Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 3:12:38 GMT
"We put into that pot $116 billion more than we take out," Cuomo said. "Kentucky takes out $148 billion more than they put in.… Senator McConnell, who's getting bailed out here?" IOKIYAR |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 15, 2021 4:56:05 GMT
Democrats complain about tax cuts to the rich but you have 17 democrats threatening to block the infrastructure bill unless the SALT deduction is restored link. Wouldn’t that be considered a tax cut for the rich? The 3 Democrats named in the article all have a net worth of a million or more and are from NY so they would benefit by restoring the deduction. Sure some rich people would benefit, but many more ordinary people would be able to put more food on the table for their kids. More then a few are paying 50% of income for housing. And yes, those taxes pay for good schools etc. There are hundreds of thousands of low/moderate income family who are paying high amounts for property taxes either directly or to their landlords if they rent. Seniors, many on fixed incomes, are being taxed out of their homes. But why do we have to subsidize McConnell in Kentucky, his net worth is far higher then a million. Even with our sending $$ to Kentucky, somewhere they are not using it well. I do NOT have the exact numbers, but Kentucky is near the bottom of health care, education, possibly other stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 15, 2021 10:11:46 GMT
elaine , I keep posting about the "right wing loons" because they have become a SIGNIFICANT part of the Republican party - as many others have stated above. They aren't even trying to move to the center - especially at the state party level. I will keep posting about the "right wing loons" until they stop trying to legislate their backwards, harmful, dangerous views on the GOP and, by extension, on the US. I'd also appreciate if you tag me if you're going to talk about me. I’m sincerely sorry, I will try to do better with tagging you. I have no problem with talking about right wing loons. Or the GOP. Or conservatives. I cannot make it any clearer that my issue is on a thread titled “what do conservatives stand for?” many people are answering the question/discussing the issue as if everyone who would say that they hold conservative values is exactly the same as Trumpers/the GOP/the right wing loons. I have no issue with trashing Trumpers and what most of the current GOP politicians are doing to this country. I have done it quite a bit myself. I feel like I am beating a dead horse to get across the idea that conservatives/the GOP/Trumpers/the right wing loons are not all the same. And using the terms interchangeably, TO ME, isn’t helpful and, in fact, detrimental, to come to an understanding with those, on this board, for example, who would label themselves as conservatives. If this thread is meant to simply be a bitch fest about the right wing loons and Trumpers, have at it. I can bitch about them with the most vocal of you. I simply refuse to do it on a thread titled “what do conservatives stand for? Because the Trumpers, right wing loons, and many of the GOP politicians aren’t conservative - they don’t hold what would be considered conservative values to me (they are all about running up the National debt and bigger government legislating what people do in the bedroom and what women can do with their bodies). This thread, IMO, by having people lump disparate groups of people and discussing them as if they are one entity, only serves to alienate those amongst us here that do consider themselves to have some conservative values. Many/most here who consider themselves to be “liberal” would pushback LOUDLY if right wing peas came on here and insisted that all liberals were communists and went on to bitch about and insist that we all wanted to eliminate all personal property, etc. Are there some fringe left extremists who would like to see us move towards communism? Yes. Does that describe everyone who is liberal on this board? No. So, for the final time. I have no issue with bitching about the right wing loons, Trumpers, most of the GOP. My issue is doing it on a thread titled “what do conservatives stand for?” and agglomerating - as if they are one Borg-like entity - those groups with people who simply label themselves as conservative. We DO have conservative peas here who do not support Trump or the right wing loons. This thread doesn’t serve to open any discussion with them, only to alienate, IMO. I believe that because it’s a 2 party system, even those who are not trumpers, who would never vote for a Democrat, that still vote for these republicans because of party loyalty are well deserving if being lumped in. Sure it sucks to be just dumped into a group that you do not fit into, but when you actively continually vote for these destructive people because you’ll never vote Dem/own the Libs, then one needs to be held accountable for that, yes? Look what republicans are doing in a lot of states—creating and passing bills that suppress voting! Gerrymandering the crap out of states. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 15, 2021 10:40:15 GMT
Democrats complain about tax cuts to the rich but you have 17 democrats threatening to block the infrastructure bill unless the SALT deduction is restored link. Wouldn’t that be considered a tax cut for the rich? The 3 Democrats named in the article all have a net worth of a million or more and are from NY so they would benefit by restoring the deduction. Nope. The SALT deduction is not exclusively nor is know as a tax on wealth. Here’s a factual explanation on what the SALT tax deduction is an who it benefits. “What is the SALT Deduction Taxpayers in the United States were granted a range of tax preferences from the federal government. The Revenue Act of 1913, which introduced the federal income tax, states that “all national, state, county, school, and municipal taxes paid within the year, not including those assessed against local benefits,” can be deducted. The Revenue Act of 1964 later named specific state and local taxes that could be deducted, which included: real and personal property, income, and general sales taxes. These tax preferences serve two important goals. First, by allowing taxpayers the ability to deduct state and local taxes (SALT), taxpayers