# ITT we defend rich people not paying their fair share of taxes



## Guest (Jul 27, 2018)

sortable by party and breaks down stances 

https://www.bullsugar.org/vote2018


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

I hate being so jaded though:


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Looks like a good start, but I chuckle at the first column..."Prioritize Health & Safety?" 

That's a bit open to interpretation although a majority of the DEM candidates were granted a "*YES*" while none of the GOP names have a definitive value listed.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

We really need to get Microskiff back to skiffs. This is getting ridiculous. Its turning into all the things it wasn't.


----------



## topnative2 (Feb 22, 2009)

Put the gang plank out. I will test it ...to damn hot now anyway!


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

K3anderson said:


> We really need to get Microskiff back to skiffs. This is getting ridiculous. Its turning into all the things it wasn't.


Its on the Environment tab - where it belongs. And at-least the OP is not a Nihilist. Gotta give him that.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

K3anderson said:


> We really need to get Microskiff back to skiffs. This is getting ridiculous. Its turning into all the things it wasn't.


What is Rick Scott's stance on tower boats and those who throw live chum?


----------



## topnative2 (Feb 22, 2009)

SomaliPirate said:


> What is Rick Scott's stance on tower boats and those who throw live chum?


OMG, now we have tower envy!

They ain't got no skills


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Interesting questionnaire. Some of those are loaded questions for desired effect. But at least they are making them visible. Sounds like the whole thing is heavily reliant on candidate participation. Unfortunately, their partisan approach will probably suppress GOP responses.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

SomaliPirate said:


> What is Rick Scott's stance on tower boats and those who throw live chum?


Finally...an important question!


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

crboggs said:


> Interesting questionnaire. Some of those are loaded questions for desired effect. But at least they are making them visible. Sounds like the whole thing is heavily reliant on candidate participation. Unfortunately, their partisan approach will probably suppress GOP responses.


crboggs bullsugar.org is a nonpartisan/bipartisan organization. All elected officials and candidates were given the same opportunity to respond to the questionnaire. Also our recommendations are based on other factors including voting record and public statements. Happy to answer any questions about the voter guides anyone may have.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> crboggs bullsugar.org is a nonpartisan/bipartisan organization. All elected officials and candidates were given the same opportunity to respond to the questionnaire. Also our recommendations are based on other factors including voting record and public statements. Happy to answer any questions about the voter guides anyone may have.


Bipartisanship .. Yes.. Yes... My precious. This time will be different.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> crboggs bullsugar.org is a nonpartisan/bipartisan organization. All elected officials and candidates were given the same opportunity to respond to the questionnaire. Also our recommendations are based on other factors including voting record and public statements. Happy to answer any questions about the voter guides anyone may have.


Dude, you guys lean so far to the left I'd be surprised if you can walk in a straight line. 

Sure, Rick Scott's an easy target as the current Governor. And I wouldn't piss on Marco Rubio if he was on fire for a variety of reasons. But when are you going to call out Bill Nelson for being #1 on the list of funding recipients from Sugar Cane and Sugar Beets in 2012 or acknowledge that he's neck and neck with Rubio in 2018? (OpenSecrets.org) He's been involved in this debacle for longer than just about anyone yet you don't hang that around his neck.

I sat with one of your early founders / directors back in 2016 during Salty Fly here in Tampa. I told him then I'd support you guys as long as you were pro-water and non-partisan. That didn't last long.

There should be no political high ground here. Both sides are complicit. And if you were truly pro-water you'd present it that way.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

If it was at the salty fly it was probably me-although I am not a founder just a board member as of the last three years. Would like to discuss this with you if you have a moment message me your phone number please. Thanks, 
Dave Preston.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

From what I've seen here, most of us are a lot like me. We lean to the right as a general rule, but we're sick and tired of the environmental issues because we're sportsmen. This has been tried numerous times in the past and hasn't worked, but what's one more try (I sound like a socialist there)...let's make a third party here in the state. Democrats are telling us clean water, no guns, welcome immigrants and lots of social programs. Republicans are telling us keep your guns, keep immigrants out, save money and f the water. We can be clean water, guns, freedom, etc. I even have a name: Pissed Off Sportsmen. That way, the other two parties even know what to call us. For instance:
"Hey, what's going on at the capital; why is the street blocked?"
"Oh, it's the POS's. They're having a rally"
or
"Hey, I'm not gonna vote for that candidate, I hear he's a POS.

In all seriousness though, it might be a thing. The outdoor industry in the state is huge and I get a feeling that a lot of people feel the way most of us do about it.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> Would like to discuss this with you if you have a moment message me your phone number please. Thanks,
> Dave Preston.


I don't think it was you. The guy we spoke to was from Massachusetts. Felt a bit like a hired gun. That was why I questioned his commitment to non-partisanship and paid close attention.

Just prove me wrong...call out all candidates that deserve it. Don't pick and choose. Call out Rick Scott for rolling back regulations. But also call out Bill Nelson for decades of inaction and passive approval of what was happening. Or get behind Ron Desantis more since we need him to blast Adam Putnam in the GOP primary. 

Help me choose which red candidates are better than others rather than shove blue down my throat.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

SomaliPirate said:


> Republicans are telling us keep your guns, keep immigrants out, save money and *f the water*.


Bullsugar! _ (Sorry, had to do it...)
_
The notion that conservatives or Republicans don't care about the water is bullshit...especially among sportsmen who lean right. But this is what the Bullsugar Mob wants you to believe so its what you hear constantly on social media. 

You touch on a good point though...this is not a single issue election. No election ever is.

*And this is why its actually important for groups like Bullsugar to help voters choose the most water friendly candidate on either side of the upcoming election. * Because I'm sure as hell not voting for anyone who would turn Florida into a sanctuary state choked to death by high taxes and entitlement programs. But I might be swayed to vote for one 2nd Amendment supporter over another based on how they would vote on water issues.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

‘’The notion that conservatives or Republicans don't care about the water is bullshit...especially among sportsmen who lean right. But this is what the Bullsugar Mob wants you to believe so its what you hear constantly on social media. ‘’

Actually that could not be further from what we believe. We do believe many Floridians have been ‘voting themselves in the foot’ on both sides of the party line for a long time. But case in point last election we endorsed Brian Mast (R) over Randy Perkins (D). Mast won and we are now working closely with him on legislation that has the potential to stop the discharges.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> But case in point last election we endorsed Brian Mast (R) over Randy Perkins (D). Mast won and we are now working closely with him on legislation that has the potential to stop the discharges.


Still working...that has been 2 years. Brian been out campaigning?

Your bullsugar questionnaire is total crap and the posting of the responses is utterly disgusting! Boggs is correct in saying bullsugar is BS and your website is proof.

The editorials are totally biased with zero balance. You crucify every republican on the ticket and endorse or recommend every democrat. But you have not mentioned the two words that have done and are directly associated with the states water quality - BILL NELSON

Oh, but the website only shows Governor, Attorney General and Ag. Commish. Why have the people who can introduce and make laws been omitted?

The stance BS takes is that the only thing that matters is your agenda. I agree that the pollution needs to be controlled but at the same time you do not take a stand for the tens of thousands families that live in the communities in which these farms coexist. Without these farms these towns will disappear.

Here is a topic for your website to blog about: Once BS is successful in ousting Big Sugar, what is BS's plans for these families and communities?

I look forward to reading the blog in the very near future.


----------



## Guest (Aug 14, 2018)

DuckNut said:


> Still working...that has been 2 years. Brian been out campaigning?
> 
> Your bullsugar questionnaire is total crap and the posting of the responses is utterly disgusting! Boggs is correct in saying bullsugar is BS and your website is proof.
> 
> ...


You have to choose your party affiliation and your county to see everyone else


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Tarpon Nole said:


> You have to choose your party affiliation and your county to see everyone else


I shouldn't have to choose a party affiliation to see the qualified and endorsed non-partisan list. The statements and comparison charts should be unbiased and even remove the R or D and just show the comparison.

That is not even good enough - the R's have "no" in the BS $ column but nearly all of the rest of the chart is question marks. How did this happen? Did only the republican candidates answer the last question "no" leaving the other questions unanswered? Did BS choose not to include the respondents answers? I don't get it, too many questions to be used as a reliable tool. The only purpose I can see from this propaganda is an agenda.

So I clicked as you described and I don't see the race for Senator. Nor is there a balanced poll for the incumbents - simply omitted. Now I know this is for the primary, but are the really going to mail these questionnaires out again or did they choose not to mail them to the incumbents? Again, too many questions.

The heart appears to be in the right place but the entire BS.org election guide
is horribly biased and as an organization that wants to do good, wants to do the right thing is doing so much bad and so much wrong.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> But case in point last election we endorsed Brian Mast (R) over Randy Perkins (D). Mast won and we are now working closely with him on legislation that has the potential to stop the discharges.


Then you should highlight that more because the Mob is painting a different picture in your name.

Alot of us who are actually on the water (I've slung flies in Biscayne, Hell's Bay, Flamingo, Snake Bight, Florida Bay, Tamiami Trail, Sanibel/Captiva, Sarasota, Tampa Bay, and Ozello in the past few years) get shouted down by agitated housewives and out-of-state environmental zealots when we try to have a rational discussion around this issue. Its all #bullsugar this and @bullsugar that.

We need more education and less agitation because many of us vote party lines for real reasons.

