It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ossoff/Handle Runoff Now Predicted in GA

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Byrd


But aren't you being unusually forgiving of his not cutting ties with his own businesses and using the Presidency to enhance his family brand and line his pockets.... and install rich cronies in government positions?

I happen to believe he has divested from his businesses... in a more thorough fashion that was requested.


You know, don't you, that various reports say he hasn't.


As far as his family and 'cronies' profiting from his actions, when in history has that not happened?

I think we're talking about different concepts of 'profiting'.

I see a difference between someone writing a book and doing speaking tours (where they actively participate and there's actually a limit on how much they can get) and Trump getting income from promoting investments and brands. In the case of Clinton, etc, the taxpayer paid their salary but tax dollars didn't pay for their speaking fees, or their books, etc.

In the case of Trump, my tax dollars are going to pay for his golfing trips to Mar-a-Lago and his kids' trips to do international business. The President DOES get charged for staying in the White House. When he stays elsewhere, it saves HIM money but it costs US money. It also costs US money to maintain his wife and kid in separate quarters - and we the people are paying her rent to stay in her own home.

So we are simply a cash cow to be milked.


I see nothing in this administration that is unusual or dangerous to the country in that respect, and honestly cannot think of a way for family or close friends of any administration to not profit in some way.


I see a difference. Chelsea didn't have a White House office... nor did the relatives and family of other Presidents.


Trump did make a black mark with me over the Internet privacy regulation, and I thought his idea of a health-care plan was ridiculous.


I don't think you'll admire his tax plan, either. Under the current set of plans you won't be able to deduct your state taxes from your Federal Income Taxes.

...and tax laws for corporations will change so that they only have to pay 15% instead of the current 35%. This is what happens when corporation owners make laws.


On the other hand the regulations on coal plants may be excessive. I know many regulations are such in a de facto sense, intended to criminalize an activity without actual passage of a law due to economic concerns.

They're on emissions. You might not have lived near a coal plant or seen the impact of coal mining. I'm old enough that I have (you should google it if you're not familiar with it.)

But this is what happens when corporations get to make the laws. Your health and welfare take a back seat.


Until he loses my trust... Trump hasn't lost my trust yet.


I think this is true of most Trump supporters. I find it interesting.
edit on 19-4-2017 by Byrd because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer


Keep on believing that the wealthy will empower you to be wealthier.


The wealthy didn't become so by sharing their wealth with you or empowering you to make more wealth.

How many people do you know that work for those in poverty?

I know if I want to make money at a job, I go to rich folk. The guy living in a cardboard box probably doesn't have enough to pay me. Will the rich make money from me working for them? Of course! I want them to, so they have incentive to keep paying me!

That's right... paying me. How is that not allowing me to increase my wealth? I know, because they don't pay enough, right? If I want to make more, all I have to do is either make myself worth more, or strike out on my own and do what they do. By paying me, they have actually given me the opportunity to do just that. Oh, but it can't be done? Bull feathers! I ALREADY DID IT ONCE.

It's obvious to me that you do not believe in working for a living. You might do it, but you certainly don't want to. You want someone to just hand you whatever you think you need and not bother you otherwise. Sorry, but that dog don't hunt. It don't work that way and never will.


You are a pawn for them to milk more wealth for themselves from.

And you're not?

At least the rich guys I want to work for do something. They either make something or provide a service. What do your sugar-daddies (politicians) make or do? Make regulations? Control others?

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan


I don't know about that.

I think you do:

Having more money can make things easier


I certainly wouldn't turn down a billion dollars if it were offered

That doesn't make you a bad person by any means. It can actually make you a good person, considering you mentioned the reason you'd like to have that billion dollars. But if you then consider others bad people solely based on them having more than you, it would make you a hypocrite.

There are bad rich guys, bad poor guys, good rich guys, and good poor guys. Wealth is not a measure of morality; it is only a measure of success in a capitalistic society.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 20 2017 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd


You know, don't you, that various reports say he hasn't.

And others say he has. As best I can tell (and remember I have owned a corporation before), he did divest.

You know, don't you, that I can find a website that claims cats bark and dogs purr.


I think we're talking about different concepts of 'profiting'.

Why?

Profiting is profiting. As long as that profit doesn't reduce mine, I honestly don't care. It's none my business what someone else makes unless I am paying for it. In Trump's case, I am not paying my portion of taxes to his salary... he has already donated it back to the Treasury.

Secret Service protection is guaranteed to all Presidents and their families. There's nothing special there (unless someone wants him to not be protected because they want to see him assassinated... but I'm sure no one here thinks that). We are also paying for SS protection for Bill and Hillary Clinton... and Chelsea, George and Barbara Bush, George and a Laura Bush, their daughters, Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter, Barack and Michelle Obama... should they be forced to not travel because of the SS bill involved?


Chelsea didn't have a White House office

Which means she had SS protection that cost more.


I don't think you'll admire his tax plan, either.

We'll see. He hasn't unveiled it yet. But when he does, I'll be looking at the bottom line... how much people will have to pay... rather than what numbers go on which line.


tax laws for corporations will change so that they only have to pay 15% instead of the current 35%

How I feel about that will depend on whether it improves the economy and whether it raises my taxes.


They're on emissions. You might not have lived near a coal plant or seen the impact of coal mining. I'm old enough that I have (you should google it if you're not familiar with it.)

Oh, I am quite familiar with it, thank you. But the question is how much which emissions will increase. If we're talking smog, that could easily be an issue; if we're talking carbon dioxide, I really don't care.


I think this is true of most Trump supporters. I find it interesting.

Have you considered the possibility that you may be operating under false assumptions as to what they expect?

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics
 
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join