Florida State Seminoles

[innocentbystander]

Life in Mississippi is actually quite nice.

If they had no state income tax, like Tennessee, I’d have no hesitancy in moving across the border.

It's incredibly affordable in Mississippi. The cost of living, that is what makes it quite nice.

When they shut down the shipyards in Quincy Massachusetts in 1974, my grandfather moved his family down to Mississippi to start working at Ingalls shipyard. My dad stayed behind in Massachusetts because he was working for the telephone company. Either way, I have been visiting Mississippi for decades, known what life was like there all my life.

But the education system, the job/career opportunities, all those things pretty much suck in Mississippi. You wouldn't want to raise a family there because the education is horrible. Job prospects are horrible. Growing up in Massachusetts, I quit my job and half an hour later, I have applied and got another job ANYWHERE. Fantastic. Its not fair to compare it Massachusetts but it is night and day. Mississippi (what with all the casino barges) is a great place to RETIRE to, that I agree with.

[eCat]

well I'm not going to try to justify crazy amounts of money in defense, however there are two considerations here

1. China and Russia are ramping up their defense spending and technology at an unprecedented rate. Both had supersonic missiles are supposedly (who knows what spacex really does) are weaponizing space at a faster pace than us making Reagans Star Wars defense system a reality in their world before ours. Our top generals have already said we've lost the AI war with China , meaning we'll never catch up in our immediate future. So it would seem reasonable that we are in an arms race with China that is going to be very expensive if we want to maintain our levels.

and 2. National defense is an obligation of our Federal Government. Its constitutionally defined. Social and Infrastructure programs are not

[DooKSucks]

National defense is an obligation of our Federal Government. Its constitutionally defined. Social and Infrastructure programs are not

You must have missed that "promote the general welfare" part of the preamble...

ETA: I have been making the same fucking error since fifth grade. Using "provide for" instead of "promote"....

[sardis]

"promote" the general welfare.

Didn't Schoolhouse Rock teach you anything?

[sardis]

The fact that Biden is politically hurt because of the current spike in Covid is not fair, just like it wasn’t fair to Trump.

Problem is people’s expectations that government can and should fix everything is the problem.

[bluetick]

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/watch-tr ... g-of-boos/

The two times Trump has publicly admitted to getting jabbed he's been booed. Equal parts funny and sad.

[eCat]

Life in Mississippi is actually quite nice.

If they had no state income tax, like Tennessee, I’d have no hesitancy in moving across the border.

It's incredibly affordable in Mississippi. The cost of living, that is what makes it quite nice.

When they shut down the shipyards in Quincy Massachusetts in 1974, my grandfather moved his family down to Mississippi to start working at Ingalls shipyard. My dad stayed behind in Massachusetts because he was working for the telephone company. Either way, I have been visiting Mississippi for decades, known what life was like there all my life.

But the education system, the job/career opportunities, all those things pretty much suck in Mississippi. You wouldn't want to raise a family there because the education is horrible. Job prospects are horrible. Growing up in Massachusetts, I quit my job and half an hour later, I have applied and got another job ANYWHERE. Fantastic. Its not fair to compare it Massachusetts but it is night and day. Mississippi (what with all the casino barges) is a great place to RETIRE to, that I agree with.

I worked at Ingalls for 7 years. Lived in Ocean Springs before the Casinos.

Lost serious money selling before those Casinos arrived. I remember I could have bought a beach front home, a 3/2 on stilts for $135K and I thought it was all the money in the world back then.

Glad I left that area though. I loved New Orleans and Orange Beach, hated everything between it.

[innocentbystander]

Life in Mississippi is actually quite nice.

If they had no state income tax, like Tennessee, I’d have no hesitancy in moving across the border.

It's incredibly affordable in Mississippi. The cost of living, that is what makes it quite nice.