avoid being taxed twice on the same income. Additionally, the deduction on property taxes, along with deduction on mortgage interest, provides a strong incentive for homeownership. The sales tax deduction provides similar incentives for encouraging spending — which facilitates economic growth. Compared with other common deductions, the state and local tax deduction had a larger impact than the deductions for both charitable giving and mortgage interest. In recent years, 29.5% of tax units used the SALT deduction. Only 21% used the SALT deduction for mortgage interest, and 15% used the deduction for charitable donations. How Do Taxpayers Benefit from the SALT Deduction? Everyone in the United States benefited from SALT, but the SALT deduction was used directly by around 30% of all taxpayers. Taxpayers were given the option of deducting real estate taxes as well as either income taxes or sales taxes paid to state and local governments. While the SALT deduction was used across all income levels, the actual amount of property versus income versus sales tax deducted by lower, middle, and upper income taxpayers provides insight into how those taxpayers benefit. For example, while over 70% of SALT deductions for tax units with an AGI of more than $200,000 were from income taxes, over 60% of deductions from taxpayers with less than $50,000 in income came from property tax. This highlights how important the property tax deduction is for middle class homeownership. In addition to its effect on taxpayers who itemize, regardless of adjusted gross income, the SALT deduction also benefited taxpayers in all 50 states. The tax deduction was used by Americans living in urban, suburban, and rural locations and across all congressional districts. The states with the highest percentage of taxpayers using the SALT deduction were in the East and Northeast regions. However, states in the West and Midwest also take advantage of the deduction. Overall, use of the SALT deduction was widespread among all states. The average deduction per tax unit in Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey were all over $7,000, and close to $6,000 in California..” www.gfoa.org/salt |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 15, 2021 14:18:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 15, 2021 15:25:29 GMT
Democrats complain about tax cuts to the rich but you have 17 democrats threatening to block the infrastructure bill unless the SALT deduction is restored link. Wouldn’t that be considered a tax cut for the rich? The 3 Democrats named in the article all have a net worth of a million or more and are from NY so they would benefit by restoring the deduction. Nope. The SALT deduction is not exclusively nor is know as a tax on wealth. Here’s a factual explanation on what the SALT tax deduction is an who it benefits. “What is the SALT Deduction Taxpayers in the United States were granted a range of tax preferences from the federal government. The Revenue Act of 1913, which introduced the federal income tax, states that “all national, state, county, school, and municipal taxes paid within the year, not including those assessed against local benefits,” can be deducted. The Revenue Act of 1964 later named specific state and local taxes that could be deducted, which included: real and personal property, income, and general sales taxes. These tax preferences serve two important goals. First, by allowing taxpayers the ability to deduct state and local taxes (SALT), taxpayers avoid being taxed twice on the same income. Additionally, the deduction on property taxes, along with deduction on mortgage interest, provides a strong incentive for homeownership. The sales tax deduction provides similar incentives for encouraging spending — which facilitates economic growth. Compared with other common deductions, the state and local tax deduction had a larger impact than the deductions for both charitable giving and mortgage interest. In recent years, 29.5% of tax units used the SALT deduction. Only 21% used the SALT deduction for mortgage interest, and 15% used the deduction for charitable donations. How Do Taxpayers Benefit from the SALT Deduction? Everyone in the United States benefited from SALT, but the SALT deduction was used directly by around 30% of all taxpayers. Taxpayers were given the option of deducting real estate taxes as well as either income taxes or sales taxes paid to state and local governments. While the SALT deduction was used across all income levels, the actual amount of property versus income versus sales tax deducted by lower, middle, and upper income taxpayers provides insight into how those taxpayers benefit. For example, while over 70% of SALT deductions for tax units with an AGI of more than $200,000 were from income taxes, over 60% of deductions from taxpayers with less than $50,000 in income came from property tax. This highlights how important the property tax deduction is for middle class homeownership. In addition to its effect on taxpayers who itemize, regardless of adjusted gross income, the SALT deduction also benefited taxpayers in all 50 states. The tax deduction was used by Americans living in urban, suburban, and rural locations and across all congressional districts. The states with the highest percentage of taxpayers using the SALT deduction were in the East and Northeast regions. However, states in the West and Midwest also take advantage of the deduction. Overall, use of the SALT deduction was widespread among all states. The average deduction per tax unit in Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey were all over $7,000, and close to $6,000 in California..” www.gfoa.org/saltWhile that's true - the LIMIT on the SALT deduction absolutely benefits primarily the wealthy. The current debate is whether the current limit of $10,000 is to be retained- as your post shows, the average deduction is well under that. taxfoundation.org/salt-deduction-cap-testimony-2019/ |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 15, 2021 15:31:01 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 15:50:33 GMT
I disagree with Boehner that the “crazies” were taking over the Republican Party in 2008. I believe the “crazies” of the Republican Party started to flex their muscles during Clinton’s term. That is when the Hastert Rule was formed & Newt Gingrich made himself known.
