5150sick
Under Ground Hustler
Staff member
VU Administrator
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
Press Corps
Member For 5 Years
Mod Team Leader
I'm sure. They are addicted to the additives in cigarettes. They have no choice - if they are law abiding citizens that don't hit the black market or travel out of state. NY should be ashamed of themselves for taking advantage of their poor citizens.
Its just another example of how progressive government policies are repressive to the rights, freedoms, and liberties of the population. Disgusting.
It's more like they are so poor they have no car and can not travel any further than the nearest corner store.
They should increase the tax to offset the loss...
They should increase the tax to offset the loss...
The sad thing is that is what they are probably thinking right now
Why do NY'ers elect these money hungry control freaks?
Because they continue to vote for whoever their party supports. People don't take the time to study the issues, and they vote for the party their parents voted for. The best way to improve the present system is to have the taxpayer fund the campaign. Big money and their lobbyists need to be out of the voting process.Why do NY'ers elect these money hungry control freaks?
NY just incubates and hatches them. Many have escaped and made their way around the globe. One of the studs has a quaffed hairdo and is threatening the very existences of all the is good.Why do NY'ers elect these money hungry control freaks?
One of the studs has a quaffed hairdo
He gobbles up a political party and acts like a moron, until all his peers hate him. Then he threatenes to leave the party and go independent. Now they have to be nice to him, because if he leaves, they all lose.
That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the party system. It's not about who's better or what's better for voters... it's about what's good for the party.
He's got my vote whether he's in the party or not. So yeah, they'll lose.
I actually find what he says much more interesting. He's a bully, like Putin. I like that. How many politicians before him lay out their "comprehensive plan" to do something, only to have the idiot representatives and congress fuck it over?This painful 3-plus-year election cycle... if he switches, that would be the first legitimately interesting thing.
This painful 3-plus-year election cycle... if he switches, that would be the first legitimately interesting thing.
They have to pay back the tobacco bonds which went into the politicians pork fund.Well, they're already losing so much revenue with the current tax vs. black market, that's a risky proposition. Easier solution: more taxes for vaping. (Chicago comes to mind.)
I was before I started my journey at GE...I was working at Alderman's Chevy as a Head Detailer and only made $9/hr. I look back on those days and wonder how I got by with 3 kids, but it was a time I started to manage my money better and then apply to many other jobs, which got me where I am today.There are people spending a quarter of their income on cigarettes?
I pretty much agree with what you just said. I think of it like this. Maybe Trump really is doing this because he wants to do something great before he dies. He's won the game financially. He could just wrap it up, take his ball, and go home. He doesn't need any of this. The job of President is a gigantic pay cut for him, so the money isn't the reason he is running. He could spend the rest of his life on a tropical island with umbrella drinks brought to him every half hour. So why in the hell would he do this? In the back of my mind, I keep coming back to the conclusion that maybe he really does want to "fix" America. It really would be easy enough to do. Our brakes have been locked up by the progressive political machine that is destroying us from within. Obama clearly has no interest in fixing a single damn thing that would make the average American safer, more prosperous, or protect our freedoms. He is trying to set us up to fail. It is as plain as the nose on your face. Now Trump, on the other hand. "Make America Great Again". Jeesh... that sounds scary. Is it possible that his goal is to do exactly that? He's smart enough. He's dilligent enough. He does know how to lead teams of people through large, complicated projects that do get finished. Can he be doing this for the "right" reason? Maybe he wants to go down in history as a great leader that saved a great country? Why else would he do any of this?I actually find what he says much more interesting. He's a bully, like Putin. I like that. How many politicians before him lay out their "comprehensive plan" to do something, only to have the idiot representatives and congress fuck it over?
At least with him, I think he will take them to task for fucking around. This could be the best thing to happen to Washington DC since the revolution. I'd rather gamble with Trump, than I would gamble with ANY other mealy mouthed politician right now.
I am scared to vote for anyone trying to get into office and have been since Clinton....I didnt get to vote before that and Im glad I cant be blamed for voting the half retarded agenda oriented presidents before that....I have yet to see a person I would say is good for the American freedom our country was fought and built upon run for president in the last century...I pretty much agree with what you just said. I think of it like this. Maybe Trump really is doing this because he wants to do something great before he dies. He's won the game financially. He could just wrap it up, take his ball, and go home. He doesn't need any of this. The job of President is a gigantic pay cut for him, so the money isn't the reason he is running. He could spend the rest of his life on a tropical island with umbrella drinks brought to him every half hour. So why in the hell would he do this? In the back of my mind, I keep coming back to the conclusion that maybe he really does want to "fix" America. It really would be easy enough to do. Our brakes have been locked up by the progressive political machine that is destroying us from within. Obama clearly has no interest in fixing a single damn thing that would make the average American safer, more prosperous, or protect our freedoms. He is trying to set us up to fail. It is as plain as the nose on your face. Now Trump, on the other hand. "Make America Great Again". Jeesh... that sounds scary. Is it possible that his goal is to do exactly that? He's smart enough. He's dilligent enough. He does know how to lead teams of people through large, complicated projects that do get finished. Can he be doing this for the "right" reason? Maybe he wants to go down in history as a great leader that saved a great country? Why else would he do any of this?