When they shut down the shipyards in Quincy Massachusetts in 1974, my grandfather moved his family down to Mississippi to start working at Ingalls shipyard. My dad stayed behind in Massachusetts because he was working for the telephone company. Either way, I have been visiting Mississippi for decades, known what life was like there all my life.

But the education system, the job/career opportunities, all those things pretty much suck in Mississippi. You wouldn't want to raise a family there because the education is horrible. Job prospects are horrible. Growing up in Massachusetts, I quit my job and half an hour later, I have applied and got another job ANYWHERE. Fantastic. Its not fair to compare it Massachusetts but it is night and day. Mississippi (what with all the casino barges) is a great place to RETIRE to, that I agree with.

I worked at Ingalls for 7 years. Lived in Ocean Springs before the Casinos.

That is exactly where my grandfather lived, Ocean Springs Mississippi. He had a tiny 3 bedroom house South of the railroad tracks not too far from the high school. He lived East of the Biloxi bridge. I know that town all too well.

Lost serious money selling before those Casinos arrived. I remember I could have bought a beach front home, a 3/2 on stilts for $135K and I thought it was all the money in the world back then.

Glad I left that area though. I loved New Orleans and Orange Beach, hated everything between it.

He retired (officially) from Ingalls in the 1980s. But even then, he was flying up to Massachusetts to live with us months at a time to work laying pipe at Seabrook Nuclear Power plant in New Hampshire. Send the money back to MS. When my grammy died in 1998, he took job running pizzas for Dominoes just to give him something to do. I think he sold his house (that he bought for basically nothing in 1974) for about $100K about 2 or 3 years before Katrina hit.

[Jungle Rat]

It's incredibly affordable in Mississippi. The cost of living, that is what makes it quite nice.

When they shut down the shipyards in Quincy Massachusetts in 1974, my grandfather moved his family down to Mississippi to start working at Ingalls shipyard. My dad stayed behind in Massachusetts because he was working for the telephone company. Either way, I have been visiting Mississippi for decades, known what life was like there all my life.

But the education system, the job/career opportunities, all those things pretty much suck in Mississippi. You wouldn't want to raise a family there because the education is horrible. Job prospects are horrible. Growing up in Massachusetts, I quit my job and half an hour later, I have applied and got another job ANYWHERE. Fantastic. Its not fair to compare it Massachusetts but it is night and day. Mississippi (what with all the casino barges) is a great place to RETIRE to, that I agree with.

I worked at Ingalls for 7 years. Lived in Ocean Springs before the Casinos.

That is exactly where my grandfather lived, Ocean Springs Mississippi. He had a tiny 3 bedroom house South of the railroad tracks not too far from the high school. He lived East of the Biloxi bridge. I know that town all too well.

Lost serious money selling before those Casinos arrived. I remember I could have bought a beach front home, a 3/2 on stilts for $135K and I thought it was all the money in the world back then.

Glad I left that area though. I loved New Orleans and Orange Beach, hated everything between it.

He retired (officially) from Ingalls in the 1980s. But even then, he was flying up to Massachusetts to live with us months at a time to work laying pipe at Seabrook Nuclear Power plant in New Hampshire. Send the money back to MS. When my grammy died in 1998, he took job running pizzas for Dominoes just to give him something to do. I think he sold his house (that he bought for basically nothing in 1974) for about $100K about 2 or 3 years before Katrina hit.

I'm bored

[innocentbystander]

Both cases, Elizabeth Holmes AND Ghislaine Maxwell, both are in jury deliberations. Its a race to see which jury returns a verdict, first. NFW will either jury take this past Christmas.

[eCat]

Rand Paul wrote a book called the case against socialism. I watched an interview about it and came away with some interesting tidbits.