And if you are truly non-partisan you know exactly what needs to be done.


----------



## fishicaltherapist (Mar 9, 2013)

How VERY sad that politics has invaded nearly EVERY single topic that gets discussed in today's world and is turning so many folks into ranting,venom spewing, blind eyed,deaf, followers of ONLY ONE school of thought; NO MATTER WHAT !!!!!!!!!!!! Some folks need to just regroup, take a LOOOONG DEEP BREATH, and get back to be being thoughtful and respectful human beings. For God's sake, NO OTHER animal species on Earth is as destructive ( in so many ways) as humans. Go fish a couple hours and THINK about it all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

crboggs said:


> Bullsugar! _ (Sorry, had to do it...)
> _
> The notion that conservatives or Republicans don't care about the water is bullshit...especially among sportsmen who lean right. But this is what the Bullsugar Mob wants you to believe so its what you hear constantly on social media.
> 
> ...


Well said.


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

Florida's closed primary creates even fewer real choices for voters. Start with changing the voting rule.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

sjrobin said:


> Florida's closed primary creates even fewer real choices for voters. Start with changing the voting rule.


I would like the primary to remain closed or you end up with John McCain and Lindsey Graham. And the bullsugar guy I met was a Massachusetts Democrat which is akin to flat out socialist. I know because I'm from there. Massachusetts basically banned hunting, guns, most fishing, most launch spots and you can't even wash your boat at a marina without hazmat collection systems that raise your storage costs massively. 

Yeah, I like clean water. But I also like freedom. And if we turn Florida into the Northeast, we are done. And its already starting. They vote all the massive taxes on themselves, get mad that it's too expensive and then move here and vote it all in again. They're like locusts destroying each state they come to. All in the name of "the poor", "the environment", "the children" or whatever other group gets them power to steal your money. Now they're advocating seizing the property of farmers through eminent domain. Just like they did in Cuba under Castro. Clean water yes. Tyranny, No.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

CRBOGGS, like I said I would be happy to have a conversation with you about this, feel free to message me your # any time. The guy you met with was Michael Donovan, who has not been with the organization in about three years. He was not a founder or board member, but an early employee for a few months, I think around four. We went our separate ways because he had a difficult time separating his personal views on these issues from the organization's. Which happens a lot because people tend to be passionate about FL waters and their current state. Anyways, we have learned a lot since then and come a long ways since, or at least we like to think.

As someone mentioned above, FL is a closed primary state, and you have to be a R to vote in the R primary, or a D to vote in the D primary. The only exception is if there is no challanger on the other side of the ticket, in which case R's or D's can vote on the only side with candidates. Independents don't really have a say in the primaries. As you point out, it's actually one of the major flaws in our system, which special interests exploit. We usually lose our best candidates in the primaries, largely because of low voter turnout - which makes it easier for special interests to swing results either way. Also special interests can run a "fake" write-in candidate on the other side of the ticket to close off a primary intentionally which basically disenfranchises a bunch of voters. Here's one of the worst examples of this happening.

https://www.tcpalm.com/story/opinio...-write-candidate-loophole-our-view/522682002/

Also FYI here is a little detail on the legislation we are working on with Congressman Mast.

https://www.bullsugar.org/brian_mast_legislation_to_cut_toxic_blooms

We are all aware that there is plenty being said about us out there, which is to be expected when you go up against the 800lb gorilla who has always gotten their way. There are billions of dollars on the line, enough people are finally starting to pay attention to this issue that we might actually be able to get something substantial done, and they are pissed. 

We are doing the best we can to educate the public on the science and politics behind our water issues, while fending off attacks from literally all angles - even within the fishing community. They are all pretty much originating from the same place, which shouldn't surprise anyone. One talking point in their whisper campaign is that we are a "radical environmental terrorist group". You can take them at their word - the guys who like things exactly the way they are and don't want anything to change - or take a closer look and decide for yourself. BTW Lloyd Wruble is on our board. So is Sandy Moret. Try calling them "liberals" and see how that goes


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


>


 Let's have the discussion here for all to see. Who will you be voting for in Bill Nelsons seat?


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Tarpon Nole said:


> Florida is a closed primary. If you vote in the primary, and you only can if you are a registered with a party, your ballot only has the people running as that party. Bullsugar's Primary Election guide is quite clear about that.


Well aware of that.

As I stated above - I will wait and see the UPDATED mailed comparison of the candidates AFTER the primary election.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Closed primaries are better than the insanity we see out in California with those jungle primaries.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

K3anderson - as far as who I personally plan on voting for, I would vote for Bill Nelson over Rick Scott 10 times out of 10 because the health of our waters/environment is the primary issue I vote on, and Rick Scott has been 8 years of environmental disaster for this state. Bill Nelson is generally very solid on the environment. http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/bill-nelson

Has he taken his share of sugar money? Absolutely. Should he be let off the hook for that. Absolutely not. But right now in this election, where we have two choices, he is a FAR better choice than Rick Scott, who is as sugared up as it gets, and is terrible on the vast majority of other environmental issues in this state as well. His primary agenda is to deregulate and promote BMP's (best management practices = fox guarding henhouse), and he has taken millions from US Sugar and FL Crystals, much of it in the last couple years at some of the exact times the discharges were going full force and the algae was exploding.

This lays it all out pretty well I think: https://newrepublic.com/article/150662/environmental-catastrophe-decide-floridas-senate-race

As far as who Bullsugar will endorse, recommend, etc. that is a board decision and I am only one voice out of many in the organization. However - in my opinion - it would be pretty difficult to describe a parallel universe where Rick Scott is somehow better for our waters than Bill Nelson.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

Dpreston said:


> K3anderson - as far as who I personally plan on voting for, I would vote for Bill Nelson over Rick Scott 10 times out of 10 because the health of our waters/environment is the primary issue I vote on, and Rick Scott has been 8 years of environmental disaster for this state. Bill Nelson is generally very solid on the environment. http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/bill-nelson
> 
> Has he taken his share of sugar money? Absolutely. Should he be let off the hook for that. Absolutely not. But right now in this election, where we have two choices, he is a FAR better choice than Rick Scott, who is as sugared up as it gets, and is terrible on the vast majority of other environmental issues in this state as well. His primary agenda is to deregulate and promote BMP's (best management practices = fox guarding henhouse), and he has taken millions from US Sugar and FL Crystals, much of it in the last couple years at some of the exact times the discharges were going full force and the algae was exploding.
> 
> ...


I respect the honesty.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

SomaliPirate said:


> From what I've seen here, most of us are a lot like me. We lean to the right as a general rule, but we're sick and tired of the environmental issues because we're sportsmen. This has been tried numerous times in the past and hasn't worked, but what's one more try (I sound like a socialist there)...let's make a third party here in the state. Democrats are telling us clean water, no guns, welcome immigrants and lots of social programs. Republicans are telling us keep your guns, keep immigrants out, save money and f the water. We can be clean water, guns, freedom, etc. I even have a name: Pissed Off Sportsmen. That way, the other two parties even know what to call us. For instance:
> "Hey, what's going on at the capital; why is the street blocked?"
> "Oh, it's the POS's. They're having a rally"
> or
> ...


The POS party.. I am in.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> BTW Lloyd Wruble is on our board. So is Sandy Moret. Try calling them "liberals" and see how that goes


I've met enough luminaries in various sports and industries to be well aware that they're just people, like the rest of us. Being famous rarely makes you right. If anything it makes you attractive to special interests who are looking to name drop. 

All I'm doing is challenging your org to be more non-partisan.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> as far as who I personally plan on voting for, I would vote for Bill Nelson over Rick Scott 10 times out of 10 because the health of our waters/environment is the primary issue I vote on


Fair enough. You're voting for the status quo instead of the bogey man. I get it. The only thing I would question is whether you think the guy with a decades long record of watching things go to shit is really less dangerous than the guy you fear might enact "best practices" or etc that might result in a mix of good & bad results.

If you're a single issue voter, then yeah...the status quo probably makes sense.

You know what you're getting with Nelson...exactly what got us here.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Chris, your criticisms of Nelson (while not completely inaccurate) apply to Scott as well and then some - 8 years as GOVERNOR wasn't enough time for him to do something to fix this issue? Instead of fixing it, he made it far worse. He politicized and defunded the water management districts, declined the US Sugar land acquisition options, personally signed 30-year no-bid leases with FL Crystals on state owned land we could be utilizing for restoration....the list is long. To reduce Rick Scott's negative impacts on this state to "enacting 'best practices'" is selling him FAR short. And I think you know that very well.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> K3anderson - as far as who I personally plan on voting for, I would vote for Bill Nelson over Rick Scott 10 times out of 10 because the health of our waters/environment is the primary issue I vote on,


Now we are getting somewhere. 

Bill Nelson has taken more $$ from "big sugar" than all politicians in Florida. So the stance of your anti sugar thing isn't really accurate, is it? It's more of a pro-liberal Democrat view. But lets look at his other positions too. 

Pro illegal immigration and amnesty. 
Massive spending in Washington. 
Voted against tax cuts for Americans
Voted against balancing the budget
Supports spying on Americans
Voted against Neil Gorsuch for Supreme Court
Supports common core education
Wants to give even more of our tax money to private company panned parenthood. ("big healthcare?"
Supports expanding TPP to send American jobs overseas 
Supports government takeover of healthcare

His LIBERTY score is literally ZERO percent. ZERO??? Meaning his policies over 40 years have advanced freedom zero times. So I ask our fisherman, etc. Do we really want the above ideas implemented because a guy who has done nothing for clean water in 40 years says he is going to this time?


