BigDrop Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/us/politics/secret-service-trump-protection.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 is from the New York Times. This is an ADDITIONAL $120 million dollars to protect Trump and his family. This means that literally every single American taxpayer is paying more than a dollar of their tax dollars to protect Trump. Elsewhere it is said that it will cost more to protect Trump for one year than it did for all eight of any other American president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Quote OT Congress Allots $120 Million for Trump Family Security so? was he not legally and fairly elected? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Big Drop would prefer he was shot - him being so dangerous and unstable. BTW, is that saying there are only 120 million taxpayers in a land of well over 300 million? If so, that is the real take home lesson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bormio said: Big Drop would prefer he was shot - him being so dangerous and unstable. BTW, is that saying there are only 120 million taxpayers in a land of well over 300 million? If so, that is the real take home lesson. you are resentful we don't tax children or the elderly without an income? sounds it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Just now, noonereal said: you are resentful we don't tax children or the elderly without an income? sounds it There ain't 200 million of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bormio said: There ain't 200 million of them. True, there are about 100,000,000. over 65, about 50,000,000. Sooo you want the WalMart employees who qualify for food stamps to pay tax? That is about all that is left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 1 minute ago, noonereal said: True, there are about 100,000,000. over 65, about 50,000,000. Sooo you want the WalMart employees who qualify for food stamps to pay tax? That is about all that is left. A lot of people over 65 are taxpayers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Just now, Bormio said: A lot of people over 65 are taxpayers. point is, you have a wing nut sound bite approach come on, think independently people that don't pay tax that are poor should not be paying tax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolebull813 Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 If the liberals didn't lose the ability to control their bowels after he was elected maybe he wouldn't feel the need to protect himself so heavily. I would spend as much as I'm allowed back to protect me and my family from the liberal mental patients Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Just now, noonereal said: point is, you have a wing nut sound bite approach come on, think independently people that don't pay tax that are poor should not be paying tax That is the way it used to be. We have exempted so many people from paying ANY federal income tax that a smaller and smaller # have skin in the game. Should people pay a lot - no - but they should pay some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Bormio said: That is the way it used to be. We have exempted so many people from paying ANY federal income tax that a smaller and smaller # have skin in the game. Should people pay a lot - no - but they should pay some. This is nonesense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wing nut stuff with no real world correlation hey, forget it, it's not worth it..... too frustrating to read stuff like this back to the thread topic, I can't see griping about the security expense I think that ridiculous have a great day Bormio. all the best 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Yell "wing nut", throw a few exclamation points and run away. The Left is becoming a caricature of itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, Bormio said: Yell "wing nut", throw a few exclamation points and run away. The Left is becoming a caricature of itself. or they post in sincerity and exasperation... could be... peace out OK, why would you write something that is blatantly false if you are not just sound bite bitten. (bite, bitten, lol) honest, I don't want to do this. It's ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 What is false? Because of increasing credits, more people at lower end of the scale are paying zero federal income tax. Child credits, earned income tax credit etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Just now, Drummer61 said: IMO The cost for security for all presidents in office is ok,however after they are out it should be stopped... Also,the amount of visits to their private homes, unless being used for an official visit,must be limited to once a month at most.. fair enough but I disagree with both your stipulations people lead vastly different lives, some read history and watch movies, others read science and listen to music we elect them, we protect them, whatever lifestyle they have lead and are comfortable leading Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus69 Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 2 hours ago, noonereal said: so? was he not legally and fairly elected? No, he was not. He was elected by an archaic Constitution precedent which allows the electoral college to select our Commander In Chief. Bad for America !!!! Rufus>> 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Rufus69 said: No, he was not. He was elected by an archaic Constitution precedent which allows the electoral college to select our Commander In Chief. Bad for America !!!! Rufus>> ......sort of yes the system is rigged, not archaic it was purposely rigged for those in power to stay in power... the whole separation of states crap was about this too none the less, he was elected within this system fair and square.... with 46% of the vote to Hill's 54% so, we agree in principle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Drummer61 said: READ WHY THE ELECToral college was put in effect...... see my post above it's no great secret, it's just not taught directly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Just now, Drummer61 said: Rigged my ass.....You guys don't even know why the Electoral college is in effect.....Politicians will ruin America because stupid people don't know why or what the constitution means and what its articles contain.... Rufus,to say it "archaic" tells me all I needed to hear... OK, so the whole separation of sates was not a compromise to allow the wealth land owners to retain power? and the electoral college was not designed to take th e power away from the common man? As if only allowing white men with land holdings wasn't restrictive enough? maybe you need to read less history written by agenda drive worms and more by valued historians? just sayin' I just can't see anyone making believe this country was set up for the average stiff. That is ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aZjimbo Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 16 minutes ago, Rufus69 said: No, he was not. He was elected by an archaic Constitution precedent which allows the electoral college to select our Commander In Chief. Bad for America !!!! Rufus>> No disrespect but probably the dumbest and stupidest post I have ever seen on this board. All liberals hate the Constitution and what it stands for. The electoral college was put in place for a reason. Never any complaints by any liberal until Trump won. Now it's rigged, unconstitutional, dumb, stupid, blah, blah, blah. People like you are nothing but judicial activists. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 2 hours ago, Bormio said: What is false? Because of increasing credits, more people at lower end of the scale are paying zero federal income tax. Child credits, earned income tax credit etc. I don't think the country needs that money and have never had an issue with poor paying no/ little tax, but you bring up a fair point about "skin in the game" even a 2% tax would help prevent some people (i.e. All Libs) from not giving a shit what we pay in taxes or how inefficiently it's spent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRealCAJ Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 1 hour ago, aZjimbo said: .All liberals hate the Constitution and what it stands for. cheeto, tell you that?...or your grandfather.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aZjimbo Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 37 minutes ago, TheRealCAJ said: cheeto, tell you that?...or your grandfather.... I think it was you with your stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiberalDonaldTrump Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 2 hours ago, aZjimbo said: No disrespect but probably the dumbest and stupidest post I have ever seen on this board. All liberals hate the Constitution and what it stands for. The electoral college was put in place for a reason. Never any complaints by any liberal until Trump won. Now it's rigged, unconstitutional, dumb, stupid, blah, blah, blah. People like you are nothing but judicial activists. Damn that post must be the worst for it to take dumbest Post of the Year.. Even over mine.. damn kid u must really suck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 3 hours ago, Pops said: I don't think the country needs that money and have never had an issue with poor paying no/ little tax, but you bring up a fair point about "skin in the game" even a 2% tax would help prevent some people (i.e. All Libs) from not giving a shit what we pay in taxes or how inefficiently it's spent nonsense (you are gonna like why I say nonsense) I'd bet dollar to doughnuts that most people paying no tax don't even realize it. ------------------------- Not to drag out this nonsense but we need to look at all taxes paid. Not just withholding. The poor paying none on withholding are still paying way too much in tax. In face, only the income tax favors he poor. The rest nail them. and don't even get me started on the SS cut off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.