I’d also point out that, insofar as “branding” goes, the GQPers no longer feel that “liberal” is enough of a scare word anymore. It’s always “radical liberal socialist” now. In fact, they use “radical” in front of anything that relates to the left of McConnell.
And, thanks to folks like Marge Greene, I’ve recently seen that “communist” is making a comeback in a way we haven’t seen since the 1950’s, or at least the 1980’s, because apparently “socialist” isn’t strong enough anymore. (And I’ll add that I’m not aware of ANY sitting Dem on the national level who is actually a communist in any true sense of the term.)
Even “progressive” - which we might consider to be to the left of “liberal” - isn’t enough of a scare word for the GQP. Perhaps because they’ve realized that it’s opposite is “regressive,” and that’s not a label they necessarily want to apply to themselves.
Out of curiosity, how do you define “fortunes” in the “no inherited fortunes” bit? Do you set fortunes at a specific dollar amount, and if so, what is that amount? Or are you saying that if a person dies with any net assets, those assets should be forfeited to the government?
I am wildly appreciative when AOC supports the party. She is doing that now. When she runs Facebook ads to raise money for herself in districts where she is wildly unpopular thus pulling down other Dems, then we bitch.
Sinema's whole claim to fame is that she has always been MAVERICK who STANDS Up to the DNC. She is not the responsibility of the party faithful or those of us who are Good Democracts. She was a Green and then a maverick. Don't fucking blame institutionalists for that Party Bad, Maverick Good piece of work.
There are only two teams. Constantly pissing on your own supports the other, no matter which side of the tent you piss upon.
I appreciate your response. I suspect that my views on the issue - and probably the case for many - are governed by personal experience.
My grandparents were immigrants who had nothing when they came to the US. They were hard-working farmers who, along with the efforts of their 5 children, eventually acquired enough farmland to be reasonably comfortable after retirement. My own inheritance from when my grandmother passed was limited to a well-used Bundt cake pan, which she used to make angel food cakes. It’s was the only thing I asked for, and I treasure it still.
But certainly my parents and her other children benefited from the farmland being passed down. If her entire estate gone to the government, I suspect I would be rather angry, because where would be the benefit to working hard, and saving and being frugal? And as for “encouraging wealth disposal before death,” I’m not entirely sure how you do that unless we all know when we’re going to die.
I do think there should be a cutoff, which is what the next generation needs to be comfortable. And that is why we have - and should have - the estate tax. Maybe it should have a lower cutoff, and maybe the estate tax above that point should be at 100%. But again, I’m probably basing that on personal experience, rather than a general philosophy.
Do common everyday Americans like most of us here really care about how much the federal govt spends? Like--oh if Senema votes for a 3 .5 trillion dollar infrastructure bill, she will never get my vote again. Aren't most of more like-I have to get another new tire because of that pothole that has been there since last winter. Somebody needs to do something!
I've been saying for years that one of the biggest things that has held Bernie Sanders -- and, more importantly, his agenda -- back, is the "Democratic Socialist" branding.
Aside from the fact that it's factually incorrect -- he is what the rest of the world calls a "Social Democrat" -- he's using it in a country where large swaths of the population have an instant and severe allergic reaction to the word "socialist".
I’d also point out that, insofar as “branding” goes, the GQPers no longer feel that “liberal” is enough of a scare word anymore. It’s always “radical liberal socialist” now. In fact, they use “radical” in front of anything that relates to the left of McConnell.
And, thanks to folks like Marge Greene, I’ve recently seen that “communist” is making a comeback in a way we haven’t seen since the 1950’s, or at least the 1980’s, because apparently “socialist” isn’t strong enough anymore. (And I’ll add that I’m not aware of ANY sitting Dem on the national level who is actually a communist in any true sense of the term.)
Even “progressive” - which we might consider to be to the left of “liberal” - isn’t enough of a scare word for the GQP. Perhaps because they’ve realized that it’s opposite is “regressive,” and that’s not a label they necessarily want to apply to themselves.
Out of curiosity, how do you define “fortunes” in the “no inherited fortunes” bit? Do you set fortunes at a specific dollar amount, and if so, what is that amount? Or are you saying that if a person dies with any net assets, those assets should be forfeited to the government?
reminds me of this (when my boys argue it also reminds me of the 3-headed knight: "Ah, cut your own head off!...")
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
wait till they realize Jeebus was made up also and at least Biden has first source documentation.
Good Democrats want people to support the party.
I am wildly appreciative when AOC supports the party. She is doing that now. When she runs Facebook ads to raise money for herself in districts where she is wildly unpopular thus pulling down other Dems, then we bitch.
Sinema's whole claim to fame is that she has always been MAVERICK who STANDS Up to the DNC. She is not the responsibility of the party faithful or those of us who are Good Democracts. She was a Green and then a maverick. Don't fucking blame institutionalists for that Party Bad, Maverick Good piece of work.
There are only two teams. Constantly pissing on your own supports the other, no matter which side of the tent you piss upon.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the first day of the Jan. 6th testimony has some of these guys rethinking their ride on the crazy train.
I appreciate your response. I suspect that my views on the issue - and probably the case for many - are governed by personal experience.
My grandparents were immigrants who had nothing when they came to the US. They were hard-working farmers who, along with the efforts of their 5 children, eventually acquired enough farmland to be reasonably comfortable after retirement. My own inheritance from when my grandmother passed was limited to a well-used Bundt cake pan, which she used to make angel food cakes. It’s was the only thing I asked for, and I treasure it still.
But certainly my parents and her other children benefited from the farmland being passed down. If her entire estate gone to the government, I suspect I would be rather angry, because where would be the benefit to working hard, and saving and being frugal? And as for “encouraging wealth disposal before death,” I’m not entirely sure how you do that unless we all know when we’re going to die.
I do think there should be a cutoff, which is what the next generation needs to be comfortable. And that is why we have - and should have - the estate tax. Maybe it should have a lower cutoff, and maybe the estate tax above that point should be at 100%. But again, I’m probably basing that on personal experience, rather than a general philosophy.
The fuck are "everyday families"?
Do common everyday Americans like most of us here really care about how much the federal govt spends? Like--oh if Senema votes for a 3 .5 trillion dollar infrastructure bill, she will never get my vote again. Aren't most of more like-I have to get another new tire because of that pothole that has been there since last winter. Somebody needs to do something!
White ones, of course, that high pitched sound is the dog whistle..
Smoke and Mirrors fellow travelers! corrupt one and all.They gave your commons to Wall Street! Just to avoid tax on their backers, suckers.
I'd like to thank Sen. Murkowski for showing that tacky twa-- twit Ms. Sidney Powell how an animal print should be worn.
iSTR remember reading that there's at least one Democrat who has won statewide office (the AG?) would be a good choice to primary Sinema.
I've been saying for years that one of the biggest things that has held Bernie Sanders -- and, more importantly, his agenda -- back, is the "Democratic Socialist" branding.
Aside from the fact that it's factually incorrect -- he is what the rest of the world calls a "Social Democrat" -- he's using it in a country where large swaths of the population have an instant and severe allergic reaction to the word "socialist".
hetro white ones
lets hope so - but if it is true, its only because they've realised its gonna hit their self interests