The Goat Pen

Nice!

Lisa

Page wrote:Trump's not ever going to be President, right? Right?

Page got an $800,000 settlement from the FBI.

Peter

Strzok wrote:No, we'll stop it

Strzok got a $1.2 million settlement from the FBI.



I don't want to believe that this is the payoff money ordered by the Biden administration to be approved by Chris Wray, but nothing would surprise me.

Well Hedge. I have no doubt that your place on the social ladder entails actual dirt being heavily caked on all your kitchenware, That being the case I have no choice but to give that one a begrudging C+. Well done sir.

As far as JD Vance's policy on wanting childless people to pay MORE income taxes than breeders, we've been down this road before, nothing new to see here. I actually worked with a woman who believed in the concept of "Bachelor Taxes." But her belief was purely punitive. She wanted to punish successful bachelors for not "manning-up-to-marry-a-slut" so to speak. She saw the successful bachelor (the Bill Maher's of the world) as very selfish men that run the risk of jeopardizing feminism with their MGTOW philosophies that seek to undermine the power of threatpoint invoked via no-fault-divorce law. Moreover, she wanted men that couldn't get married (since they had nothing to offer a woman, any woman) to either pay more taxes or hurry and commit suicide.

With JD Vance, I think its the opposite. Its not a stick, its a carrot. He thinks that breeders should get more tax cuts and tax credits, things to be denied from the childless. If you don't bring children into this world (or if you don't support them) then you must pay "full freight" so to speak. You would be considered one of the students who attend higher university without financial aid.

Vice Presidents have no authority to do, anything. But they do have the ability to get their policy proposals to the President who (in turn) can get them to legislature to (maybe) have them act upon them. This is not really a left-vs-right thing unless you believe that married couples with children are the base of the Republican party and the childless (married or not) are the base of the democrats. We could argue on that one for years. Traditional democrat voters would greatly benefit under JD Vance's proposals.

People with children are using more government services than childless folks, they should be paying more taxes than the childless...

People with children are creating the future taxpayers

aTm wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2024 8:36 am People with children are creating the future taxpayers

Well put aTm. That IS JD Vance's point. You don't have to be a breeder to be a taxpayer. Bill Maher has paid more in income taxes than any of us here at the Goat Pen. And I would argue that Bill hasn't used hardly any government services (to address hedge's point.) But, he has produced zero future taxpayers.

OK, so it's a wash. People with children use more government resources but they produce future tax payers. They shouldn't get more b/c of that...

[citation needed]

aTm wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2024 8:36 am People with children are creating the future taxpayers

And more important, the future wage slaves.

hedge wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2024 11:06 am OK, so it's a wash. People with children use more government resources but they produce future tax payers. They shouldn't get more b/c of that...

Well, that depends doesn't it hedge? What are the priorities of the USA? What does it mean to be a US citizen? Does it mean a hopeless future where parents and grandparents vastly outnumber their children and grandchildren and we become Europe and/or Japan? If that is the case, just surrender to Islam right-the-fuck-now because Muslims (who are still fucking and breeding) will simply inherit the whole earth by way of showing up! The West will go the way of PD James' The Children of Men (read that fucking book.)

My congressman just went on a fucking rant yesterday on Capitol Hill about the $35 trillion in debt we have but no one was in the chamber to listen to him. In the end, it will NOT be you and I on the hook, it will be future tax payers who will have to pay the bill unless you want the US government to (someday) just declare bankruptcy and write it all off? Pretty much every single Millennial and Gen-Zer that I meet who wants their student loans written off is in the "welsh-on-the-debt" camp. But those kids are also in the hopeless future camp. They are just patiently waiting for the zombie apocalypse to take them while only fucking the top 5% of what they see on Tinder.

Do you believe in God hedge? What do you think God wants us to do?

people in deep red states like West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana are probably creating more tax consumers than tax income producers....

On that one, I am sure you are correct DS. That is California's argument. That is New York's argument. That is New Jersey's argument. That is Massachusetts' argument. I do not disagree. Maybe we should have just let the South win the fucking civil war, keep their slaves, we be the Union in the North and let the Confederate states of America (with their average IQ of 91) sit in perpetual poverty and famine instead of what we have today with the South sucking-off the Northeast and California? Because that is basically what you are saying.

I don't think that would have been a good idea.

We live in the information age, not the cotton age. IQ is everything. The super smart people could live anywhere but they want to live in San Francisco, Atherton, Palo Alto, Westchester NY, Long Island, the Gold Coast of CT, Weston or Wellsley MA, the suburbs of DC, Palm Beach Florida, or Northern New Jersey. These are the people who (blessed by their God given intelligence) will subsidize the others or this experiment of the United States will not work. In the information age, the difference between an IQ of 91 and an IQ of 100 (just average intelligence) is probably, $3 million in lifetime earnings (where the one with the 91 IQ will finish the game at negative $2 million, the 100 IQ at positive one million.) The difference between an IQ of 100 and an IQ of (say) 110 is $15 million in earnings. The difference between an IQ of 110 and IQ of 120 and we are at $100 million in lifetime earnings. Get up near 130 IQ and now we are Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, and (unfortunately) Jeffrey Epstein, and you can see where this is heading. These are ALSO the same people who ruined the middle class by shipping all the middle class jobs (for the 91 IQ people) overseas.

We are always going to have givers and takers. Yes, the takers are in the South. Where do you want to put them? They can't afford to live anywhere else, counsellor. They have nothing because you are too busy sucking off them what with all the divorces you are filing against them. But the takers are giving us our Army veterans and all our babies. No matter how smart Bill Maher is, eventually he'll be dead, his wealth squandered, and he will not have made the nation a better place.

I know! Lets collectivize all property and business and then just either give or tax everyone $150,000 a year minus their income, then everyone would own everything and we'd all make the same killing!

come on aTm, everyone already knows the only reason why Marxist economics has failed every single place it has ever been implemented and every single time it has been tried, simply because, they did it wrong.

JD Vances children are half & half. Trump is scared. Kamala surges. Heh.

DooKSucks wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2024 1:54 pm people in deep red states like West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana are probably creating more tax consumers than tax income producers....

Going out on a limb there, eh brah?

"Do you believe in God hedge? What do you think God wants us to do?"

Hell no, but if I did I'd think he'd want me to kill you...

This guy could teach some of you a few things, brahs.

Anyone still doubt that Israel is running our shit?