Primarily that Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail (and to some extent AOC parrots this) is that he isn't for socialism of Cuba and Venezuela , he is for the socialism of Sweden and Denmark. So they started looking into what makes socialism work in Sweden and Denmark and they found some key things

1. Everyone pays for socialism in these countries. If you make the equivalent of $60K a year, you are in a 60% tax bracket. Americans currently enjoy roughly a 10% tax bracket if they make $60K a year.
2. The corporate tax rate is 15% lower than ours , so this idea that our corporations aren't paying their fair share isn't right

and the final bit of new in regards to the comparison is they talk about how there is no poverty in Sweden, and while this isn't apples to apples, the reality is America doesn't have any poverty for Swedish Americans either. People of Swedish and Danish heritage enjoy a 55% increase in salary, live longer and have a higher quality of life over their Swedish counterparts. They reference a guy named Nima Sendaji (sic) that has several comparison studies between the Nordic Socialism and American Capitalism.

One thing that is pointed out is that Swedes live on average 5 years longer than Americans which is true - and they want you believe that is attributed to socialized medicine, however the Swedes lived an average of 5 years longer before socialized medicine really took root in their country in the 70's . Also of the major corporations in their country, only 2 were created post socialism's advent in those countries in that same time frame.

With the people that support Bernie, the belief is that the cure for failed socialism is more socialism. And the youth of this country who want affordable housing, free public education, socialized medicine and heavily regulated industry don't fully understand the cost to them financially and to their liberty. Equality in the world of socialist policies is a very unpopular stance.

[innocentbystander]

Rand Paul wrote a book called the case against socialism. I watched an interview about it and came away with some interesting tidbits.

Primarily that Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail (and to some extent AOC parrots this) is that he isn't for socialism of Cuba and Venezuela , he is for the socialism of Sweden and Denmark. So they started looking into what makes socialism work in Sweden and Denmark and they found some key things

1. Everyone pays for socialism in these countries. If you make the equivalent of $60K a year, you are in a 60% tax bracket. Americans currently enjoy roughly a 10% tax bracket if they make $60K a year.
2. The corporate tax rate is 15% lower than ours , so this idea that our corporations aren't paying their fair share isn't right

Bernie is for the socialism of Sweden and Denmark (and NOT Venezuela) because the people are largely Protestant and their laws are akin to the laws that are common for Anglo-Saxon culture. They live (mostly) as we do, the "functional" we. Obviously, Bernie would NEVER dignify that as the reason (he can't politically) but that is main difference between these versions of "socialism." I am not criticizing you eCat. I agree with what you are saying, do not get me wrong. I am your ally. But I think we need to have an honest an open conversation on the problems that exist South of the Border. No one wants to talk about it, mostly because it so damn hurtful. The truth is entirely hurtful (almost mean spirited.) But if we don't get to the truth, we are just bullshitting ourselves.

It angers me that people do not know what the HELL if going on in Venezuela. People do not know because our media refuses to report on it or even do any investigative journalism. NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, and Fox, should all have a reporter or two with boots on the ground in Caracas reporting back to what I already know is the problem. But even if they do, no fucking WAY would Lester Holt, Norah O'Donnell, or David Meir let this news come out on THEIR program.

I already know the real problem because we are hosting Venezuelan refugees for Christmas. They are in my home. They are sleeping in my 5th wheel trailer. They are friends of my wife's sister and they will be staying with us over the Holidays. And I talk to them about Venezuela all the time and they are honest (to a fault) even if their honesty makes them feel bad about a country they grew up in, love, fled, and (God willing) hope to return to someday. They do not want to stay here. They love their country. Angel Falls is (to them) the most beautiful place on Earth.

As Anglo-Saxons, we think in terms that we can understand and comprehend. We compartmentalize things according to our understanding. That is the problem here. We know what socialism is. Well, we think we do. And because we think we know it; socialism (if we do it) is the reason why things suck OR socialism (if we do NOT do it) is the reason why things suck. It all depends on your politics. But socialism is not the problem in Venezuela.

The problem in Venezuela is that they are not Anglo-Saxon BUT they were given a government where "the people" have the right to create laws, to elect legislature, to elect an executive, and to govern themselves. That is a fucking STUPID THING TO DO for a country like Venezuela. And why?