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

K3, you are twisting my comments. I said I would PERSONALLY be voting for Bill Nelson because I believe he is stronger on environmental issues (including but not limited to stopping the discharges and sending clean water south) than Rick Scott. The body of evidence out there to support that is STRONG. I had no obligation to tell anyone who I plan to vote for - I offered that information in good faith so as to provide a full response to the question that was asked. Please go back and re-read my post above. 

As far as who Bullsugar will be endorsing or recommending, that decision will solely be based on who we believe as an organization will have the most positive impact on stopping the toxic discharges east and west, and sending clean water south. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> 8 years as GOVERNOR wasn't enough time for him to do something to fix this issue?


Ok...so lets talk about Governor for a bit. 

Who do you think the general election comes down to?

Any reason Bullsugar couldn't get behind DeSantis?


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

The polls right now are looking like DeSantis vs. Graham is the likely match-up. If that is how it plays out, that means we all - clean water voters on both sides of the aisle - made a HUGE positive difference as it relates to this issue. We like DeSantis - which is why he is recommended in the R primary in our voter guides.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> K3, you are twisting my comments. I said I would PERSONALLY be voting for Bill Nelson


 I support your right to do that and applaud your honesty. I'm not twisting anything. I'm merely pointing out the FACT that Bill Nelson has taken more $$ from "big sugar" than any politician in Florida. That seems like an inconsistency if you think these sugar farmers are the real culprit here. Then I pointed out all of the other issues that Nelson is ON RECORD supporting. Because, if he wins, you get all of his positions which I believe are very harmful to my children's future in one of the last free states we have, Florida. You see, I lived in the tyranny of Massachusetts. Nelson and his ilk hate gun owners. They hate fisherman. They hate freedom. The only solution to anything for Bill Nelson is more "funding" which means more of my hard earned dollars pissed away.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

K3 - bullsugar doesn’t try to tell anyone who to vote for. We just try to give you as much information as possible to use when weighing your decision. If you like and trust the information we are providing - great. If not, all good too. That’s what really makes America great - choice.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Tarpon Nole said:


> Call me a socialist or whatever but there are many many people who feel that same way as registered Rs


Can someone please take the record off the turntable in the back room? Its skipping and repeating.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> We just try to give you as much information as possible to use when weighing your decision.


Perfect. Now I'm giving the rest of the information. The actual voting record of Bill Nelson and the positions he has taken. You see I believe some information is being left out. I'm no special pleader for Rick Scott, but, from what I've seen, the attacks have been one sided in this race. Nelson has escaped all blame despite having been in office longer than anyone in any party. And yet, he isn't responsible for anything. For 40 years, he accepted $$ from US Sugar et al, and no one cared. Now its Rubio (who I don't like for other reasons) and Scott to blame for a disaster thats been going on for 50 years. Bipartisan? Call me just a little skeptical.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

You have a right to be skeptical when it comes to this race-but as much as you feel like you can trust someone you’ve never met who is very involved in this issue-we have a lot better chance of Bill Nelson coming around on this issue then we do Rick Scott. He may have taken plenty of sugar money, but he has at least a shred of conscience when it comes to the environment, which is far more than I can say for Rick Scott.


----------



## JoeWelbourn (Dec 11, 2006)

I want to weigh in on this topic. For the record, I am a conservative, registered Republican. I feed my family by manufacturing products for the inshore fishing industry. I care deeply about our water policy and the various root-causes leading up to the current crisis. 

Now the part that is hard for me to confess. I used to be part of the problem. I was ignorant, narrow-minded, and politically apathetic. I sat in my recliner and let the other folks deal with the issues involving politics because I did not like politics. I voted carelessly down the republican party ticket (just as we are programmed to do in both parties). So what changed? What changed is I began to learn about the root-causes of why Florida water conditions are so bad. Initially, I got this knowledge from Bullsugar.org. I have learned a lot over the past 2.5 years. 

Now, I am educated on Florida water policy. I have learned it is a political problem. Now, I look at the candidates as individuals and I look at who gives them money. I now support candidates from both of the political parties because I only care about where they stand on water quality. I am a better educated citizen today because of Bullsugar.org. I am very active in the organization. I can assure you of one thing, no one in the State of Florida cares more about correcting the Florida water policy issues than Bullsugar.org. Having said that, not everyone likes Bullsugar.org. I feel that is because Bullsugar.org is revealing the nasty decades-old secrets that have lead to this water crisis. Bullsugar.org is trying to create transparency in how Florida water policy is made. Unfortunately there are a lot of people benefiting from the current system in which taxpayer dollars are channeled into subsidies then quieting dished out back to the politicians via the hosts. This current systems is designed to make money for the politicians. The small farmers, the citizens, the environment are just the host for this form on parasite: gaffing the taxpayer in order to enrich the politician and big businesses wish to buy political favor. 

Politicians. Which brings me to my last point. Although I feel most Florida politicians have enabled this dysfunctional water policy system to exist, we will never get rid of politicians. But thanks to Bullsugar.org, I know who is taking money from Big Sugar and who is voting "quid pro quo" back for Big Sugar. If anyone feels Big Sugar is not the overwhelming source of the problems in the water quality crisis, I beg you to please educate yourself. Big Sugar and their influence over Florida politicians (using subsidies money) is the problem. 

At this juncture if you care about Florida water, we must engage the Florida politicians willing to: 
1. Not take money from big businesses (Big Sugar) in a "quid pro quo" arrangement as things have been in that past;
2. Educate the politicians;
3. Replace the support they were getting from bad policy influences with our support so they can and will make good policies.
4. Hold each politician accountable as an individual, not a party.

It is very easy to take a nilihist approach and damn all politicians. But that gets us nowhere. Politicians will listen, if you have the right message and if they feel pressure from large segments of their constituents: that is you and me. We have to work to educate ourselves on the issues, educate our neighbors, educate our politicians, and then hold our politicians accountable regardless of party affiliation. That is how I feel. ~Joe


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> we have a lot better chance of Bill Nelson


 Well that interesting. Because Bill Nelson has taken more from US Sugar THIS YEAR?!?!?! What are they buying with this donation?


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

JoeWelbourn said:


> That is how I feel. ~Joe


 I like you Joe and we have similar views. But, I am quite well educated on the issues. And I've read up on this one too. All the way back to Gov. Broward and his plan to drain the swamp. This entire mess was created by politicians. Companies will give to whomever can help them gain an advantage. And they should. The focus here needs to be on LESS government. LESS Water Agencies. The actual people turning the dial to dump green water into the gulf are the government. As long as these politicians have the power to control that dial, they will turn it in the direction who pays them. If someone's answer is more funding and agencies they are an immediate NO. That is all $$ being pissed away IMO.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

@JoeWelbourn - Well said. My desire is to see Bullsugar put pressure on politicians regardless of political affiliation. If I viewed them as non-partisan I'd respect them the same as I do Captains for Clean Water. They have an opportunity to be non-partisan...should they choose to use it.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Well that interesting. Because Bill Nelson has taken more from US Sugar THIS YEAR?!?!?! What are they buying with this donation?


Its interesting...looking at OpenSecrets.org shows sugar companies across the nation donating pretty evenly across both parties. Florida Crystals does seem to skew more GOP than DEM while the smaller Florida companies and co-ops are pretty evenly split.
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=A1200

But what's really telling is the 2018 comparison between Rubio and Nelson:
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=A1200&cycle=2018&recipdetail=S&mem=Y

They are within a few grand of each other and both are in the Top 5 of all Senators across the nation. What that tells me is that Marco Rubio can't be attacked here without Bill Nelson also taking heat. (And I f'ng hate Marco Rubio for other reasons...)

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=A1200&cycle=2018&recipdetail=H&mem=Y
If you look at all members of the House Diaz-Balart (R) stands out. Not surprising when you look at where his district is. He's in Big Sugar's back yard. But as you go down the list you see the money pretty evenly spread between Rs and Ds. Hell...even Wasserman Schultz gets her piece.

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=A1200&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
For shits and grins I selected Top 20 Members across All Cycles and got the following...
#2 Alcee Hastings (D)
#7 Mark Foley (R)
#14 Bill Nelson (D)
#15 Allen Boyd (D)
#17 Marco Rubio (R)
#19 Mario Diaz-Balart (R)

So...3 DEM and 3 GOP with the dollars more heavily weighted to the DEMs.

In summary..."sugar money" is not a GOP-centric problem...doesn't appear it ever has been.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Chris, now we are getting somewhere. Thanks for taking the time to do this research and post. The D’s in FL sure do have a sugar problem. There is a reason Alfie is a Dem and Pepe is a Republican.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Pro illegal immigration and amnesty.


C'mon dude


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> Chris, now we are getting somewhere. Thanks for taking the time to do this research and post. The D’s in FL sure do have a sugar problem. There is a reason Alfie is a Dem and Pepe is a Republican.


HS batman, that has power meme written all over it.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> C The D’s in FL sure do have a sugar problem.


