Trump Will be Impeached

[Maturin]

5 hours ago, Thestarider said:

Europeans didn't have much respect for Reagan either ??? Look what happened 😁

https://ourfuture.org/20140930/reagan-set-up-the-death-of-the-middle-class-but-china-was-the-clincher

"Before Reagan working people benefitted more during economic recoveries than the top 10 percent. After Reagan the top 10 percent benefitted more. But after 2000, 90 percent of us not only didn’t benefit during economic recoveries, we continued to fall behind. Reagan shifted the power to the wealthy, and the wealthy used that power to escape the borders of democracy by moving production to China. And that, my friends, was that."

[BBsq69]

16 hours ago, Maturin said:

https://ourfuture.org/20140930/reagan-set-up-the-death-of-the-middle-class-but-china-was-the-clincher

"Before Reagan working people benefitted more during economic recoveries than the top 10 percent. After Reagan the top 10 percent benefitted more. But after 2000, 90 percent of us not only didn’t benefit during economic recoveries, we continued to fall behind. Reagan shifted the power to the wealthy, and the wealthy used that power to escape the borders of democracy by moving production to China. And that, my friends, was that."

I remember looking at a graph of the most unequal countries in the world and unsurprisingly the US was not only the most extreme but also one of 2 outliers and I can't remember who the other country was. However the US has always been like that. It is almost the philosophy of the country. Making money is seen as something to be admired so philosophically they are only really practising what they preach. Sadly however the UK was in 3rd or 4th which will depressed me. Looking into it further this disparity really started under Thatcher. Now tax on the wealthy was at a stupid level in the 1970s but my economics master told me that the wages offered to the top people took that into account. Now when from the early days of Thatcher the top level started to get reduced to more sensible levels there was no consequent cut in the top salaries indeed it went in the other direction. At the same time she single-handedly devastated the industry of the North of England and Wales leading to a devastation similar to the Rust Belt in the US - and while Trump made promises she was just callous. The free market was her God. In fact she seemed more concerned in protecting the fascist dictator Pinochet rather than jobs in the North. Unemployment was at astronomical levels within a couple of years of her coming to power despite more than 20 changes in how it was calculated to pretend it was only disastrous instead of catastrophic. As Trump knows though you only need a certain percentage to win and a good war like The Falklands helps.

Since then the UK became far more unequal and indicators are that trend only stopped with the economic collapse in 2008 since which whatever they are spinning the UK has a worse record on productivity than any other major Western nation despite the high levels of employment. More people producing less means somebody fucked up badly. As I said I get why the US is so unequal but the UK should not be following and now we have (almost) left the EU I can only see this getting worse.  

[Maturin]

11 hours ago, BBsq69 said:

I remember looking at a graph of the most unequal countries in the world and unsurprisingly the US was not only the most extreme but also one of 2 outliers and I can't remember who the other country was. However the US has always been like that. It is almost the philosophy of the country. Making money is seen as something to be admired so philosophically they are only really practising what they preach. Sadly however the UK was in 3rd or 4th which will depressed me. Looking into it further this disparity really started under Thatcher. Now tax on the wealthy was at a stupid level in the 1970s but my economics master told me that the wages offered to the top people took that into account. Now when from the early days of Thatcher the top level started to get reduced to more sensible levels there was no consequent cut in the top salaries indeed it went in the other direction. At the same time she single-handedly devastated the industry of the North of England and Wales leading to a devastation similar to the Rust Belt in the US - and while Trump made promises she was just callous. The free market was her God. In fact she seemed more concerned in protecting the fascist dictator Pinochet rather than jobs in the North. Unemployment was at astronomical levels within a couple of years of her coming to power despite more than 20 changes in how it was calculated to pretend it was only disastrous instead of catastrophic. As Trump knows though you only need a certain percentage to win and a good war like The Falklands helps.

Since then the UK became far more unequal and indicators are that trend only stopped with the economic collapse in 2008 since which whatever they are spinning the UK has a worse record on productivity than any other major Western nation despite the high levels of employment. More people producing less means somebody fucked up badly. As I said I get why the US is so unequal but the UK should not be following and now we have (almost) left the EU I can only see this getting worse.  

Really excellent summary of Thatcher's 80s.  The two things that saved her government were the Falklands and the North Sea gas.  One gave them a false sense of national unity despite the rape of the North and West and the other gave them the money to plug up the financial gaps in her disastrous social and economic policies. I've never had and never will have any respect for the opinions of a person the proudly proclaims that they vote Tory.