Here's the interesting part. I was in an automotive repair facility the other day, and I heard 3 young men talking about how they had never voted before, but were registering to vote so that they could vote for Trump. Now that really suprised me because first of all, I'm in Maryland (one of the lemming capitals of the world), and second, it was one white guy and two black ones, all in their 20s. I was shocked...
I remember when they doubled the tax on booze and beer in MD. Pissed a lot of people off, but for some reason Cisco, Thunderbird, Night Train, and MD 20/20 bum wines stayed the same price in the major cities.It's more like they are so poor they have no car and can not travel any further than the nearest corner store.
When you are forced to blow 1/4 of your earnings on sin taxes you wouldn't be able to afford much else.
He could just wrap it up, take his ball, and go home. He doesn't need any of this.
I've voted against people for a long time. Reagan was the last guy I voted for - twice. I was just getting out of college, and was fortunate to that I was able to ride his wave. When he took office, mortgage rates were in the double digits, jobs were hard to find, and we were getting hit hard by the utility monopolies. He busted up a lot of crony capitalism and opened up a bunch of doors for people like me. Not to mention that it just felt good hearing him on the radio. You could tell that he really was looking out for all of us. Of course, the people who's power trips he messed up have been slandering him ever since. Good thing I was there to see it, or otherwise I'd think he sucked as President. I really liked him.We'll never know this for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's just doing this to shake things up. There are times his actions seem like some giant social experiment.
Here in MN taxes go up whether we have a D or an R. It doesn't matter.
I am a fan of progress and progressive thought and politics. I will put good money on none of the fear-mongering freak show R candidates (whoever ends up getting the nomination) getting more than 30% of the vote. Progressives are going to turn out in record numbers this election cycle to do anything in their power to ensure that none of the Republicans make it to the presidency (and other elected offices).
Question: What in the hell is a neocon? I actually like the sound of it, and once the conservatives take the GOP back, I'm going to suggest that we use it as the new party name. "Republicans" sounds boring, "Neocon" is way cooler in a Matrix, hip, sorta way. Might make us more popular with the "yutes". So, back to the question. I know several hundred or more conservatives. None of them has ever said to me "I'm a Neocon" when I ask if they are a liberal. Every one says "conservative". Hell... If there is something new going on in conservatism... We wanna know about it... But from now on, I'm going to start calling myself a Neocon because it is cool. At any rate, it is a serious question. Conservatism has always been about ensuring personal freedom and liberty, personal responsibility, and the chance to sink or swim on your own, and of your own accord. These things have been the same since the beginning of time. There isn't a need to go "neo" (aside from the hip sound to it). Theses concepts and principles date back to the dawn of man.
Neocon. While official definitions vary a bit, I think there is a general use definition.
It's more foreign policy than domestic. The common neocon(for instance Hitlery Clinton is considered a neocon by many), shows a propensity to believe that US exert it's force, both economic and military, over other countries, governments and leaders simply because we know what's best for them. Which makes sense since neo means 'new'. Conservatives of old believed in "ensuring personal freedom and liberty, personal responsibility, and the chance to sink or swim on your own, and of your own accord"(as you put it), but also applied that to foreign policy. For instance, they would let the people of Syria decide who and what their government would be rather the "Assad must go" mantra of today's neocons that actively use US power, again both economic and military for the neocons to decide Syria's government rather than the Syrian people.
That's why, in large part, the R party has shrunk. Many would be R's that believe "ensuring personal freedom and liberty, personal responsibility, and the chance to sink or swim on your own, and of your own accord"(as you put it) can't and won't be persuaded that using force and coercion on those outside the country is a good idea. Empire building by it's nature requires a very strong and big central government and that is counter productive to liberty or conservative values. In other words, you can't have a far reaching foreign policy with a small central government and you can't have a free population with a large one. Neocons are a counter productive lot.
"Progresive thought" means giving up your individual rights and freedoms to a government entity who in theory, knows how to make the decisions in your life better than you do. It is regressive towards the free will of the citizenry. Support for those principles is a clear indication that you do not have enough self confidence to do these things on your own. Why do you believe that you are incapable of making the decisions for yourself? There isn't any need for 90% of the government we have. The dirty little secret of "progressivism" is that it is progress BACKWARDS to the days when people were controlled by others. Sometimes it was a king, other times a dictator, sometimes a "council" but all were the inevitable result of a government that had gotten so huge, and the power amassed in a centralized location that it was easy for the taking. The end result of that kind of progress has always been bad. Why do progressives want to go back and take a 2000th try at a benevolent, all powerful government when it has failed in spectacular (and usually bloody) fashion 1999 times before? The definition of insanity.