There are too many 25 year old grand-parents in Venezuela.

That is what my refugees are telling me. There are too many 25 year old grandparents in their country. Now think about that for a moment? Just sit there and really think about that. Think about how different your life would be if at the age of 25, your 12 year old daughter presented to you, your grandson? Do you (do ANY OF YOU) honestly believe that a 25 year old grandparent should ever, EVER have any control over their government or the decisions that it makes? The answer of course is NO (these people are PEASANTS living in MUD HUTS) but as Anglo-Saxons, we can't possibly understand or comprehend a nation full of people who could never possibly govern themselves. We can't understand it because WE (as Anglo-Saxons) have always done that and have done that for centuries. So we instinctively assume that everyone can do it. Since the time the first British Settlers landed in Virginia in 1609, there has never-EVER been 25 year old grandparents on this continent who have arrived from a Protestant nation. Never. Our 35 year old grandparents (the youngest they can get in our country), they live in public housing, they live for their welfare check, they have never been married, they will never work a job, and they will likely die very young in some horrible homicide or strung out on drugs and alcohol. They could never-EVER care for themselves (let alone, decide things for other people) and it is stupid to ask them to do so. But we tolerate their existence among us so long as they are "few."

The 25 year old grandparent of Venezuela, they are the "many."

Venezuela used to be the richest nation in South America because the 1% of the population of Venezuela (the people who did NOT have grand-children at age 25, who knew everything, ran everything, and owned everything) they told the 25 year old grand-parent EXACTLY what they had to do to get a loaf of bread on the table. The serfs/peasants/Mud-Hut people/what-ever-they-are, they OBEYED the 1%. And everyone was working. And everyone was eating. And the country was rich. And everyone lived together (perhaps not happily) but they didn't murder each other. That is all gone because the 1% of Venezuela, they are gone. All their assets have been seized by the government of Venezuela through nationalization. So the 25 year old grand-parent (ruling themselves) they are eating pigeons and zoo animals.

[sardis]

Before the EIC and Child Tax credits, the lower income folks in the US paid more in taxes than they do now. Lately, the elites had to keep giving them more tax breaks because their incomes weren't keeping up with inflation because of our generous trade policy with other nations. The key is to tighten up trade and raise their wages so they are paying taxes.

[innocentbystander]

Before the EIC and Child Tax credits, the lower income folks in the US paid more in taxes than they do now. Lately, the elites had to keep giving them more tax breaks because their incomes weren't keeping up with inflation because of our generous trade policy with other nations. The key is to tighten up trade and raise their wages so they are paying taxes.

George Will refers to this as the "Great Crossover." That was the moment that fully half of the people living in this country no longer paid any income tax (not one penny) because their deductions and credits were more than any income tax that they paid in a year. Once half of the voting public no longer pays for any government services, there is no longer and real restriction on the part of the majority of voters to limit the size and scope of a government of which they are not paying for! I mean, what do they care? It doesn't cost them anything.

This happened in the last decade. We're fucked sardis.

[Jungle Rat]

I wish you would cross over.

[eCat]

If Biden's economy is doing well, its not translating to the voting public

-----------------

President Joe Biden is struggling in the minds of the American public. While his approval rating is down on a slew of issues, his difficulties are perhaps most noticeable on the economy.

Biden now sports the lowest net economic rating of any president at this point through their first term since at least Jimmy Carter in 1977.
In the latest CNN/SSRS poll, Biden comes in with a 44% approval rating to 55% disapproval rating among registered voters on his economic performance. This makes for a -9 point net approval rating. The average of all polls taken in December is quite similar with Biden at -13 points on the economy.
To put that in perspective, the average president at this point in the last 44 years (since we have been polling on the topic) had a net economic approval rating of +5 points. That means Biden's is 18 points worse than the average.

