Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
It’s not just that she’s wealthy, she’s wealthy because she has a job that requires ever increasing taxes to aquire/maintain her wealth. Also, she got a free invite from someone, again using her wealth to obtain things others can’t.
1. What you outlined above isn't what I wrote. What you've outlined is "the ultra-wealthy" advocating for higher taxes on the "upper middle class". While that seems like bad policy, it's not hypocritical. More to the point, it's also not what Buffett and Gates are doing. They are advocating for higher taxes on themselves and others in their situation.
1. Her job (by itself) doesn't pay "ultra-wealth" level, and her specific job doesn't really require "ever increasing taxes". Some of the policies and programs for which she advocates certainly require additional taxes, but suggesting that those taxes should come from the wealthy isn't hypocritical in and of itself. If she argued, for example, that Congress should be exempt from taxes, that would be hypocritical, in my book.
this is why I find it hysterical about the whole situation.
You're right, there Isn't. So I'm not sure why you're beholden to sugar coating and pretending that what's going on isn't really what's going on.
Agreed, it is hard to pass such laws. I suspect that, if AOC were able to do so on her own, that she would significantly increase taxes on the ultra-wealthy. Naturally, no single Congressperson has that ability. It's still not hypocritical to advocate for a policy, even if one recognizes that the likelihood of the policy becoming law is slim. I advocate for proportional representation all the time, even though I recognize it will likely never happen.
Labeling something correctly or calling out incorrect labels isn't "sugar coating and pretending"
It was a generic statement on taxes
. Over the years my taxes (all inclusive, housing, etc) have increased.
Last five years? I've only been here less than two years. Now I know you're making stuff upLabeling something correctly or calling out incorrect labels isn't "sugar coating and pretending"
This narrative you've been attempting to drive for the better part of the last 5 years has got to be the longest slippery slope argument ever constructed by man. We're at about 75 years and counting.
Again, labeling something correctly or calling out incorrect labels isn't "sugar coating". For example, when you label the US government funding healthcare as "socialism" despite the fact that they government is NOT taking over the creation and rationing portion, that's incorrect/incomplete. When it's suggested that our vaccine rollout is the most socialist event we've had in my lifetime (47 years) and you scoff at that. Both illustrations of the labeling problem we currently have.
Again, labeling something correctly or calling out incorrect labels isn't "sugar coating". For example, when you label the US government funding healthcare as "socialism" despite the fact that they government is NOT taking over the creation and rationing portion, that's incorrect/incomplete. When it's suggested that our vaccine rollout is the most socialist event we've had in my lifetime (47 years) and you scoff at that. Both illustrations of the labeling problem we currently have.
Bold is one of my favorite shticks by the way
None of this is my thoughts. It's all stuff you've said in the past. If it seems chaotic to you, imagine the rest of us watching it getting posted over and over.At some point you have to stop making things up, right? You're not going to be able to hold it all together. Youre barely holding it together now.
I suggest you stick with things you know about, like "OMG!!! TRUMP!!"" instead of pretending things that are happening arent really happening so you dont have to face the truth.
None of this is my thoughts. It's all stuff you've said in the past. If it seems chaotic to you, imagine the rest of us watching it getting posted over and over.
Between this and "whatabout BLM!!!!!!" this is 98% of your body of work here. The only thing I'm left wondering is if you realize you're merely on the other side of the coin you claim to loathe.
Yes, specifically the Costume Institute which has an amazing collection. I was lucky to get an after hours tour one year through work. Still waiting on my Gala invite.
Was just pointing out the obvious....outside of that, none of it had anything to do with me. It's not like everyone else missed it or something.
In other words, his post hit a little close to home when you have to resort to this retort.
In other words, his post hit a little close to home when you have to resort to this retort.
And she has ethics complaints being laid against her for accepting a 35k ticket. 0% chance she paid for that herself.
Two peas in a pod, you two.I don't know. I think loud-mouthed hypocrites who peddle dangerous ideologies are worth their own thread.
It's always fun to point that they never follow the same rules they want you and me to follow, enriching themselves in the process.
Two peas in a pod, you two.
Just saw that Congressional employees can't accept anything over $100. This was 350x that. I am chagrined a representative would even consider accepting such a gift.
Angry...good one
I couldn't be more entertained with an individual on these boards. "Do as I say, not as I do" is one of the more entertaining faux outrage positions going.
I'm sure it doesSounds like you're trying to convince yourself that you're not an angry, straw man type of guy.
I would say "be better" but I know you can't.