Question: What in the hell is a neocon? I actually like the sound of it, and once the conservatives take the GOP back, I'm going to suggest that we use it as the new party name. "Republicans" sounds boring, "Neocon" is way cooler in a Matrix, hip, sorta way. Might make us more popular with the "yutes". So, back to the question. I know several hundred or more conservatives. None of them has ever said to me "I'm a Neocon" when I ask if they are a liberal. Every one says "conservative". Hell... If there is something new going on in conservatism... We wanna know about it... But from now on, I'm going to start calling myself a Neocon because it is cool. At any rate, it is a serious question. Conservatism has always been about ensuring personal freedom and liberty, personal responsibility, and the chance to sink or swim on your own, and of your own accord. These things have been the same since the beginning of time. There isn't a need to go "neo" (aside from the hip sound to it). Theses concepts and principles date back to the dawn of man.
Today's Republicans have a serious hypocrisy issue. They abhor the thought of socialism, but insist on having a colossal US military presence policing the world; which is in and of itself socialism.
The US military IS a form of socialism; there is no way around it. Therefore Neocons are socialists and definitely in favor of "big government" especially when it comes to pretending to police the world.
What you're referring to is fascism and despotism, not socialism. Far-right dictatorships and monarchies have done exactly what you're talking about (what you're incorrectly referring to as "progressivism") and have been doing so since they have existed.
Free market capitalism has been PROVEN not to work, especially after the "great recession". OUR tax dollars were used (yours AND mine, and A LOT of them) to bail out the largest US financial institutions and the US auto industry that got in trouble because of 40 years of regressive deregulation legislation. If this was a fully free capitalist market (as Neocons want) Wall Street, the financial institutions, and the auto industry would've been SOL just like the rest of us. Instead, they got ass loads of money (618 BILLION DOLLARS) and not so much as a slap on the wrist to the execs that took advantage of the system to the point of destroying the economy. The burden of a couple dozen people's screw up was placed on the American people at a cost that can't be measured in just dollars. A complete loss of livelihood doesn't have a dollar amount, but these people didn't receive a bailout, unless unemployment extensions count as a bailout.
Progressivism isn't about taking away people's rights or liberties or making a benevolent government.
And Neocon sounds a bit like Neo-Nazi to me.
Progressives are dumber than neocons. At least the neocons have it half right.
You say free market capitalism has proven not to work and then you go on to prove that we don't have free market capitalism. You can't say it's proven to not work when it's not what we have.
What has been proven not to work is progressivism. The more progressive the country has become, the worst shape it is in. Blaming free market capitalism when we have not had it for several generations now, is silly.
What I said is that we let the market be too free and it had to be rescued by socialism.
And now the Republicans want to further decrease regulations.
Why don't we just get it over with and put an assault rifle in everyone's hands and have it out in total anarchy? That's the next step right?
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk
Who told you that we let the market be too free? Who told you that it had to be rescued?
I'm afraid you don't know enough about the "market", our system, how things went down or how things work in order for me to want to continue a conversation about it. I don't have time to educate you. I would suggest you spend some time reading about these things so that you are not so easily manipulated into believing such bull.
Sounds good. I don't much care for Fox News anyway. I guess I've been being manipulated into believing the things that have happened to me as fact. I'll just erase 2009-2011, they were pretty crappy years anyway. There was also a college economics class as well as an American Government class in there as well that I should just forget. They didn't learn me nothin' anyway.
Today's Republicans have a serious hypocrisy issue. They abhor the thought of socialism, but insist on having a colossal US military presence policing the world; which is in and of itself socialism.
The US military IS a form of socialism; there is no way around it. Therefore Neocons are socialists and definitely in favor of "big government" especially when it comes to pretending to police the world.
What you're referring to is fascism and despotism, not socialism. Far-right dictatorships and monarchies have done exactly what you're talking about (what you're incorrectly referring to as "progressivism") and have been doing so since they have existed.
Free market capitalism has been PROVEN not to work, especially after the "great recession". OUR tax dollars were used (yours AND mine, and A LOT of them) to bail out the largest US financial institutions and the US auto industry that got in trouble because of 40 years of regressive deregulation legislation. If this was a fully free capitalist market (as Neocons want) Wall Street, the financial institutions, and the auto industry would've been SOL just like the rest of us. Instead, they got ass loads of money (618 BILLION DOLLARS) and not so much as a slap on the wrist to the execs that took advantage of the system to the point of destroying the economy. The burden of a couple dozen people's screw up was placed on the American people at a cost that can't be measured in just dollars. A complete loss of livelihood doesn't have a dollar amount, but these people didn't receive a bailout, unless unemployment extensions count as a bailout.
Progressivism isn't about taking away people's rights or liberties or making a benevolent government.
And Neocon sounds a bit like Neo-Nazi to me.
Obviously......They didn't learn me nothin' anyway.