’t have major financial backing. But Evans said 13,000 people have volunteered to collect signatures.

“This is real,” Evans said. “We treat it seriously.”

Various groups have made noise about California forming its own country in the wake of Trump’s election this month, most prominently Silicon Valley financier Shervin Pishevar. But similar proposals have dotted the state’s political landscape for years. Yes California has tried and failed previously, and Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper was not able to get a proposal to split California into six states onto the 2016 ballot.

 kronk wrote:
Sebster,

Please hunt through my 23967 posts and find 1 positive thing I've ever fething said about Trump or his fething chronies.

Go ahead. I'll fething wait.

My Tax Policy Center colleague Len Burman showed in a recent TaxVox post that Trump’s plan would levy higher taxes on some single taxpayers. Another TPC colleague, Lily Batchelder, demonstrated in a TPC paper that Trump’s plan would raise taxes on millions of families.

Three major changes make Trump’s plan particularly hard on single parents.

First, he would eliminate the head-of-household filing status, thus requiring single parents to file as individuals. By itself, that boosts tax rates for single parents at most income ranges.

Second, although Trump would boost the standard deduction, he would eliminate personal and dependent exemptions, raising taxable income for all single parents who do not itemize. Under current law in 2017, a single parent with one child can take a $9,400 standard deduction and two $4,100 exemptions, thus reducing her taxable income by $17,600. Trump would replace that combination with a $15,150 standard deduction, making $2,450 more income subject to tax. And bigger families would get hit even harder—their taxable income under Trump’s plan would go up by $4,100 for each additional child, relative to current law.

Finally—and most consequentially—Trump would collapse the current tax schedule from seven rates to three. That may seem less complicated but it would actually raise rates at some income levels. The result: Higher taxes for many heads of household. For example, in 2017 a single parent with one child who claims the standard deduction would face a 25 percent tax rate on adjusted gross income (AGI) between $53,050 and $68,550, compared with just a 15 percent rate under current law.

Trump’s tax rates would increase a single parent’s tax bill at almost every AGI level between $15,150 and about $560,000 (see chart). If her AGI is $15,150 or less, she would owe no tax under either Trump’s plan or current law. And if her AGI exceeds roughly $560,000, she’d pay less than under current law since Trump’s 33 percent top tax rate is so much lower than the current 39.6 percent top rate. And very high-income single parents would save a huge amount from Trump’s tax cuts. The top 0.1% would see an average tax cut of more than $1.3 million, boosting their after-tax income by almost 16 percent relative to current law (see page 6 of pdf of TPC’s distributional effects of Trump’s tax plan).

Because Trump would eliminate the dependent exemptions, taxes would be even higher for a single parent with more than one child. On the other hand, these tax increases would be at least partially offset for families with children under age 13 by Trump’s proposed above-the-line deduction for childcare costs. For example, a taxpayer with $100,000 of AGI who spends $5,000 on childcare would get a $1,250 tax break, offsetting most of the roughly $1,450 tax increase caused by Trump’s rate changes. Trump would also repeal the Affordable Care Act’s net investment income tax and the alternative minimum tax, both of which hit high-income single parents hard.

Regardless of other provisions, however, most single parents could look forward to higher taxes under Donald Trump’s tax plan.

Mitochondria wrote:
Sebster - It is more than money, it is time that is a limiting factor. You can reach more people in the most efficient manner by sticking to high density population areas.

Eliminating the EC would merely flip the existing paradigm, not really fixing anything.

This does sound appealing to liberals because they tend to congregate in high population density areas. Thereby giving them the advantage.

 SickSix wrote:
I also would love to see a President communicate directly to the people and bypass the MSM. Like FDR used the radio (but I do NOT want another FDR).

 Stevefamine wrote:
I really hope Trump ignores the NYTimes/Huffpost/Any major news group - including breitbart. I'd rather the president just put up YouTube videos instead of these disorganized press released.

We need actual journalism and news, not fluff. Vox/Salon/Breitbart/NY Times are all on the same level of "Make gak up as fast as possible and write an article"

 Frazzled wrote:

 Stevefamine wrote:
I really hope Trump ignores the NYTimes/Huffpost/Any major news group - including breitbart. I'd rather the president just put up YouTube videos instead of these disorganized press released.

We need actual journalism and news, not fluff. Vox/Salon/Breitbart/NY Times are all on the same level of "Make gak up as fast as possible and write an article"

The executive has no constitutional responsibility to interact with the media in any way whatsoever. No interviews, no press pool, no briefings, no Q&A.