I do believe the Republican Party, at all levels, will continue on this craziness until they pay a price. And the ONLY price they will understand is not winning elections. Which means it’s up to the voters to hold them accountable.
And so far those who regularly vote for candidates with an “R” after their names are failing big time to hold the Republican Party accountable for this craziness.
What does that say about these voters that continue to vote for this craziness?
“Opinion: Republicans will keep up the craziness until they pay a real price”
Opinion by
James Hohmann
Columnist
“John Boehner first realized “the crazies” were taking over the Republican Party during the 2008 financial crisis, two years before the tea party wave made him speaker of the House and seven years before Donald Trump descended a golden escalator to run for president.
The moment of clarity came when 133 House Republicans voted down a $700 billion rescue package sought by President George W. Bush. To Boehner, then minority leader, these members seemed more worried about pleasing Fox News’s Sean Hannity than preventing another Great Depression. Four days later, after tanking markets wiped out trillions of dollars in wealth, Boehner twisted enough arms to pass the bailout, but 108 of his members still voted no.
“None of the so-called conservatives who were willing to blow up our economy ever paid any price,” Boehner laments in “On the House,” his memoir that published Tuesday. “It was a story I would see played out over and over again in the next few years.”
Boehner is correct, if not blameless, in his diagnosis of what caused the GOP to become unable to govern responsibly or effectively: The lack of meaningful consequences for political arsonists since 2008 has warped incentives for ambitious Republicans, radicalizing the party and paving the road that led to the attack against democracy itself on Jan. 6. “The legislative terrorism that I’d witnessed as Speaker had now encouraged actual terrorism,” Boehner writes.
Boehner calls Trump “a product of the chaos we’ve seen in our political process” since 2008, but he also admits he voted to reelect the former president last November because he liked his judicial nominees. He writes that he went along with shutting down the government in 2013, even though he knew the strategy to defund Obamacare was reckless and futile.
“Sometimes you have to let people blow themselves up to make a point,” he explains. The former Ohio congressman concludes his book, written from retirement in Florida, by calling the failed insurrection “a wake-up call for a return to Republican sanity.”
Three months later, no one can argue that’s happened. Sen. Josh Hawley said he will “never apologize” for organizing efforts to reject Joe Biden’s electors, alongside Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), whom Boehner describes as “head lunatic.”
Hawley’s move alienated mentors and early supporters, but he raised more than $3 million from 57,000 small-dollar donors in the three months after Jan. 6. The junior senator from Missouri now finds himself inundated with invitations to speak at Lincoln Day dinners.
And, entirely foreseeable, several corporations that suspended donations after Jan. 6 have resumed writing checks to lawmakers who voted against certifying Biden’s victory. JetBlue was first to back off, contributing to Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.), who is a member of the committee with jurisdiction over aviation.
Trump, a registered Democrat until 2009, hijacked the GOP five years ago. Republican leaders are terrified of the ex-president’s sway with the grass roots, but they also suffer from Stockholm syndrome. How else can you explain last weekend’s Republican National Committee gathering at Mar-a-Lago?