 I think we have a government problem. Politicians beholden to lobbyists. So the answer is clear. Vote for less power for the government and dismantling of all "agencies" involved.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> C'mon dude


Back in the day Nelson supposedly supported this:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/s1351/text


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

EdK13 said:


> Back in the day Nelson supposedly supported this:
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/s1351/text


Yes he did. Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Reid, they all supported strong borders. As their party and base went further and further into identity politics and socialism they all moved far left to appease them. Now the only way they can win is by importing new voters with promises of free things.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

K3anderson said:


> Yes he did. Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Reid, they all supported strong borders. As their party and base went further and further into identity politics and socialism they all moved far left to appease them. Now the only way they can win is by importing new voters with promises of free things.


Its why I chuckle over all the "this time will be different" political hand wringing. So its either Somalis POS party or RENO (re elect no one) party for me. These water issues have been conveniently shown the light "Just In Time" for every election since I started paying attention in 1986. I suspect nothing but more of the same since Americans re-elect their sorry Reps to the tune of 90+ percent every cycle. A Damned shame to be sure- Nearly 20 years in Florida prior to moving to Texas and frankly it breaks my heart hearing how shitty the water quality is getting.


----------



## Net 30 (Mar 24, 2012)

K3anderson said:


> I know because I'm from there. Massachusetts basically banned hunting, guns, most fishing, most launch spots and you can't even wash your boat at a marina without hazmat collection systems that raise your storage costs massively.


I'm calling BS on this. I have property in Mass. that I hunt every year as do all my friends. I own pistols, rifles and shotguns. I fish all over the state in fresh and saltwater. My county actually extended bow season this year due to the need to harvest more deer. I have no less than 3 ramps within 5 miles of my home and all are free and maintained by the state.

Of all the guys I fish and hunt with (95% who were born and raised here) no one bitches and moans about how the big bad liberal government is trying to take away our guns, stop us from hunting & fishing or where we launch or store our boats. What a load of crap.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> Chris, now we are getting somewhere. Thanks for taking the time to do this research and post. *The D’s in FL sure do have a sugar problem.* There is a reason Alfie is a Dem and Pepe is a Republican.


I looked this up long ago...and its exactly why I get disgruntled when groups that bill themselves as non-partisan present this is a GOP issue while minimizing DEM culpability and responsibility.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

Net 30 said:


> I'm calling BS on this. I have property in Mass. that I hunt every year as do all my friends. I own pistols, rifles and shotguns. I fish all over the state in fresh and saltwater. My county actually extended bow season this year due to the need to harvest more deer. I have no less than 3 ramps within 5 miles of my home and all are free and maintained by the state.
> 
> Of all the guys I fish and hunt with (95% who were born and raised here) no one bitches and moans about how the big bad liberal government is trying to take away our guns stop, us from hunting & fishing or where we launch or store our boats. What a load of crap.


I liked Mass. I was young but remember eating backstrap and fish provided by our (classical) Liberal neighbor when pops was stationed at Ft Devins. He was a good man and took me surf fishing. Even my father, whose politics were to the right of Genghis Khan, acknowledged that.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

EdK13 said:


> Back in the day Nelson supposedly supported this:
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/s1351/text


This is hardly "pro illegal immigrant" or am I missing something??


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> This is hardly "pro illegal immigrant" or am I missing something??


Nope- you are bright enough to get it. Its arguably the strongest immigration legislation written since Coolidge.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

didn't we discuss recently that the sugar growers campaign contributions go exclusively to democrat politicians?


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

devrep said:


> didn't we discuss recently that the sugar growers campaign contributions go exclusively to democrat politicians?


They are ALL FOS parade jumpers. If it were up to me I would have a "just in case" twelve station gallows set up in front of every state house for all to see.. just in case. With a pre-treatment piss station... just for you.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> You have a right to be skeptical when it comes to this race-but as much as you feel like you can trust someone you’ve never met who is very involved in this issue-we have a lot better chance of Bill Nelson coming around on this issue then we do Rick Scott. He may have taken plenty of sugar money, but he has at least a shred of conscience when it comes to the environment, which is far more than I can say for Rick Scott.


This is the biggest BS post on the thread - Bill Nelson won't do a god damn thing about the issue. He hasn't done a god damn thing in 50 years.

You really need to take your knee pads off and review the "facts" your website is spewing!


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

EdK13 said:


> Back in the day Nelson supposedly supported this:
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/s1351/text


The laws have been on the books for decades and now that there is a new sheriff in town enforcing those laws the liberals are hurt.

The crying is not because the laws are unjust - Obama deported more people than Trump. The crying is because someone other than "their guy" is at the helm righting the ship.


----------



## mtoddsolomon (Mar 25, 2015)

The only thing I’ll note on the subject is I personally know Baxter Troutman very well and that he’s a true outdoorsman and a genuine person, not a career politician. I’d say if you’re spreading votes out he’d be the one I’d give the nod to on agriculture commissioner


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

DuckNut said:


> The laws have been on the books for decades and now that there is a new sheriff in town enforcing those laws the liberals are hurt.
> 
> The crying is not because the laws are unjust - Obama deported more people than Trump. The crying is because someone other than "their guy" is at the helm righting the ship.


Not sure about the reporting, because I never am. Ice friend says the methodology for reporting changed. IE. turn-around at the border were counted as deportations. All I know is the observable here in South Texas does not match the narrative. It seldom does these days or so it seems. What I do know is the Uni-Party loves cashing checks. And I loathe them all.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

JoeWelbourn said:


> I want to weigh in on this topic. For the record, I am a conservative, registered Republican. I feed my family by manufacturing products for the inshore fishing industry. I care deeply about our water policy and the various root-causes leading up to the current crisis.
> 
> Now the part that is hard for me to confess. I used to be part of the problem. I was ignorant, narrow-minded, and politically apathetic. I sat in my recliner and let the other folks deal with the issues involving politics because I did not like politics. I voted carelessly down the republican party ticket (just as we are programmed to do in both parties). So what changed? What changed is I began to learn about the root-causes of why Florida water conditions are so bad. Initially, I got this knowledge from Bullsugar.org. I have learned a lot over the past 2.5 years.
> 
> ...


Joe,

I have never met you or even talked to you but that is a very good read and I do feel it is truthful.

Water quality is not the only issue at hand and to me not the biggest issue. My freedom is more important to me than some floating algae. There are candidates that truly want to wreck the state we call home. I believe that one of the two political parties truly wants to destroy America as we know it. I will not be a part of the problem down the road and it starts by logically considering which is worse at this moment.

When I do my home work I do more than just look at a single topic because I would be remiss in doing so. The big picture is what matters not the pimple on a ducks azz.

In the past decade there have been so many laws passed that were forced down our throats because 0.0002% of the population is offended because they do not have their own transgender bathrooms to use and get confused and piss their pants. If this type of legislature is so meaningful that the rest of the 99.9998% get overridden - minuscule minority over overwhelming majority.

This is where the landslide begins. Target was one of the people who wants to appease everybody and they found out by the billions that the offended the overwhelming majority by following suit and supporting the minuscule minority. Good lord they are even going to do something this year they have not done since Bush #2 was in office and that is the will be proudly displaying "Christmas" in the stores again.

The time is coming and the revolution has begun. Not the revolution of the past but the present. The Freedom of Information Act has so much dirt on all of these lawmakers that the ones who are working for the people will be rewarded and those that are working for themselves will be sent home.

I too have voted across party lines in the past and will probably do so again in the future. But to me the here and now decision is taking back our great country and letting the the water take a back seat this round.

I am with you on the BS.org picture. I just found out about it and spent quite a bit of time reading the sight only to get mad at the lies that are being spread. There is no way, by any stretch of the imagination, can they call themselves bipartisan or non-biased. In one of the posts above it was said that they are a "environmental terrorist group" - sounds harsh when you hear that, but when the kool-aid has been sat down and ones eyes clear the picture will become focused. There is no doubt this group only has one agenda, the saddening part is they have lost sight of our great country.

I am not singling you out at all Joe, it is just that your post was very well read and has lots of good points which compelled me to single the post out.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

EdK13 said:


> Not sure about the reporting, because I never am. Ice friend says the methodology for reporting changed. IE. turn-around at the border were counted as deportations. All I know is the observable here in South Texas does not match the narrative. It seldom does these days or so it seems. What I do know is the Uni-Party loves cashing checks. And I loathe them all.


I am hearing from friends in Brownsville and Laredo that the numbers of attempts are down.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Net 30 said:


> I'm calling BS on this. I have property in Mass. that I hunt every year as do all my friends. I own pistols, rifles and shotguns. I fish all over the state in fresh and saltwater. My county actually extended bow season this year due to the need to harvest more deer. I have no less than 3 ramps within 5 miles of my home and all are free and maintained by the state.
> .


I am from mass idiot. Not my friends. Me. Very few places not posted. Endless rules. And endless permits and bs. Chief of police can deny your permit to carry in your town for no reason.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> Chris, your criticisms of Nelson (while not completely inaccurate) apply to Scott as well and then some - 8 years as GOVERNOR wasn't enough time for him to do something to fix this issue? Instead of fixing it, he made it far worse. He politicized and defunded the water management districts, declined the US Sugar land acquisition options, personally signed 30-year no-bid leases with FL Crystals on state owned land we could be utilizing for restoration....the list is long. To reduce Rick Scott's negative impacts on this state to "enacting 'best practices'" is selling him FAR short. And I think you know that very well.