 Stevefamine wrote:
I really hope Trump ignores the NYTimes/Huffpost/Any major news group - including breitbart. I'd rather the president just put up YouTube videos instead of these disorganized press released.

We need actual journalism and news, not fluff. Vox/Salon/Breitbart/NY Times are all on the same level of "Make gak up as fast as possible and write an article"

 Stevefamine wrote:
I really hope Trump ignores the NYTimes/Huffpost/Any major news group - including breitbart. I'd rather the president just put up YouTube videos instead of these disorganized press released.

We need actual journalism and news, not fluff. Vox/Salon/Breitbart/NY Times are all on the same level of "Make gak up as fast as possible and write an article"

 Compel wrote:

 whembly wrote:

But the important thing is that the Red Team Won and we are just bitching about loosing a game of politics because we suck as playing Twittah or something. It's not about real world consequences, it's not about actual living breathing people being affected by politics. It's a fething game and the only things that matters is that your team got a score.

And as long as we argue with the players we are participating in their stupid game, so why do we keep on rolling the dice with them?

Well... you gotta admit, Democrats just got their teeth kicked in. So, they'll need to dust off, recalibrate and get back in the political thunderdome.

Most of the posts I've seen are (aside from the Hamilton and university things), are, for example, concerns over major players in the new administration thinking that electrocuting gay people is a really awesome idea that's worth funding.

 whembly wrote:

 Compel wrote:

 whembly wrote:

But the important thing is that the Red Team Won and we are just bitching about loosing a game of politics because we suck as playing Twittah or something. It's not about real world consequences, it's not about actual living breathing people being affected by politics. It's a fething game and the only things that matters is that your team got a score.

And as long as we argue with the players we are participating in their stupid game, so why do we keep on rolling the dice with them?

Well... you gotta admit, Democrats just got their teeth kicked in. So, they'll need to dust off, recalibrate and get back in the political thunderdome.

Most of the posts I've seen are (aside from the Hamilton and university things), are, for example, concerns over major players in the new administration thinking that electrocuting gay people is a really awesome idea that's worth funding.

Electrocuting gays? Who's saying that in the new administration?

 whembly wrote:

 Compel wrote:

 whembly wrote:

But the important thing is that the Red Team Won and we are just bitching about loosing a game of politics because we suck as playing Twittah or something. It's not about real world consequences, it's not about actual living breathing people being affected by politics. It's a fething game and the only things that matters is that your team got a score.

And as long as we argue with the players we are participating in their stupid game, so why do we keep on rolling the dice with them?

Well... you gotta admit, Democrats just got their teeth kicked in. So, they'll need to dust off, recalibrate and get back in the political thunderdome.

Most of the posts I've seen are (aside from the Hamilton and university things), are, for example, concerns over major players in the new administration thinking that electrocuting gay people is a really awesome idea that's worth funding.

Gay conversion therapy advocates have said electro shock therapy can help "get the gay away".

Btw, Pence is a big believer in gay conversion therapy. Not sure where he stands on elctroshock.
Electrocuting gays? Who's saying that in the new administration?

 sebster wrote:

I was just running on the general mood in the conversation that people were happy to see the rich pay more tax, and commenting Trump and his Rebublicans were going in the ezact opposite direction.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Compel wrote:

 whembly wrote:

But the important thing is that the Red Team Won and we are just bitching about loosing a game of politics because we suck as playing Twittah or something. It's not about real world consequences, it's not about actual living breathing people being affected by politics. It's a fething game and the only things that matters is that your team got a score.

And as long as we argue with the players we are participating in their stupid game, so why do we keep on rolling the dice with them?

Well... you gotta admit, Democrats just got their teeth kicked in. So, they'll need to dust off, recalibrate and get back in the political thunderdome.

Most of the posts I've seen are (aside from the Hamilton and university things), are, for example, concerns over major players in the new administration thinking that electrocuting gay people is a really awesome idea that's worth funding.

Electrocuting gays? Who's saying that in the new administration?

I'd guess pence would, it's part of his conversion "therapy"

sirlynchmob wrote:
I'd guess pence would, it's part of his conversion "therapy"

Congress should support the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act only after completion of an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus. Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior.

Congress shoud oppose any effort to put gay and lesbian relationships on equal legal status with heterosexual marriage