The former president, repeating false claims that he won in November and keeping the door open to running again in 2024, used his Saturday speech to again attack Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as a “dumb son of a bitch” for not trying to overturn the election. The minority leader holds Trump responsible for provoking Jan. 6, which McConnell called a “disgraceful dereliction of duty,” yet nevertheless voted to acquit him after his second impeachment trial. He declined to respond to Trump’s latest broadside. The same weekend, Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.), the National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman, presented Trump with a “Champion for Freedom” award, a prize created for their meeting.
While individual members have yet to pay a discernible price for playing these games, the antics have taken a toll on the party’s brand. Fresh Gallup polling shows 49 percent of Americans identify with or lean toward Democrats, compared to 40 percent for Republicans. That’s the widest gap since 2012.
Boehner believes neither he nor former president Ronald Reagan could win as Republicans today. But there are no indications GOP leaders will listen to his calls for “sanity.” When someone with a sense of humor dropped off a signed copy of Boehner’s book at Cruz’s office, the Texan tweeted a picture of the gift in his fireplace. “The appropriate place,” Cruz wrote.
For his part, Boehner remains angry at Republicans who voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program in 2008, which he calls “one of the more successful economic measures ever passed by Congress.” He notes that all the money spent was paid back, with interest, by the companies saved from collapse.
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), now House minority leader, was not just one of the 147 lawmakers who voted to overturn the 2020 election. He was also among the 108 Republicans who voted against TARP both times in 2008. The inmates now run the asylum.”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 15:57:10 GMT
Maybe this is the real reason why voters continue to vote for Republicans.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 16:41:21 GMT
Note to a those who regularly vote for candidates with a “R” next to their name, this is the kind of logic you all are voting for.
😀
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 15, 2021 16:48:01 GMT
I wonder if, in an expensive state like New York, there are a lot of families living basically middle class lifestyles who would still benefit from raising the cap or getting rid of it just because their homes are much more expensive that similar homes elsewhere. The richest 20% make about 131,000 in household income per year, according to 2020 census data. While that’s a comfortable sum in many places, it’s not going to qualify as “rich” in most. Around here, that’s a decent but not cushy middle class income - roughly what a two-teacher household would make in the Houston suburbs. Those same people in NYC are probably living in a much more expensive house/condo and their cost of living is higher. So I can see why the reps from New York might have an interest in at least raising the cap. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 15, 2021 17:12:11 GMT
I wonder if, in an expensive state like New York, there are a lot of families living basically middle class lifestyles who would still benefit from raising the cap or getting rid of it just because their homes are much more expensive that similar homes elsewhere. The richest 20% make about 131,000 in household income per year, according to 2020 census data. While that’s a comfortable sum in many places, it’s not going to qualify as “rich” in most. Around here, that’s a decent but not cushy middle class income - roughly what a two-teacher household would make in the Houston suburbs. Those same people in NYC are probably living in a much more expensive house/condo and their cost of living is higher. So I can see why the reps from New York might have an interest in at least raising the cap. It doesn't change the fact that the NY reps are holding up the infrastructure bill want it eliminated and that will disproportionally benefit the wealthy. And let's be real, they're doing it for their big Wall Street donors which is why the want it eliminated and not just raised. I'm finding it hilarious to be honest. An across the board tax cut is vilified as if you reduce all tax rates 1% the poor get nothing as they don't pay federal income taxes. And you get that headline or about how the wealthy benefit most. I could find thousands of soundbites from these exact same politicians on ANY tax cut carrying on about how it just benefits the wealthy. But this policy - which truly is only felt by upper income families and truly is a gift to the mega wealthy and these Dems want to hold up Biden's major legislation to help poor and working class families. Hey knock yourself out defending it - just realize the hypocrisy - and next time a republican wants to lower taxes I'll expect the same understanding on why those making more than $131,000 should pay less in taxes. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 19:13:18 GMT
“Republicans and the Great Replacement
The idea that they're being "replaced" is now part of the core GOP ideology”
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 15, 2021 21:41:54 GMT