They have absolutely fucked up the UK on so many levels (health, education, economy, pensions, reputation), are demonstrably racist as well providing a government that weekly provides a fresh example of the word "incompetence," who, at every opportunity, picks the side of evil over humanity, see Saudi Arabia and Israel for the modern day equivalent of Thatcher's Pinochet and Jimmy Saville (what a wide pallet a of depravity).

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

This ideal of universal equality is nonsense. It doesn't exist, except in a constitutional government that accepts that all people are EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. This mean NO CLASS DISTINCTION.

People are born with different potentials, talents, and desires. Not every one of them wants to be fucking rich; many humans just want to enjoy raising children (kinda important) in a decent environment, and allow them a chance to improve their conditions through honest work.

I think if you're talking about "equality" polls, you should instead start talking about an individual's interest in attaining what they want to do with their lives. That means looking at a poll that talks about economic MOBILITY. Most Americans I know have gone from rages to riches, some of them back again, but the only real limits for attaining our dreams is either our laziness or our government edicts.

I'd like to see the Mobility Poll. I've run the gambit. It was quite challenging. But I've never seen it from afar.

 

[BBsq69]

1 hour ago, Foamy T. Squirrel said:

This ideal of universal equality is nonsense

Of course it is Foamy but we have a situation where in many countries there is still a large umber of poor who have got significantly poorer since 2008 and a large number of wealthy, many of whom are poorer as well except of course their drop in wealth is far less dramatic. It's really what happened from the early 80s to 2008 where the wealth gap really expanded, It is true more were brought into the middle class as the world itself got wealthier but the poor became more and more an underclass and the wealthy became a race apart just like the upper class used to be. If you go back to the 70s the kinds of discrepancies between CEOs and shopfloor workers was much much less. Today you get Mitt Romney boasting about how little tax he pays and Trump able to offset paying taxes because he made losses on stupid business deals. Do ordinary people get to offset tax when they lose their jobs, do they fuck. You don't get benefit unless you are poor and in the UK that's definitely more working people than for non-workers. Soup kitchens were unknown in the UK since the depression but now more than 100,000 use them.

Equality is nonsense but is a CEO of a medium sized company really worth 100 times a cancer nurse - more in 4 days than she gets in a year. This is where it is got ludicrous and we have some CEOs earning, not because they created these companies but they happen to claim they have experience of running large companies however unsuccessfully in the past, 20 million+. These salaries are ridiculous. A good example of different philosophies is between the UK and Germany in football. Now there is far more money in English football but the Germans use the money they get to subsidise their fans making sure ordinary people can go to the games whereas in the UK especially for the London clubs the prices are several times what they are in Germany. Why? Because owners and top players cream off a luidicrous amount and then complain they have to pay taxes even after handing over millions to agents and putting their money in dodgy schemes to avoid tax. But what do the papers say about this? The major issue is benefit cheats ... This actual accounts for very little a tiny fraction maybe 5% of the tax avoidance schemes even after the tax rates have been lowered. 

Of on a sidetrack here but the Tories claimed that reducing the tax rate brought in more revenue - than in itself was a lie  - but the reason why the take was less than expected was the Tories told them they were going to do this so obviously wealthy people decided that if there were things they could move to the next year when there was a lower tax rate they did thus the very announcement ensured there would less revenue when we most needed it. At one point I was a top rate tax payer but in order to subsidise the reduction of the tax rate for the wealthy the threshold was brought down very low. And with all those avoidance schemes the rate of tax the actual wealthy were paying was much less than people in the middle like me.

I believe in a philosophy of bottom loaded utilitarianism which means the first duty of a society is to ensure there is a decent standard of living for everybody. This is very different of Thatcher's crass utilitarianism which was designed to ensure that the majority were better off and quite frankly fuck the poor it's their own fault. Another problem with Thatcher's utilitarianism was that she only measured whether people were "happy" (Greatest Happiness Principle) in monetary terms instead of any other criteria and applied to this to public spending. The first question was always the Ron Swanson way "What is the cheapest we can do this for or can we persuade some charity to do this for us instead?" instead of a Leslie Knope "What is the the best value for the tax payer's money?" which is an entirely different question. "Value" in this case meaning how did it contribute to the general well being of the individual/town/region/country set against the cost. This is how Germany worked things and why their town centres used to be so much more pleasant. I had an Italian friend come  to stay in England and he was horrified at the state of town planning. 

I know this is more suited to the European topic but it does indicate different philosophies and possibly why the right and left will never see eye to eye. One is trying to create a better world by wealth creation and if that brings in an unequal society so what and the other is trying to build  a utopia based on equality which may be nothing but a dream. Of course the answer lies in between but the truth is people in the US and now to some extent in the UK are not in between.

BTW here is were Trump confuses because his attempt to regenerate the Rust Belt is definitely a left of centre policy bringing no other benefit in reality - certainly not financially - except to bring votes to him.

