The Many Faces of US Politics...

[Gmac]

44% of Americans pay no tax

Bullshit

why ? It includes all income levels
You presumed I was talking about poor people only I'm sure

[heganboy]

44% of Americans pay no tax
The average American pays about $11000 long way to 7 million

Not sure what you're saying here?

[seafoid]

80% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck


And POTUS is a malignant narcissist


https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1156678616/unfit-malignant-narcissism-comes-to-wash-dc-very-b

[omochain]

Maybe they can unearth another shocking video of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dancing on a roof top in college.

That'll show 'em!

i heard her talking about a new tax plan today if I was her I'd stick to the dancing

70% rate on earnings OVER $10m sounds Ok to me... pretty sure the majority of Americans could cope with it as well!!

might fly in the eu not here

Apparently it affects like 20,000 people why shouldn't it?

Different mindset over here. It would be viewed as a penalty on successful people

Seeing as there is no floor over here (in terms of welfare) many people think there shouldn't be a cap on the other end either, and the top 1% already pay a disproportionate amount of the overall tax take

Don't know who you hang out with but that ain't the mindset beyond the world of the "trickle down" BS artists who don't want to pay their fair share. Subscribers to the Voodoo Economics Job creator theory.. Would that be the Don't tax me and I will create jobs Penalty that you are talking about.
The 1% pay a disproportionately low amount of taxes relative to what they reap from the Government.
What do you mean "there is no floor over here (in terms of welfare)? Perhaps you could explain !

[easytiger95]

People need to realise what free speech and the first amendment actually mean - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc are all private, commercial forums, subject to user agreement. Their owners have every right under the American Constitution to censor what goes on their own, commercial platforms.

Now, if you wanted to guarantee free speech on these platforms, under the Constitution, you would have to nationalise these platforms. Which is a policy I would support, and, coincidentally, it is really hilarious to see right wing, small government, libertarians being forced to use this argument, thus essentially nullifying their world view of "government - bad! Market - good!"

So, as you can see Dolph, Whitey et al, the "speech police" are actually mall cops. Perhaps you should change where you shop.

These are publicly traded companies that should be enforcing their standards uniformly. What's good for the left should be good for the right. Their "enforcement" seems to be very one sided and overly restrictive on points of view that are right leaning.In time these platforms will evolve and maybe even face competition from other sources. Eg I now use Twitter much more than Facebook

Facebook has free speech rights as well you know, or don't you remember Citizens United? Online commercial platforms can enforce any editorial line they like, it's there in their user agreements.

The market has chosen Whitey - stop whinging like a snowflake.

BTW a Trump supporter banging on about left wing bias on Facebook, given what all US intelligence bodies have confirmed went on there during the 2016 campaign, is a bit much.

[whitey]

Eh.....who's whinging?

The market has spoken and I now rely almost exclusively on Twitter for political discourse.

If a private company wants to take sides that's entirely up to them, but the only folks FB are fooling are themselves  if they think  are enforcing their standards uniformly

[easytiger95]

People need to realise what free speech and the first amendment actually mean - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc are all private, commercial forums, subject to user agreement. Their owners have every right under the American Constitution to censor what goes on their own, commercial platforms.

Now, if you wanted to guarantee free speech on these platforms, under the Constitution, you would have to nationalise these platforms. Which is a policy I would support, and, coincidentally, it is really hilarious to see right wing, small government, libertarians being forced to use this argument, thus essentially nullifying their world view of "government - bad! Market - good!"

So, as you can see Dolph, Whitey et al, the "speech police" are actually mall cops. Perhaps you should change where you shop.

These are publicly traded companies that should be enforcing their standards uniformly. What's good for the left should be good for the right. Their "enforcement" seems to be very one sided and overly restrictive on points of view that are right leaning.In time these platforms will evolve and maybe even face competition from other sources. Eg I now use Twitter much more than Facebook

Facebook has free speech rights as well you know, or don't you remember Citizens United? Online commercial platforms can enforce any editorial line they like, it's there in their user agreements.

The market has chosen Whitey - stop whinging like a snowflake.

BTW a Trump supporter banging on about left wing bias on Facebook, given what all US intelligence bodies have confirmed went on there during the 2016 campaign, is a bit much.

Eh...you.

[whitey]

People need to realise what free speech and the first amendment actually mean - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc are all private, commercial forums, subject to user agreement. Their owners have every right under the American Constitution to censor what goes on their own, commercial platforms.

Now, if you wanted to guarantee free speech on these platforms, under the Constitution, you would have to nationalise these platforms. Which is a policy I would support, and, coincidentally, it is really hilarious to see right wing, small government, libertarians being forced to use this argument, thus essentially nullifying their world view of "government - bad! Market - good!"

So, as you can see Dolph, Whitey et al, the "speech police" are actually mall cops. Perhaps you should change where you shop.

These are publicly traded companies that should be enforcing their standards uniformly. What's good for the left should be good for the right. Their "enforcement" seems to be very one sided and overly restrictive on points of view that are right leaning.In time these platforms will evolve and maybe even face competition from other sources. Eg I now use Twitter much more than Facebook

Facebook has free speech rights as well you know, or don't you remember Citizens United? Online commercial platforms can enforce any editorial line they like, it's there in their user agreements.