I wonder if, in an expensive state like New York, there are a lot of families living basically middle class lifestyles who would still benefit from raising the cap or getting rid of it just because their homes are much more expensive that similar homes elsewhere. The richest 20% make about 131,000 in household income per year, according to 2020 census data. While that’s a comfortable sum in many places, it’s not going to qualify as “rich” in most. Around here, that’s a decent but not cushy middle class income - roughly what a two-teacher household would make in the Houston suburbs. Those same people in NYC are probably living in a much more expensive house/condo and their cost of living is higher. So I can see why the reps from New York might have an interest in at least raising the cap. It doesn't change the fact that the NY reps are holding up the infrastructure bill want it eliminated and that will disproportionally benefit the wealthy. And let's be real, they're doing it for their big Wall Street donors which is why the want it eliminated and not just raised. I'm finding it hilarious to be honest. An across the board tax cut is vilified as if you reduce all tax rates 1% the poor get nothing as they don't pay federal income taxes. And you get that headline or about how the wealthy benefit most. I could find thousands of soundbites from these exact same politicians on ANY tax cut carrying on about how it just benefits the wealthy. But this policy - which truly is only felt by upper income families and truly is a gift to the mega wealthy and these Dems want to hold up Biden's major legislation to help poor and working class families. Hey knock yourself out defending it - just realize the hypocrisy - and next time a republican wants to lower taxes I'll expect the same understanding on why those making more than $131,000 should pay less in taxes. I’m not defending it. I’m asking a question and speculating to better understand. Thanks for your ... answers. 🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 15, 2021 22:58:45 GMT
SALT, bipartisan House members! A bipartisan group of House members from high-tax states on Thursday launched a caucus focused on advocating for undoing the $10,000 limit on the state and local tax deductions (SALT), as lawmakers press to include repeal of the cap in infrastructure legislation.“It is high time that Congress reinstates the state and local tax deduction, so we can get more dollars back into the pockets of so many struggling families, especially as we recover from this pandemic,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), one of the chairs of the caucus, said during a press conference. The caucus has about 30 members from states such as New York, New Jersey, California and Illinois. Democratic members of the caucus include Gottheimer, and Reps. Thomas Suozzi (N.Y.) and Bill Pascrell (N.J.), who have all been outspoken on the SALT issue in recent days. GOP lawmakers in the caucus include several first-term House members from New York and California, as well as Rep. Lee Zeldin, who recently announced that he is running for governor of New York. “I’m very proud to fight for my Californians by joining this SALT caucus,” said Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), another co-chair of the caucus. ** thehill.com/policy/finance/548493-lawmakers-launch-bipartisan-caucus-on-salt-deductionWhy not set a maximum income for the exemptions? |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 15, 2021 23:53:15 GMT
SALT, bipartisan House members! A bipartisan group of House members from high-tax states on Thursday launched a caucus focused on advocating for undoing the $10,000 limit on the state and local tax deductions (SALT), as lawmakers press to include repeal of the cap in infrastructure legislation.“It is high time that Congress reinstates the state and local tax deduction, so we can get more dollars back into the pockets of so many struggling families, especially as we recover from this pandemic,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), one of the chairs of the caucus, said during a press conference. The caucus has about 30 members from states such as New York, New Jersey, California and Illinois. Democratic members of the caucus include Gottheimer, and Reps. Thomas Suozzi (N.Y.) and Bill Pascrell (N.J.), who have all been outspoken on the SALT issue in recent days. GOP lawmakers in the caucus include several first-term House members from New York and California, as well as Rep. Lee Zeldin, who recently announced that he is running for governor of New York. “I’m very proud to fight for my Californians by joining this SALT caucus,” said Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), another co-chair of the caucus. ** thehill.com/policy/finance/548493-lawmakers-launch-bipartisan-caucus-on-salt-deductionWhy not set a maximum income for the exemptions? Because then they can't pretend it's benefit "struggling families." A $10,000 cap means it's already limited to those with higher income. I mean honestly - do you want to pay more in taxes or have a higher deficit so that families making $545,000 pay less in taxes - particularly as these exact same people overall benefited from the entirety of the tax legislation despite their whining about SALT? www.aei.org/economics/the-deduction-for-state-and-local-taxes-and-the-middle-class/More numbers: www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/repealing-salt-cap-would-be-regressive-and-proposed-offset-would-use-up-neededIt'll make great fodder for those want to paint the Democrats as coastal elites - yeah fair share is all well and good unless you're a Wall Street millionaire and don't want a limit on your deductions because you live in a high tax state. Hey if it passes, I'll benefit - so good luck Schumer! |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456 
|
Post by sassyangel on Apr 16, 2021 0:29:26 GMT
Is this thread asking conservatives what they stand for, or are you telling them what they stand for now? I’m confused. I think it's asking the Peas what they think Conservatives stand for - whether they are speaking personally as Conservatives or speaking about Conservatives based on their experience with them. Oh ok, cause my experience with conservatives is pretty varied, so I’m not sure I’d feel comfortable speaking *for* them, if that was the intent.  I can give my observations on the major disconnect I feel exists between the current Republican Party and the ones I know, some of whom feel basically homeless. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 16, 2021 0:58:17 GMT
I think it's just a spot for @freddie to collect various tweets and stories. Obviously she has zero interest in actually engaging in discussion. Apparently 2peas is now just a bookmarking site.
