no communist party has been communist

Winnick is hot but not my type.

they are socialist or dictatorships

theres a difference?

That's not true, entirely. There was that commune in Oregon, or Idaho or somehting.

They were communists.

communist party

They were a political party too.

Nope she confirmed it bro @Dan V

lol really? thats hilarious

props to them for being maybe the first actual communist party in a long time

rather than just "yeah, we are totally communist" then end before the whole lack of state and giving up control

most difficult step

@Rabbi Shekels more the "she creeps me out like Trudeau" comment

Oh they had their own host of problems, just they did actually start a commune and were trying to grow it from there.

There's a doc on netflix about it.

Depending on how you want to define "communist" you might still disagree, but I think they were the closest to achieving it.

Wild Wild Things I think is the name of the Doc.

wild wild country

Not things.

Doc Wol you say?

😛

@Dan V inly her fake eyebrows not her

Documentary. >.<

https://twitter.com/qikipedia/status/1027180376354115586?s=20

Also, the human disaster Cynthia Nixon is running in NY as a socialist. This is going to be hilarious

YOUPORN BANNED ALEX JONES TOO OH MY GOD I'M DYING

this is getting really silly now

Wait, really!?

haha!

xD

wow man.. the pressure on twitter is really picking up pace

BBC getting in on the action

Wait, it's fucking real!?

techcrunch and other tech media outlets tweeting that jones should be banned

Is banning Alrx Jones becomming a meme?

https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/06/now-even-youporn-has-banned-alex-jones-but-hes-still-on-twitter/

yeah did a quick search and saw that article

since jack posted a tweet saying we wont back down under pressure... it will be intersting to see how high the pressure can go

What Jack should do: 🖕

But sargon of akkad was too extreme for twitter 😄

I mean, he is a shit poster, but still.

I was too extreme for Twitter. I am a Russian bot though so maybe Jack was woke on me

Can we talk about a founder of napster (and founder of Spotify) censoring content.

I remember when Taylor Swift didn't weigh in on politics which basically made her Eva Braun

This time she needs to break the silence smh

twitter confirmed russian bot

XD

* Anti-Russian bot

I think every single establishment needs to place a sign, visible at the entrance, showing they have also decided to ban alex jones and will ban anyone else for wrong think. Then all those establishments without that sign is where I will shop.

Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.

― George Orwell, 1984

@Dennafen lmao the founder of napster censoring peopel lulz

I was wrong on that one.

He's an investor, not the founder of Spotify.

Still, it seems like a shit deal if you ask me.

Now to see if apple bans him from the App Store.

Alex Jones that is.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/07/us/elections/results-ohio-special-house-election-district-12.html

ya, I heard ohio was invaded by russians and Robots sent from the future to meddle in the election.

really?

something like that.

Could be red dawn and terminator i am thinking of.

Russian bots are my fav bots

I prefer ukrainian dolls.

Someone should really take down Pewdiepies channel, last thing we need is Swedes meddling in our elections

for sure.

+ the hate speech

In fact

Just ban all foreigner accounts

nah, ban all accounts. All are guilty of hate speech

Have the people importing Russian brides this whole time just been importing Russian bots? 🤔

Last thing we want is our citizens speaking to foreigners online and being influenced politically

hmm, you may be onto something there...

russian brides are infiltrators, bots in disguise....hmm

Muh foreign influence

Yes god forbid foreigners post on our social media

We should just heavily regulate social media to keep our citizens safe from foreign influence

Build that digital wall

Ideally something along the lines of what North Korea has

That way those pesky Russians stop interfering in our elections

Or the great digital wall of China

You know, what the commies do

But shh nationalism is only something the right does

Commies be commieing

Anyone care to fill me in on this whole 8/9 wins Trump is talking about in some kind of election today?

< Not 'Murican

I think the country is turning more conservative

Hopefully

Any election the democrats lose is the cause of Russian influence

Stupid commies gone too far they are gonna get what they deserve

@>_ the red wave

well there was the ohio election

Red the color of commies oh wait....,.,

Or the majority of “bigots” who believe there’s only 2 genders

yeah!