The market has chosen Whitey - stop whinging like a snowflake.

BTW a Trump supporter banging on about left wing bias on Facebook, given what all US intelligence bodies have confirmed went on there during the 2016 campaign, is a bit much.

Eh...you.

Absolutely not

I already knew they were biased

If an spokesperson for a publicly traded company knowingly makes materially  false statements they could be charged with any number of violations

[HiMucker]

People need to realise what free speech and the first amendment actually mean - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc are all private, commercial forums, subject to user agreement. Their owners have every right under the American Constitution to censor what goes on their own, commercial platforms.

Now, if you wanted to guarantee free speech on these platforms, under the Constitution, you would have to nationalise these platforms. Which is a policy I would support, and, coincidentally, it is really hilarious to see right wing, small government, libertarians being forced to use this argument, thus essentially nullifying their world view of "government - bad! Market - good!"

So, as you can see Dolph, Whitey et al, the "speech police" are actually mall cops. Perhaps you should change where you shop.

These are publicly traded companies that should be enforcing their standards uniformly. What's good for the left should be good for the right. Their "enforcement" seems to be very one sided and overly restrictive on points of view that are right leaning.In time these platforms will evolve and maybe even face competition from other sources. Eg I now use Twitter much more than Facebook

Facebook has free speech rights as well you know, or don't you remember Citizens United? Online commercial platforms can enforce any editorial line they like, it's there in their user agreements.

The market has chosen Whitey - stop whinging like a snowflake.

BTW a Trump supporter banging on about left wing bias on Facebook, given what all US intelligence bodies have confirmed went on there during the 2016 campaign, is a bit much.

Eh...you.

Absolutely not

I already knew they were biased

If an spokesperson for a publicly traded company knowingly makes materially  false statements they could be charged with any number of violations

Yeah, and a bit mad that a president cant!

[whitey]

Tell me about it

IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HEALTH PLAN ......PERIOD!!!!!!

Do you remember who said that?

[Dolph1]

Tell me about it

IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HEALTH PLAN ......PERIOD!!!!!!

Do you remember who said that?

Barack Hussein Obama. Do I win the speedboat Jim?

[Gabriel_Hurl]

[J70]

Tell me about it

IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HEALTH PLAN ......PERIOD!!!!!!

Do you remember who said that?

Fair enough, but do you really want to line the likes of Obama up against Trump in terms of character and lying? Just about every president (maybe the pious Carter or a decent man like Ford being exceptions) has lies which can be leveled at them. No one, at least in the modern era, does so with the impunity of Trump, as a matter of course, on a daily basis, often in direct contradiction of what he said the day or days before.

[whitey]

Tell me about it

IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HEALTH PLAN ......PERIOD!!!!!!

Do you remember who said that?

Fair enough, but do you really want to line the likes of Obama up against Trump in terms of character and lying? Just about every president (maybe the pious Carter or a decent man like Ford being exceptions) has lies which can be leveled at them. No one, at least in the modern era, does so with the impunity of Trump, as a matter of course, on a daily basis, often in direct contradiction of what he said the day or days before.

Agreed

I made what I view as a factual statement about the potential legal perils of an officer of a publicly traded company (Facebook) making material misrepresentations

Someone then decided to try and deflect that onto Trump. Then I decided to try and deflect that onto Obama.

[easytiger95]

People need to realise what free speech and the first amendment actually mean - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc are all private, commercial forums, subject to user agreement. Their owners have every right under the American Constitution to censor what goes on their own, commercial platforms.

Now, if you wanted to guarantee free speech on these platforms, under the Constitution, you would have to nationalise these platforms. Which is a policy I would support, and, coincidentally, it is really hilarious to see right wing, small government, libertarians being forced to use this argument, thus essentially nullifying their world view of "government - bad! Market - good!"

So, as you can see Dolph, Whitey et al, the "speech police" are actually mall cops. Perhaps you should change where you shop.

These are publicly traded companies that should be enforcing their standards uniformly. What's good for the left should be good for the right. Their "enforcement" seems to be very one sided and overly restrictive on points of view that are right leaning.In time these platforms will evolve and maybe even face competition from other sources. Eg I now use Twitter much more than Facebook

Facebook has free speech rights as well you know, or don't you remember Citizens United? Online commercial platforms can enforce any editorial line they like, it's there in their user agreements.

The market has chosen Whitey - stop whinging like a snowflake.

BTW a Trump supporter banging on about left wing bias on Facebook, given what all US intelligence bodies have confirmed went on there during the 2016 campaign, is a bit much.

Eh...you.

Absolutely not

I already knew they were biased

If an spokesperson for a publicly traded company knowingly makes materially  false statements they could be charged with any number of violations

Well said, I would say that Zuckerberg was definitely evasive about what they did to combat the use of their platform by Russian and Trump campaign conspirators to push false and misleading stories promoting Donald Trump in the 2016 election.

Pesky right wing bias, eh?