[BBsq69]

2 hours ago, Foamy T. Squirrel said:

Not every one of them wants to be fucking rich

Everyone wants more money though except a tiny percentage of people who already have some and what to leave the rat race ... I can very much appreciate that mentality.  

[BBsq69]

13 hours ago, Maturin said:

Jimmy Saville

TBF I am sure she don't know he was the UK's biggest paedo. He did used to be a frequent guest at Chequers though. 

[BBsq69]

I doubt very much Trump will be impeached unless he gets sillier. In my opinion he deserves to be but the point is any impeachment process would not only take a long time but damage the US as Trump would become more and more erratic in his behaviour and do the Democrats really want to do that?

[Thestarider]

21 minutes ago, BBsq69 said:

I doubt very much Trump will be impeached unless he gets sillier. In my opinion he deserves to be but the point is any impeachment process would not only take a long time but damage the US as Trump would become more and more erratic in his behaviour and do the Democrats really want to do that?

The new democratic platform for 2018 mid terms, 

1. Roll back the 2017 tax cuts

2. Open borders, limit ICE control, Make the lottery permanent, Amnesty for almost 12 million Illegal immigrant's. 

3. Roll back into effect the mandatory health insurance penalties.

 

Now what citizen in their right mind wants or agrees with this platform ?

I believe they have just sealed the death of the democratic party.

[mic351]

8 minutes ago, Thestarider said:

The new democratic platform for 2018 mid terms, 

1. Roll back the 2017 tax cuts

2. Open borders, limit ICE control, Make the lottery permanent, Amnesty for almost 12 million Illegal immigrant's. 

3. Roll back into effect the mandatory health insurance penalties.

 

Now what citizen in their right mind wants or agrees with this platform ?

I believe they have just sealed the death of the democratic party.

Funny, I just read the Democratic Platform as put out by party leaders and they say they want to:

1.  Rebuild the infrastructure

2. Institute paid family leave

3.  Put together a new independent agency to tackle the high drug prices (we pay the highest drug prices in the world)

4.  Stop unpoliced corporate mergers

5.  Provide protection for Daca People

6.  Address the student loan crisis

7.  Work on the single payer option.

What citizen in their right mind would not agree to this platform?

I believe the republicans have already sealed the death of their party.  In began when they started to put party above people and the law..

[Thestarider]

18 minutes ago, mic351 said:

Funny, I just read the Democratic Platform as put out by party leaders and they say they want to:

1.  Rebuild the infrastructure

2. Institute paid family leave

3.  Put together a new independent agency to tackle the high drug prices (we pay the highest drug prices in the world)

4.  Stop unpoliced corporate mergers

5.  Provide protection for Daca People

6.  Address the student loan crisis

7.  Work on the single payer option.

What citizen in their right mind would not agree to this platform?

I believe the republicans have already sealed the death of their party.  In began when they started to put party above people and the law..

Humm very interesting ? Party leaders including Pelosi, Schumer, and Tom loud mouth Perez, or the want a be leaders ? There is one hell of difference you know?

Good luck

The Republican National Committee (RNC) raised just over $39 million in the first quarter of 2018, nearly double the amount raised during that same period by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) of just under $22 million. The RNC stated that the $13.9 million it received in receipts for March 2018 was its highest monthly fundraising amount in a non-presidential election year. The RNC also reported having just under $43 million in cash on hand at the end of March, with no debts owed. The DNC reported having just over $9 million on hand, with over $6 million in debt. That is currently a net of 3 million or there about, compared to the 43 million cash on hand for RNC, like I said good luck, you know what they say No mon No fun  😁

Year-to-date fundraising for the national committees
Organization	Total Receipts ('18 YTD)	Total Disbursements ('18 YTD)	Cash on hand	Debts Owed
National party committees (as of March 2018)
DNC	$21,762,672	$19,202,757	$9,172,725	$6,618,600
RNC	$39,031,857	$34,891,602	$42,958,883	$1,237
House campaign committees (as of March 2018)
DCCC	$34,229,964	$16,129,650	$57,000,811	$0
NRCC	$31,159,951	$15,944,887	$58,859,703	$0
Senate campaign committees (as of March 2018)
DSCC	$16,920,285	$6,052,691	$29,889,207	$4,202,404
NRSC	$15,944,616	$16,415,425	$14,798,353	$0

[mic351]

1 minute ago, Thestarider said:

Humm very interesting ? Party leaders including Pelosi, Schumer, and Tom loud mouth Perez, or the want a be leaders ? 

Hmmm, or  perhaps, Traitor Trump, Turtle Man McConnell,  Corporate Lackey Ryan?  The traitorous trio ...