|
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Apr 16, 2021 2:40:27 GMT
I think it's just a spot for @freddie to collect various tweets and stories. Obviously she has zero interest in actually engaging in discussion. Apparently 2peas is now just a bookmarking site. I’m going to remember, and probably bump, this thread next time we get the inevitable “why can’t all of the rest of YOU be nicer to, and more understanding of, other peas” handslap thread that is issued every few months. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2021 3:14:48 GMT
I think it's just a spot for @freddie to collect various tweets and stories. Obviously she has zero interest in actually engaging in discussion. Apparently 2peas is now just a bookmarking site. Actually she does have an interest in having a serious discussion. But did she expect those on the right to venture in with the intent of giving reasons why they continue to vote for Republicans? Sadly no. And since that wasn’t going to happen on this board she decided just to ponder why those who regularly vote Republican continue to do so. It is a mystery. And she would also like to point out that other people’s comments, whether in a post, a tweet, or a story, can start a discussion if others are so inclined. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2021 3:53:41 GMT
Why not set a maximum income for the exemptions? My thought exactly! We phase in and out all kinds of taxes on all kinds of parameters. Make SALT deductible up to a certain income level. Done and done. |
|
|
|
Post by sunshine on Apr 16, 2021 11:11:36 GMT
I think it's just a spot for @freddie to collect various tweets and stories. Obviously she has zero interest in actually engaging in discussion. Apparently 2peas is now just a bookmarking site. Actually she does have an interest in having a serious discussion. But did she expect those on the right to venture in with the intent of giving reasons why they continue to vote for Republicans? Sadly no. And since that wasn’t going to happen on this board she decided just to ponder why those who regularly vote Republican continue to do so. It is a mystery. And she would also like to point out that other people’s comments, whether in a post, a tweet, or a story, can start a discussion if others are so inclined. I had a “Jimmy” Seinfeld episode flashback after reading this. Weird, but that was one of the best episodes! |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2021 15:01:27 GMT
When you look at the percentages, especially the 78% that believe President Biden didn’t “legitimately” win. There is no proof to even remotely suggest what these individuals believe happened. So why do they believe this?
And no I don’t expect anyone to answer. It’s just another mystery.
|
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 16, 2021 17:22:59 GMT
The new GOP stands for nothing!! The vote in the House was 415 for, 2 against. Here are the two!!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2021 0:56:42 GMT
Should we ask this guy what conservative values he’s talking about? Think he would answer?
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Apr 26, 2021 1:23:42 GMT
Democrats complain about tax cuts to the rich but you have 17 democrats threatening to block the infrastructure bill unless the SALT deduction is restored link. Wouldn’t that be considered a tax cut for the rich? The 3 Democrats named in the article all have a net worth of a million or more and are from NY so they would benefit by restoring the deduction. Did you actually read the article? The Democrats are from high cost of living blue states. Former capped the deduction at $10,000. The Republicans not surprisingly are opposed because it would benefit people from blue states, not just the wealthy. I have not looked at all of the numbers. But, we are a middle class family living in an average house for our area of N.H. We pay more than $10,000 in property taxes and would benefit from raising the 10,000 cap. I’m not sure N.H. is even considered a high cost of living state but our property taxes are really high. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2021 18:05:57 GMT
She has a point and yet people will continue vote for these guys. It is a mystery.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:23:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2021 1:09:02 GMT
Maybe the reason people vote for folks with a big “R” after their names is because they believe this stuff,..
This is Mike Pence’s brother who is now in Congress. And guess what he voted no on the bill that is doing this and he is trying to take credit for it.
“Help is on the way, no thanks to me”.
|
|
I can give my observations on the major disconnect I feel exists between the current Republican Party and the ones I know, some of whom feel basically homeless. 