Preston-

I have been critical of your posts but now I am asking a question. I have followed Scott over the years to some degree but not on a daily basis. Can you tell me what laws he created to be the devil in your eyes?

I do appreciate the banter but this is really a question I have that I can not find the answer to.

Thanks.


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

Don't lose your faith gentlemen. If the people want to solve the Florida water problem, with political leadership the problem will be solved. Democracy is a slow process, usually improved by small changes over time. For me, my freedom comes from being able to hunt at least fifty uninterrupted miles of coastal zone or walk fifty miles without seeing a rooftop. I would like to think we can at least ensure these small traces of our natural world survive human impact.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Ducknut - you sure know how to make friends and influence people. careful thinking you know everything-you have been flat out wrong on several of your assumptions and comments. Happy to put some points together on Rick Scott’s most egregious actions over the last eight years that helped lead us to this point. Leaving on a trip now will try to get to it today hopefully.


----------



## makin moves (Mar 20, 2010)

Dpreston said:


> Ducknut - you sure know how to make friends and influence people. careful thinking you know everything-you have been flat out wrong on several of your assumptions and comments. Happy to put some points together on Rick Scott’s most egregious actions over the last eight years that helped lead us to this point. Leaving on a trip now will try to get to it today hopefully.


 I seriously doubt he is on here trying to make friends. He is calling out the b.s. If he flat out said something incorrect call it out and stop beating around the bush.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Sign bill delaying clean up of Lake O for another 20 years: https://www.google.com/amp/amp.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article57231473.html

Neutered the DEP - enforcement down 85%: 

https://www.peer.org/news/news-rele...second-worst-eco-enforcement-in-30-years.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ta...undergoes-drastic-change/2202776?template=amp

Signed 30-year no-bid leases with FL Crystals for 14,000 acres of EAA land that could be uses as pieces for restoration. 

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article1946553.html

Abolished the Dept of Community Affairs, which was the agency responsible for smart growth and development statewide: 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.orla...gement-political-hack-20170809-story,amp.html

Refused to exercise any of the US Sugar land acquisition options: 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.sun-...fl-sugar-deal-revival-20150514-story,amp.html


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

crboggs said:


> Can someone please take the record off the turntable in the back room? Its skipping and repeating.


Do not feed the shills.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

I agree with you Nole that neither candidate is ideal.

Let me run through these items:
1) He did cut SFWMD budget but only a handful of people lost their jobs. SFWMD has spent Billions on Lake O and surrounding areas and not much to show for it other than 20 years of spending. I always am confused how an agency/department/company can even exist if their budget is slashed by 40%. The answer always seems to circle back to "they get rid of the dead weight and become efficient again". SFWMD's budget is over $800 mil per year and after 15 years they do not have this done yet - I would have cut their budget too.
2) I found this from FWC and similar from Mote Marine Labs
*Has coastal (nutrient) pollution caused the Florida red tide?*
Florida red tides develop 10-40 miles offshore, away from man-made nutrient sources. In contrast to the many red tide species that are fueled by nutrient pollution associated with urban or agricultural runoff, there is no direct link between nutrient pollution and the frequency or initiation of red tides caused by _K. brevis_. Red tides occurred in Florida long before human settlement, and severe red tides were observed in the mid-1900s before the state’s coastlines were heavily developed.
3) South Florida Weapon of Mass Destruction (I mean SFWMD) was backing away from the deal BEFORE Scott even took office. I believe a dude by the name of O'Keefe was the head honcho at SFWMD and he is the one that said it was too expensive so the deal faded away.

No doubt about it - every turn is laden with politics and money and there will probably never be another Douglas MacArthur who comes along.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Dpreston said:


> Sign bill delaying clean up of Lake O for another 20 years: https://www.google.com/amp/amp.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article57231473.html
> 
> Neutered the DEP - enforcement down 85%:
> 
> ...



Well....I'm in favor of most of those things. In fact, I think we need to shut all those useless agencies down. Why haven't they done anything when their entire purpose for existing was to NOT allow what's happened to happen? Let me guess....Need more funding. Only thing I don't like is "no bid" leases.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)




----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Can you imagine if you ran a company like these things are run? Imagine you hire someone to mow your lawn. You agree on a price of $30 per week. First week lawn isn't mowed. You call and ask why??? Not enough funding. I need $50 a week plus you have to pay for the week I didn't cut your lawn. Week 3...Lawn not cut. We were working on other things. In order to cut the lawn and do the other things you didn't hire me for, I need more funding. Oh, and a pension. How long would this go on?


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Tarpon Nole said:


> Reminder- SFWMD board is not elected, they are appointed by the governor....connect the dots


The dots are the dude O'keefe was turning away from the deal before Scott was elected.

"I don't want to go spend a couple billion dollars and not solve the problem," district Board Chairman Daniel O'Keefe said. "This can't be the shiny thing that distracts us from getting the projects done."

Also seems Sen. Negron is very actively pursuing funding to buy the land.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> Sign bill delaying clean up of Lake O for another 20 years: https://www.google.com/amp/amp.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article57231473.html
> 
> Neutered the DEP - enforcement down 85%:
> 
> ...


How many Billions of dollars have been saved and how many additional Billions of added revenue have been added?

You simply are not seeing the truth to the story. You are blinded by the rainbow unicorn standing on the shores of its own island.

I asked you for legislation introduced by Scott and all you provided was commentary from the liberal media who also love unicorns.

What I don't think you fully understand is the fact that Governor's do not introduce bills to become laws nor do they just make up laws to suit their needs. Laws are introduced by bills which are dream't up by either a senator or a member of the house, not the governor. When the bill has enough support it is sent to the governor and he can either sign it or veto it. Most of the time they sign it because with all of the support needed to get it on his desk it pretty much shows wide support from constituents.

So now that your 5th grade government class is over you might take heed in the fact that you along with the rest of the people at BS.org are crucifying one man who is mostly a spokesman and a puppet when you really need to be focusing on the 40 senators and the 27 representatives. These are the facts.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> Ducknut - you sure know how to make friends and influence people. careful thinking you know everything-you have been flat out wrong on several of your assumptions and comments. Happy to put some points together on Rick Scott’s most egregious actions over the last eight years that helped lead us to this point. Leaving on a trip now will try to get to it today hopefully.


You are so right - I am not here to make friends with people living life with blinders on and a single focus. I abhor these people and I do not wish to befriend them. Hell, I don't even care to know their names. 

Over my years of life I have come to the conclusion that they are only capable of thinking of the big picture in the same way a 6 year old focus when you take her lollipop away. I have also learned that there are really only two kinds of people out there; Givers and takers.

Would you mind providing your address so I can post one of these signs in your front lawn.










Please make sure your front door is unlocked - it makes for a warm welcoming.


----------



## makin moves (Mar 20, 2010)

He will get back to you, he is traveling on that non profit coin.


----------



## Fishshoot (Oct 26, 2017)

Bill Nelson vs Rick Scott that is the mother of all bad choices! Shit sandwich vs turd burger!! Someone here in Colorado asked who i was voting for governor here I said whatever 3rd party candidate is on ballot because the two main party candidates are so bad


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Fishshoot said:


> Bill Nelson vs Rick Scott that is the mother of all bad choices! Shit sandwich vs turd burger!! Someone here in Colorado asked who i was voting for governor here I said whatever 3rd party candidate is on ballot because the two main party candidates are so bad


I guess out of these two tasty morsels I am going to have to vote for the turd burger because the shit sandwich has left a shitty taste in my mouth for 50 years and no one should live their entire life with only one flavor of crap.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

Gov Scotts main focus when he was elected was to get the State of Florida out of the outrageous amount of debt that had been run up. It takes a lot of slashing to do that. Funny how all that slashing doesn't seem to affect much how the Government runs.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

A lot of talk about letting the water run south like it used to. There used to not be millions of people living in the burbs south of Lake O.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Mr. Preston,

You have some 'esplainin to do!

Your stance is that BS demands to know where the sugar money is going and won't endorse a candidate that takes sweetened money. Interesting because your founder said this:

_"OK, so, I can't really give you a list of our donors," co-founder Kenan Siegel said._ 

And another quote from one of the other level headed founders;

_"Our entire river is covered with green," Kenny Hinkle Jr. said. "Now I hope Rick Scott's puppets sitting up here will go back to their puppet master and let him know we demand change and we demand it now."_

Bullsugar.org is a 501c(4) group - so what does this c(4) mean in comparison to a c(3). It means that you are not required to disclose where your funding comes from. I can spell it out for you - it is dark money and not required to be disclosed on federal tax returns. Speaking of that why hasn't the sling arm of Bullsugar which is an organization with the c(3) designation published its form 990's for all the public to see?

This is how your organization treats people?



__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1716479718567520


I guess my stand in your face and treat you like a bitch your organization is, is only reciprocating the face of BS.

Assumption from another post of yours is that you guys are a terrorist group is pretty fitting. Completely unwilling to shut your mouth and listen to learn. You have some balls for chastising others when your organization is clearly does not have clean hands and are hiding important information from the public.