Notably, Biden's net rating is worse than his two immediate predecessors, Barack Obama in December 2009 and Donald Trump in December 2017. Both Obama and Trump had net approval ratings on the economy of -4 points.

The economy was, by a lot of measures, in deep trouble in December 2009. The University of Michigan consumer sentiment index was well below average at 72.5. Today, it's at a similar 70.4. Yet, Biden's ratings on the economy are considerably worse.
Trump was a different story. Consumer sentiment was at 95.9 in December 2017, but Trump's overall net approval ratings (-20 points) were so bad that they were dragging down his popularity on a host of issues.

Interestingly, Trump's problem then is the opposite of Biden's now. Back in late 2017, most voters were not concentrated on the economy. It was not the nation's top problem. Ergo, what Americans saw as a relatively stronger economy wasn't translating into helping Trump.

Today, the economy is viewed as the top problem for both the nation and for people's families, so the low consumer sentiment is dragging Biden down. A Monmouth University poll released earlier this month found that 41% listed economic concerns (either everyday bills and groceries; inflation; job security and employment; or the economy overall) as the top issue for their family. That's far more than for any other issue.

Inflation, in particular, seems to be a big issue for Biden. Just 28% of Americans approved of the job he is doing to handle inflation in a recent ABC News/Ipsos poll. This comes as more voters said they were concerned about inflation than any other issue in a December Fox News poll, and only 22% said the Biden's administration efforts to get inflation and rising prices under control were helping. The plurality (47%) said they were hurting.

[eCat]

I checked out Rand's number on my own - he is pretty much on the money so to speak

The personal tax rate in the US is 37%, where as Sweden is 53%, Denmark 56%

The Corporate Tax rate in the US is 21%, Sweden is 21% and Denmark its 22% - not a huge difference but does away with this idea that our corporations pay so much less.

One huge difference, although Paul didn't touch on it and I must admit, I don't fully understand it is the idea of a sales tax. Perhaps they mean VAT. The United States does not have a sales tax per se so its listed as zero in the economic trading site I was using but of course I think almost every state has a sale tax of some kind and variation - that said, I haven't heard of any being more than 10%

In Denmark and Sweden, these are 25%.

So not only are you hit with a very healthy income tax at relatively low levels of income in those countries, but what may be worse is the sales tax levied against everyone who makes any purchase, regardless of income level being significantly higher than in the states.


so the question is, do the younger Generation - whatever their title is - really want to be in the 50% income bracket with a 20% sales tax implemented on top of that to get a free college education and noticeably reduced health care. Considering our current rate of college education is about 30%, even free or greatly reduced I can't see that number hitting 45%, then couple that with the young not using health care at a consumption rate comparable to the % of their income going to support it (since a vast amount of health care is devoted to the elderly) - it seems like a pretty short sighted trade off to me. Of course they don't want that - what they believe is that Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Elon Musk will pay for it. No matter what think tank in Washington believes that Sanders health care program would actually reduce costs, the platform as a whole with all the other kickers to the disenfranchised would be a huge expense.

Now if you are say 60 years old, I can see where you'd love to go the more socialist route - cheaper health care and a reduced tax rate , oh wait, we have that already in this country.

I'm not sure the people really wanting a progressive platform have thought this thru.

[sardis]

I will say that American corporations may have a similar rate, but they have a ton more loopholes than the Scandinavian counterparts. It leads to companies like Amazon to pay relatively no tax. Even though it is a capital asset, Amazon can pretty much deduct the cost of their expansion, trucks, 40% of their data center builds, etc. for tax purposes while on their SEC (book) reporting statements they are capitalized as an asset with a fraction of a write off per year. I am actually in favor of the minimum tax (16%) calculated off their "book" income that the BBB plan had.

[hedge]

Yeah, a 21% corporate tax rate means nothing when the largest corporations in reality pay little or nothing in taxes. Meanwhile, I suspect the Nordic corporations actually pay that 21%...

[eCat]

yea they probably do have some big loopholes