Communists causing the party that freed the slaves,
And was most anti-Russian during the cold war,

To win

the party of "Tear down this wall" Reagan

so, Red Wave incoming?

Trickle down economics

Reaganomics

'trickle down' was a Democrat pejorative. Anyone else calls it economics.

Reaganomics!

and soon

TRUMPANOMICS!!

I was to see that with the inverse too "we told them we'd give the money back to the people"

I mean...

you don't get money back

You just get more Human Rights 😉

Didn't Obama literally hand out money to the rich in order to not allow people to lose their jobs?

There is a video in newsroom, that discusses "trickle down"

To big to fail and all.

Bush did it too

No no no, not so people didn't lose their jobs... So that the government didn't lose their pension funds

It's disgusting

Yes.

yeah but that clip is 2 hours long

So lets just yell at eachother without having knowledge

Or their military contractors

Nothing should be to big to fail IMO.

don;t have to watch all of it

If it's to big to fail it's too big.

I'm talking from a business owner perspective

Nothing is. The bigger the company, the most costly their mistakes usually

Let's deal with flat taxes. 35 percent.

We need to stop shit like that and subsidizes

Company makes a million dollars a year

If a company thats "too big to fail" knows it will be bailed out,

It will become reckless because "shit, if we succeed its big money, if we fail, we'll get bailed out"

so it won't take precautions

and flat tax IS the most fair

That's 650,000 after taxes

fair is not always better though is it?

Flat tax is fair.

And the rich still pay the most.

Now, decrease that tax by just 3 percent to 32,000

yes, but better is subjective

No tax if you're a billionaire is great

If you're poor its awful

90% tax on the 1% is good for the poor, but horrible for the rich

They can then afford exactly one more employee at 30,000 a year

with Flat tax of like Rye said 35%

a person who makes
1,000,000
will pay 350,000 taxes

and a person who makes
10,000

will pay 3,500 in taxes

So rich still pay more

That's just 3 percent of a million dollars

There is a curve though when taxing people

besides, just scrap congress income a bit,

Not like those old farts are gonna need that money,

They don't use drugs, or hookers, or anything thats fun and costly, and will cause a scandal

So when they talk about taxing companies more

Does the curve stay the same at every level?

flat tax means everyone pays the same %

They're talking about amounts the size of employee salaries

If you're running a razor thin margin

And you get a 3 percent tax hike

Consumption Tax seems to make sense to me, but I don't know how well it would really work.

That's a man down

Easy

best part about a flat tax? no more tax brackets, except maybe at the bottom end.

I mean the laffer curve

dafuq is a Consumption tax?

I like brackets personally

I was using a flat tax as an example

if you make the bottom end of a tax bracket, you could be taking home less money than if you were in the higher end of the lower bracket

I get out near the top of the tax brackets regardless so, it doesn't really matter to me.

in other words, you end up making less money from a raise

that seems like a punishment to me

no

So, that 3 percent tax hike that equates to an entire employee's salary

not in progressive tax system

making more is always better

depends on the tax system

Is hitting across the board

Meaning less money in the econony

whatever the current system is, that is how it works

In the progressive tax system you make less from a raise the more money you make.

It sinks back into the system

if you pay 30% tax at 50,000 a year income

And 35% tax at 51,000 a year income

You're gonna lose out 😛

unless you are telling me that isn't what has happened to my family and friends from time to time.

That means sales will likely drop as well

@RyeNorth it depends on how much tax there is to begin with

I gave a very specific and realistic example

You only pay the increased tax on the income above the bracket.

There is a point where increases do become constrictive

Million dollar a year projected income

At 35 per, against 32 per

That's a small business doing well.

Your local Jimmy John's pulls those numbers alone

If we do flat tax, would small business not have to pay a greater share?

No.

time to throw this convo around,

Look guys, we can argue all day about what tax system works best,

But in the end, We just gotta scrap massive budget costs!

The state doesn't need to tax that much if it maintains a tight budget!