*I am asking you on this public forum to post a list of your donors and all of the form 990's - UNLESS you have something to hide.*

But wait, there's more - how about this headline:
*Bullsugar: Kenny Hinkle “the Con-Man” Could Be Harming the Florida Everglades*
And now for the story: Bullsugar: Kenny Hinkle “the Con-Man” Could Be Harming the Florida Everglades

http://sunshinestatenews.com/story/bullsugarorgs-anti-kevin-powers-campaign-lies

Hinkle also worked for Rivers Coalition. Did he get fired because of all the lawsuits or was it the loss of tax exemption?

This brings me to a segway about candidates: Who are you going to be endorsing for Attorney General? I know I am going to be close minded (like you) on this one. Frank White. I am sure you will not because he has an axe with your name on it.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

First, I don’t get paid for any bullsugar work, expenses, etc. board members are volunteers. Second, you don’t need my permission to vote for Rick Scott - by all means go right ahead. Third, good job digging up the garbage that sugar as been throwing at us the last several years through their bought and paid for media sources. When you poke the gorilla, that’s the kind of stuff that gets written about you. If that crap was the best shot they had at us, I think we will be just fine. And or the record, Kenny Hinkle has not been involved in the organization in about 2 1/2 years. Four, the Putnam video was just a good old fashioned welcome from he residents of Stuart during peak discharges for a guy who has sold our waters down the river maybe more than anyone in this state. He deserved every bit of it and more. Dumb move coming to Stuart to host a fundraiser for himself while the community is getting smacked in the face with 3 billion gallons a day of Lake O water. Honestly surprised he didn’t end up in the river. Anything else guys? This thread is getting a little old.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Im also interested in the donors list.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Im also interested in the donors list.


Bullsugar.org front home page scrolling list of our top donors.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

"THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT" - It won't. Sadly. SOS. Controlled opposition. Mostly. Except for the powerless folks that truly care.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Dpreston said:


> Bullsugar.org front home page scrolling list of our top donors.


*Once again, I ask that you publish BOTH form 990's so we can all see where the money comes from and goes so we can make an educated decision on which organizations and/or companies not to support in the future.*

Thanking you in advance for your diligence, honesty and most of all your transparency.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

K3anderson said:


> Im also interested in the donors list.


Guess what I have???? That's right the forms from 2016 which were not filed until Jan 2018.

But I am too stupid to get them on here - if you can do it I will email them to you.



Dpreston said:


> And or the record, Kenny Hinkle has not been involved in the organization in about 2 1/2 years.


Not a true statement Mr. Preston.



Dpreston said:


> board members are volunteers.


Not a true statement Mr. Preston.

*Would you be so kind and post 2017's as well.*


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

You all are welcome to draw whatever conclusions you want about the organization. Not really interested in defending ourselves to you. We’ll keep trying our best to make a positive impact on FL’s water issues, you guys keep on doing whatever it is you’re doing to try to fix this mess.


----------



## fowlplay (Aug 6, 2018)

Dpreston- how do you feel about TERM LIMITS? I feel that limiting the terms of our elected officials may solve a lot of these problems. Bill Nelson has been on the tax payers/ donor tit for how many years????.....and he has not accomplished a damn thing except to line his own pockets.

I know this occurs on both sides of the aisle...but Nelson's lack of a spine really sticks in my craw as a native Floridian.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Fowl, I think the positives outweigh the negatives when it comes to term limits. I’m relatively new to this stuff - got involved about 3 years ago after seeing my home waters FL Bay get trashed for the 2nd time in my lifetime, and moved up to Jupiter to find the Lake O discharges. Never had much interest in this mess we call "politics" before, and try to stay focused on just fixing this issue - don't really care who does it or why. With that said, special interests find a way to cozy up with our leaders over time - the longer they are there, the more money they take, the further indebted they become, the less they are working for us. On the flip side of the coin, just like any profession, we establish beneficial relationships and become more effective at our jobs over time, so the downside is constant turnover of officials and less experience. I sure as hell know more about real estate after working in it for 15 years than I did after 4. In hindsight, I didn't know crap for the first half of my career. And still learning. So it's a double edged sword to some extent, and just like most issues should be addressed with sharp, smart policy that truly addresses the issues.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

I couldn't agree more on term limits. "Politician" should not be a profession.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

FL Sportsman lays it all out pretty well here. If you believe that the solution to our water issues is LESS regulation, than we're probably not going to agree on much. But if you live on the planet earth and understand that corporations will take the most profitable route 10 times out of 10 and it's almost always cheaper to pollute than not - and thus they need to be regulated - then this is well worth the read. http://www.floridasportsman.com/2018/08/22/dead-in-the-water/


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Looking like it may be Desantis vs Gillum.

Gillum will be too busy promising free stuff to the Bernie fans to think much about Big Sugar.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

DPreston,

Now that you have squandered away all of your political contributions - what is your plan to work with the successful candidates since you have pissed them all off?


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> FL Sportsman lays it all out pretty well here. If you believe that the solution to our water issues is LESS regulation, than we're probably not going to agree on much. But if you live on the planet earth and understand that corporations will take the most profitable route 10 times out of 10 and it's almost always cheaper to pollute than not - and thus they need to be regulated - then this is well worth the read. http://www.floridasportsman.com/2018/08/22/dead-in-the-water/


The story lays it out. The state of Florida, led by Rick Scott, take over water management and testing and pass on purchasing 153,000 acres of additional water storage/ filtration/nutrient conversion land from US Sugar.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

So our choices are a Bernie style democrat or just more business as usual...screw it. Time to start looking for work in Wyoming.


----------



## Fishshoot (Oct 26, 2017)

If you end up in Wyoming hit me up, I will pole you around for carp, the redfish of the rockies!


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

Fishshoot said:


> If you end up in Wyoming hit me up, I will pole you around for carp, the redfish of the rockies!


I'm trying man, as soon as my wife's job contract is up in two years we may start looking. I bet I'll have the only 17T on Yellowstone Lake.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

SomaliPirate said:


> So our choices are a Bernie style democrat or just more business as usual...screw it. Time to start looking for work in Wyoming.


Should be interesting. I don't think there is any love lost between DeSantis and the Sugar families. And I don't think Gillum needs sugar money given how deep Soros' pockets are.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

crboggs said:


> Should be interesting. I don't think there is any love lost between DeSantis and the Sugar families. And I don't think Gillum needs sugar money given how deep Soros' pockets are.


Good points.


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

No matter who wins... we still face the long fight to convince the leaders of our state that the enormous task of fixing 80 years of mistakes needs to get started... If we're ever able to do that then the rest will follow...

No matter who's running things - the terrific cost of what needs to be done will be very easy to decline (not many politicians survive telling the truth and saying things like "raise taxes" to pay for it...). I'm not counting on any funding from the feds - but we might get some - if we commit to the repair and restructuring of the big lake -and all that needs to follow that first step.

Lastly, we need to remember that proposed changes have more than once been sent into oblivion by endless litigation (some are still there... and have been for years...).

I figure that if I'm lucky I might just get to see the beginnings of this once the decision is made, if it ever is.. It will take entire careers for good things to begin to show fruit - but we still need to get started... 

By the way for most in our state, other than what they've recently seen about the Gulf coast on TV... the most common response to these kind of topics is... wait for it... huhh? The vast majority of voters in Florida know very little about the causes of terrible algae outbreaks or much bigger and longer plagues of red tide... It will be up to all of us to make them aware -in every way possible. None of that leaves any room for a lot political posturing -by either party (or any of us...).

Once again, I'll get down off of my soapbox...


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

So here's our new socialist candidates platform. 
1. Give criminals a second chance....
2. Raise taxes through a new state income tax.
3. Raise Taxes (not a mistake, wants to this on corpprations too)
4. Clean energy scam again which means raise taxes
5. Gun bans
6. Healthcare single payer (meaning people with jobs pay for everyone)
7. Amnesty and Sanctuary cities.
8. Puerto Rico??? Not sure why he's pushing this since he wants to be Governor of our state, which is Florida?? I guess he wants to take Florida tax money and give it to Puerto Rico? Thats weird.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Oh I forgot...also wants men who think they are women to go into little girls bathrooms....But I am a "science denier".....lol 

But water!


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

K3anderson said:


> So here's our new socialist candidates platform.
> 1. Give criminals a second chance....
> 2. Raise taxes through a new state income tax.
> 3. Raise Taxes (not a mistake, wants to this on corpprations too)
> ...


PR is going to be used in an attempt to turn FL solidly blue. In fact, it already is with the post hurricane relocation.


----------



## Boneheaded (Oct 4, 2017)

our choices... A leftist obama wannabee, and Fox news pundit.....Either way were screwed.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

This


Boneheaded said:


> our choices... A leftist obama wannabee, and Fox news pundit.....Either way were screwed.


 guy is in the Bernie camp. Way more radical than even Obama.


----------



## Boneheaded (Oct 4, 2017)

As a public school employee, feel that i need to choose sides. Desantis is not batting for my team by any means...but gun bans and giving people free stuff isnt cool either yet legalizing and regulating pot and earmarking for education to me seems practical... Anticipating the debates.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Gillum is under federal investigation, increased the crime rate to new record heights, want's to kill businesses with $15 an hour, universal health care, abolish ICE, repeal stand your ground, and tax the wealthy.

Funded by Soros and Steyer.

Sorry, I like my money and don't really feel it like giving it to those that don't want to work for theirs.

But we're getting off track.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

Big takeaway is Putnam went down in flames. Clean water voters and Trump are to thank for that. Huge win for FL. Regardless of what happens in the general election, we are far better off today than we were last week largely because clean water was a major issue at the ballot box for perhaps the first time ever in FL.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

DuckNut said:


> Funded by Soros and Steyer.
> .


Can you imagine a guy whose entire campaign is based on class warfare and attacking the "rich" getting his biggest donations from billionaires??? It boggles the mind.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Can you imagine a guy whose entire campaign is based on class warfare and attacking the "rich" getting his biggest donations from billionaires??? It boggles the mind.


I don't understand this sentiment, there are billionaire donors everywhere. Sheldon Adelson and his wife donated more than $83 million in the 2016 election cycle and more than $25 million to Trump's campaign, plus $5million for the inaugural fund, you know the one with "the largest crowd ever, period." And the Koch brothers regularly spend 10s of millions on every election...


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

yobata said:


> I don't understand this sentiment, there are billionaire donors everywhere. Sheldon Adelson and his wife donated more than $83 million in the 2016 election cycle and more than $25 million to Trump's campaign, plus $5million for the inaugural fund, you know the one with "the largest crowd ever, period." And the Koch brothers regularly spend 10s of millions on every election...


I think that's a root problem on both sides. Nobody can get elected to any major office without pleasing rich oligarchs of some kind. This election stuff worked pretty well when we were a small confederation of former colonies on the eastern seaboard. I'm not so sure it works well anymore.


----------



## Dpreston (Oct 16, 2015)

https://www.bullsugar.org/florida_voted_water


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

SomaliPirate said:


> I think that's a root problem on both sides. Nobody can get elected to any major office without pleasing rich oligarchs of some kind. This election stuff worked pretty well when we were a small confederation of former colonies on the eastern seaboard. I'm not so sure it works well anymore.



It worked then because politicians couldn't use their office to pay off their donors afterward. They couldn't make regulations that banned competition or steal from the voters and give subsidies to Solyndra and ethanol. These agencies are packed with the executives from the corporations they are "regulating". It's just a way to prevent competition.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> I don't understand this sentiment


It's the hypocrisy. This Gillam socialist attacks millionaires and billionaires and then happily takes their money. Sort of like how Rick Scotts attacked as being "big sugar" while Bill Nelson has taken the most $$ from them.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> It's the hypocrisy. This Gillam socialist attacks millionaires and billionaires and then happily takes their money. Sort of like how Rick Scotts attacked as being "big sugar" while Bill Nelson has taken the most $$ from them.


Warren Buffet is a wealthy man, but believes that he should be taxed at a higher rate. If a candidate also believes that high earners should be taxed at a higher rate, should that candidate not accept money from Buffet?


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> Warren Buffet is a wealthy man, but believes that he should be taxed at a higher rate. If a candidate also believes that high earners should be taxed at a higher rate, should that candidate not accept money from Buffet?


Thats even more hypocrisy. If Buffet believes that why doesn't he just give all or whatever portion of his income he thinks the government needs voluntarily? Why does he need a LAW to take more from me? Answer: Because he has business's that will eventually get the money stolen from me back in his pocket through one of his Berkshire companies. Thanks for providing the foil.


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

Dpreston said:


> https://www.bullsugar.org/florida_voted_water


A start for Everglades clean water. Hold the candidates accountable in the general election. I will not typically vote single issue but all Floridians should on November 6.


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Thats even more hypocrisy. If Buffet believes that why doesn't he just give all or whatever portion of his income he thinks the government needs voluntarily? Why does he need a LAW to take more from me? Answer: Because he has business's that will eventually get the money stolen from me back in his pocket through one of his Berkshire companies. Thanks for providing the foil.


Not really hypocrisy, Buffett just plays on a level field. Most of his income if he needs a little cash is generated by long term/short term capital gains taxed at 15 or 20%. He says his secretary is in a higher tax bracket than he is. Gary Cohn, Trump's former economic advisor, said he tried twenty five times to include boosting the short term tax rate that hedge fund mangers and others pay in the tax bill, but he gave up and resigned after the bill was passed. Buffet is a great philanthropist and solid American citizen.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

sjrobin said:


> Not really hypocrisy, Buffett just plays on a level field.


 You didn't respond to my post. If he wants to give more, do it. Why does he need to force everyone else to do it? Answer: Because his companies will get that additional tax money from contracts and favorable laws to him. He doesn't do it because he's a "solid American citizen". He does it to get more money.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> Warren Buffet is a wealthy man, but believes that he should be taxed at a higher rate. If a candidate also believes that high earners should be taxed at a higher rate, should that candidate not accept money from Buffet?


If Warren wants to voluntarily give the ultra inefficient Government more of his money he can- There is a form for that. But while .GOV wastes 40 cents on the dollar funding the revolving door self enrichment scam, f that. If .GOV wants to do something for me remove the penalty to live outside the US. Only one other country on Earth has the arcane expat tax system the US has, Eritrea. I would book in a second.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

K3anderson said:


> Can you imagine a guy whose entire campaign is based on class warfare and attacking the "rich" getting his biggest donations from billionaires??? It boggles the mind.


This is the game by these two guys. They are highly organized and pay these people to create havoc and get on tv. These guys want a completely socialist society and they are experimenting on how to do it.

The agenda these guys want is anarchy and they are winning in some areas. They continue to ruin peaceful demonstrations and yet none of them are arrested for fear of lawsuits. The only time that I know of where there is an issue is the recent march where Antifa was allowed to beat people with sticks and the city/police did nothing to protect the ones marching with a valid permit. The judge gave the go ahead to sue the shiz out of them.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Thats even more hypocrisy. If Buffet believes that why doesn't he just give all or whatever portion of his income he thinks the government needs voluntarily? Why does he need a LAW to take more from me? Answer: Because he has business's that will eventually get the money stolen from me back in his pocket through one of his Berkshire companies. Thanks for providing the foil.


The tax code is a law already, I think he (Warren) is saying that the tax code favors too much of the wealthy class. I believe the giant increase in income inequality since the 60s supports this. I think he isn't giving his money away because he doesn't have to. 

Also, and no offense to you, I don't think that you, K3, and Warren Buffet are in the same tax bracket. I think that most people that I know are hovering somewhere in the middle, but that tax hikes are used as a scare tool. If we are talking about increasing the taxes on the top 1%, none of us on this forum would have anything to worry about...


----------



## fowlplay (Aug 6, 2018)

yobata said:


> If we are talking about increasing the taxes on the top 1%, none of us on this forum would have anything to worry about...


If you have a job, or want a job, you have to worry about it. I'm pretty sure most on this forum have a job, or want one. 

The answer is not to take MORE from the rich, the answer is to curb .GOV spending, reform welfare and immigration, and get EVERYONE paying their fair share.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

fowlplay said:


> If you have a job, or want a job, you have to worry about it. I'm pretty sure most on this forum have a job, or want one.
> 
> The answer is not to take MORE from the rich, the answer is to curb .GOV spending, reform welfare and immigration, and get EVERYONE paying their fair share.


Respectfully, I disagree! I have a job. I hope you are paying attention to the inequality gap. The recent tax cuts resulted in a net gain of $0 for me, how did the top 1% do? How did you do, and if you choose to answer this question, can you tell us about your job/business?

Also, the New Deal literally brought us out of a depression.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> Respectfully, I disagree! I have a job. I hope you are paying attention to the inequality gap. The recent tax cuts resulted in a net gain of $0 for me, how did the top 1% do? How did you do, and if you choose to answer this question, can you tell us about your job/business?
> 
> Also, the New Deal literally brought us out of a depression.


It's not my job or the job of the federal government to work on "income inequality". I was just checking the Constitution, you know, law of the land, and I can't seem to locate that being a enumerated power. Can you show me that part?


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

So...if you create a business...lets say you invented Windows (Microsoft), you want people to vote on how much of your profit the government can take from you if they feel the amount you made on the product you invented is too much?


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> It's not my job or the job of the federal government to work on "income inequality". I was just checking the Constitution, you know, law of the land, and I can't seem to locate that being a enumerated power. Can you show me that part?


I feel like you may have been yelling inside your head when you wrote this, but I could be wrong...

Anyway, its the 16th amendment. And what we are discussing is whether everyone is paying their fair share or if the wealthy get tax breaks that allow them to pay a lower rate than their secretarial counterparts...


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> So...if you create a business...lets say you invented Windows (Microsoft), you want people to vote on how much of your profit the government can take from you if they feel the amount you made on the product you invented is too much?


No, I want people to vote for legislators who will make the tax rates fair to the majority of us, instead of favoring the wealthy. And yes, legislators literally make these allocation decisions all the time. For instance, the tax break that was legislated last year is a decision on funds, which will cost all the tax payers an additional 1.5trillion dollars, but which has only benefited a select tier of people who are more than well off...


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

*cough cough* flat tax! *cough*


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> No, I want people to vote for legislators who will make the tax rates fair to the majority of us, instead of favoring the wealthy.


 So I'm confused. 45% of all people in the USA pay ZERO taxes. Right now, with no changes. The top 20% will be paying 87% of ALL taxes. So when you say its "unfair", I'd say your right. It unfair for people to vote to take my tax money. 