Yes yes yes

no doubt

I honestly think if you want a flat tax, a consumption tax makes more sense.

gouvernment not spending alot???????/// WHAT KIND OF BLASPHEMY IS THIS

fire the Gender Studies department of Government!

We'll save millions!

XD

There is no gender studies in government.

Unless you mean state colleges.

Your taxes pay for schools

Tax bracket: i make 1000 a year, thats just at the top edge of my bracket. i get taxed 1%. so i take home 900 bucks. now i make 1010 per year, but now i'm in a new bracket. my tax is 2%. i now take home 808 bucks.

Direct taxes in U.S. were first used when a war needed funding

schools have gender studies

My argument wasn't about best tax systems

taxes pay for gender studies 😛

Uhh thats not how tax brackets work Grenade

I don't care if colleges have gender studies.

tell me how that is not a punishment for making more money?

I care if colleges repress ideas.

its like gender studies was designed specifically to be a wasteful gouvernment expenditure

@Grenade123 nobody supports that system, when people talk brackets they mean progressive tax bracket

My argument was about so called 'trickle down economics' or economics, as anyone else calls them

Tax brackets work like this. Say 5 10 15% fo simplicity

@Grenade123 income in that bracket gets taxed at that rate

It is Julz

Gender studies is a 0 job opportunity major,

Meaning those people will become poor/useless, and thus want extra benefits from the state (so another voter for welfare)

5% Up to 5000, 10% from 5000 to 10000 and the 15% on anything over 10000

Philosophy studies is a 0 job opportunity major,

Meaning those people will become poor/useless, and thus want extra benefits from the state (so another voter for welfare)

@RyeNorth I agree that supply side economics is important

This is a bad argument.

Philosophy shouldn't be a university degree either

@Dennafen true, speeches and books are lucrative now

not actual numbers just a conceptual simulation

...

Yes it should.

So should gender studies.

Pondering reality doesn't exactly have its uses that a free book on the internet can't provide

It shouldn't be a required class for a major maybe.

@ExceptionalFeather yes, thank you. except what happens when you get small raise that takes you just into the next bracket?

It should be allowed in school, but not be funded a penny

Who makes books though 🤔

That's an argument against school in general @Dr.Wol

You get taxed at the higher percetage for the amount you make IN the higher bracket

@Grenade123 then the portion of the raise that goes in the bracket gets taxed a little more

nah, school should be there to teach you the basics, and later on a trade of choice in something thats valuable to society

Gender studies isn't valuable to society

You don't suddenly get taxed the higher percetage on the full amount

@Grenade123 I think there should be discussion on where and how much the brackets are but I don't believe in getting rid of them

You don't need a school to teach you anything really, it's for free on the internet.

School are there to teach how to think, not what to think.

exactly, but since children make poor decisions, in order to prevent a generation of stupids (on paper, cuz people are stupid in general)
You force them the basics by mandatory schooling

The problem with gender studies, and other such classes is that they're indoctrinating people into an ideology not the thrust of the ideas.

@Grenade123 there is also the issue of using brackets in determining welfare, which could be looked at

theres nothing to learn in gender studies, all it is is propaganda

That's not true.

Theres no trade you learn

And pondering things from a different angle is just general Philosophy

theres nothing Gender Studies teaches you

thats specific to gender studies

Trades aren't the only useful knowledge you can have.

any knowledge outside a trade can be done outside school

school should be there to teach you a trade, so you can find specialised work

No.

does it take into account cost of living in the given area? because i feel like even the poor with working jobs in say California are rich if you just look at some of their salaries

You can read books by philosophers that doesn't make you a philosopher.

@Grenade123 That is usually handled more by city taxing, and wages

you can read books on how to philosophise

You can read books, and great authors, that doesn't make you a writer.

so then the feds shouldn't be taxing people, more taxing the states.

@Grenade123 Someone choosing to live in an expensive area are using their wealth to do so though as well so that should be factored in

i mean, if they are too far removed to really know the cost of living, why tax everyone when 70k could mean you are rich in like Louisiana and poor in cali.