How much more than 87% of all taxes should the 20% pay. Would you like them to pay 100%? When you say "fair" it seems like its quite UNFAIR now.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

So in looking at 2018, it looks like you're absolutely right. It's very unfair. We need to ensure that its more "fair" but raising taxes from 0% to at least 7-14% for almost half of the USA. To ensure everyone is paying their fair share.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> So I'm confused. 45% of all people in the USA pay ZERO taxes. Right now, with no changes. The top 20% will be paying 87% of ALL taxes. So when you say its "unfair", I'd say your right. It unfair for people to vote to take my tax money.
> 
> How much more than 87% of all taxes should the 20% pay. Would you like them to pay 100%? When you say "fair" it seems like its quite UNFAIR now.


There are companies making billions that have tax rates at or close to 0... so yes, I do think that is unfair.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/economy/corporate-tax-report.html


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

All I know is after I account for everything- Fed, State, County and City theft for redistribution and property lease payments on the house, I mean Taxes. .Gov is getting well over 50%.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> There are companies making billions that have tax rates at or close to 0... so yes, I do think that is unfair.
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/economy/corporate-tax-report.html



Wait, we can get to corporate taxes after. You said it wasn't fair and I'm agreeing with you, but, the numbers show something different than what you said. It shows that a minority of people is paying 87%. And the questions was, how much MORE should they pay? It's already quite unfair, isn't it?


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Wait, we can get to corporate taxes after. You said it wasn't fair and I'm agreeing with you, but, the numbers show something different than what you said. It shows that a minority of people is paying 87%. And the questions was, how much MORE should they pay? It's already quite unfair, isn't it?


I thought we were talking about corporate tax rates this whole time? In an earlier post you were talking about someone who "invented Windows (Microsoft)"...

As to the numbers that you are talking about, you are using two different modes. yes a minority of the people pay a lot, but that doesn't say anything about the RATE.... If you make 100billion and you pay 15billion in taxes, while I make 100thousand and pay 25thousand, your rate is lower than mine even though technically your 15billion and my 25thousand = you paying 99% of the taxes


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

funny everyone I know benefited from the recent tax cuts. Also it is well known that the new deal and all the associated liberal programs prolonged the great depression. WWII brought the country out of it.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> I thought we were talking about corporate tax rates this whole time? In an earlier post you were talking about someone who "invented Windows (Microsoft)"...


No, the graph shows quite clearly that 45+% pay nothing. So thats 0% of their income. Anything north of that is more. So what would you like me to pay?


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> No, the graph shows quite clearly that 45+% pay nothing. So thats 0% of their income. Anything north of that is more. So what would you like me to pay?


This (anonymous) graph that you posted earlier shows that?









Also, I'll be happy to answer your question as to how much I would like you to pay if you could please let me know how much income you generated last year.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

I miss the old days when we argued about tunnel hulls and Hal Chittum.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Are you disputing that 45% pay 0% of their income and 0% of taxes??? Let's stay focused please. Is 1/2 the country paying NOTHING fair? Again, you said you wanted people to pay their "fair share". I pay almost 50% of what I make and I have 1/2 my fellow citizens paying zero. How is that fair? And the guys you are saying dont pay enough are already paying almost 90% of everything. WTF??? This makes no sense.


----------



## manny2376 (Mar 15, 2007)

SomaliPirate said:


> I miss the old days when we argued about tunnel hulls and Hal Chittum.


My tax return drafts 2” and can do 40mph in 3’ chop!


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

manny2376 said:


> My tax return drafts 2” and can do 40mph in 3’ chop!


Mine has patented standard deduction spray rails.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

SomaliPirate said:


> Mine has patented standard deduction spray rails.


You deserve some of my draft since we aren't equal.


----------



## Fishshoot (Oct 26, 2017)

devrep said:


> funny everyone I know benefited from the recent tax cuts. Also it is well known that the new deal and all the associated liberal programs prolonged the great depression. WWII brought the country out of it.


Well I guess, if you consider passing an even larger debt on to your children a benefit. I for one don't think taxes have to be raised, I believe the amount of spending has to be cut.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

Fishshoot said:


> Well I guess, if you consider passing an even larger debt on to your children a benefit. I for one don't think taxes have to be raised, I believe the amount of spending has to be cut.


Totally agree with you. Spending should be cut massively and taxes reduced as well.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

devrep said:


> Totally agree with you. Spending should be cut massively and taxes reduced as well.


How bout we need SCOTUS justices that will overturn Plyler v. Doe (made it illegal to deny immigrants, legal or illegal, access to welfare programs, schools, medical etc). One year savings - 143 billion + buy all the historical wetlands o-town south. Send illegals back from whence they came with walking around money and have enough left over to build a wall. Reduce the population by 10 million+ WIN Win win & Mother Gaia would cry tears of joy.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

yobata said:


> I thought we were talking about corporate tax rates this whole time? In an earlier post you were talking about someone who "invented Windows (Microsoft)"...
> 
> As to the numbers that you are talking about, you are using two different modes. yes a minority of the people pay a lot, but that doesn't say anything about the RATE.... If you make 100billion and you pay 15billion in taxes, while I make 100thousand and pay 25thousand, your rate is lower than mine even though technically your 15billion and my 25thousand = you paying 99% of the taxes


I have enjoyed the banter of this but I have to weigh in here.

Using your equation he is responsible for way more than your stated 99%. You see if he is making 100 bil he has a corporation and he owes corporate tax and he has 400,000 employees that pay taxes as well.

Let's assume you work for him and you are making a good living at 100 k. But what you don't realize is you are a taker, not a giver. You are a follower, not a leader. 

Now you vote to make him pay even more and he gets pissed off and hand you and all the others pink slip for Christmas while swimming in his ocean of money he has saved. Now what are you and the other 399,999 takers going to do?

At some point we need to protect those that create these jobs and pay good wages. Anyone who wishes to donate to the gov certainly can do that. However, the tax code allows for interpretation and greed makes it viable to pay as little as possible.

Pass a 20% flat tax and now you are taxing those you are trying to protect that already don't pay taxes and this hurts their spending capacity far worse than the wealthy. If you make it an increasing rate then you are just changing the language of the current codes.

To me it is sickening that 50% of the people pay zero taxes. When a person does not have a horse in the race they tend not to give a shiz and we end up with 50% of the population who are pissed off and feel they are due something from the rest of us. These people are the same people you see at the not so peaceful demonstrations demand equality for all. Of course they are demanding something that doesn't cost them anything. 

No thank you. I like the feeling of inequality


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

yobata said:


> Anyway, its the 16th amendment. And what we are discussing is whether everyone is paying their fair share or if the wealthy get tax breaks that allow them to pay a lower rate than their secretarial counterparts...


The 16th allowed for the gov to levy takes. Nowhere is the word "fair" written in the amendment.

However, the term "without apportionment" is. Therefore, the word "fair" has been politically corrected from "unfairly".


----------



## Cam (Apr 5, 2017)

Low income people pay a hefty amount of taxes (sales, gas, property, payroll, etc) based on their non-disposable income. Middle class pay by far the largest percentage because they pay a hefty chunk of their income in non-income taxes (sales, gas, property, payroll, etc) and pay the highest in income tax rates mainly due to so much of their income falling outside capital gains.

Most of the 1% pay less than 25% of their income in total tax (both income and non-income). Outside of people below the poverty line, they tend to pay the smallest percentage. This is why the AMT came about.

My suggestion, adults do not pay any federal tax until they pass 20k per year with dependents deducting another 4k per. The tax rate is flat at 25% beyond that with no tax breaks, medicare, SSN or capital gains (adjust that rate as needed). A traditional family of four would be tax free to 48k and pay 25% for everything they make over that. Everybody gets the same deal.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Cam said:


> My suggestion, adults do not pay any federal tax until they pass 20k per year with dependents deducting another 4k per. The tax rate is flat at 25% beyond that with no tax breaks, medicare, SSN or capital gains (adjust that rate as needed). A traditional family of four would be tax free to 48k and pay 25% for everything they make over that. Everybody gets the same deal.





Cam said:


> Everybody gets the same deal.


Huh- what a load of crap. Everybody does not get the same deal- You are not taking 25% on the first 48K for families of 4 but those with dependents are being taxed on 20-48k.

There is no simple solution to the tax issues. I really don't feel it is my responsibility to pay taxes to support those who are too lazy to work and I certainly don't enjoy funding the incompetent/inefficient guberment with money they just squander.

Taxing the poor the same as everyone else has to be done in a manner that makes all have skin in the game. I agree with you that the lower incomes pay more in total percent due to state/local taxes levied. 

What would be my cut off points for a traditional family of 3? What would the limits be for a single mom with 2 kids and no dad in the picture? Not a cut and dry picture.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

DuckNut said:


> To me it is sickening that 50% of the people pay zero taxes. *When a person does not have a horse in the race they tend not to give a shiz and we end up with 50% of the population who are pissed off and feel they are due something from the rest of us. * These people are the same people you see at the not so peaceful demonstrations demand equality for all. Of course they are demanding something that doesn't cost them anything.


This is EXACTLY what the liberals and socialists want.

They want a captive voting block that is large enough and agitated enough to demand free stuff and who become dependent enough to vote to protect it.

Once you get to that point, it becomes a single party system because noone who would dare threaten the entitlements has a chance in hell of winning an election. The Mob will protect its government cheese while demanding more in the process...

We're at a tipping point...right now...


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

Too many people. Period. Pretend more and magic will happen.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Interesting...

*Everglades Trust endorses Ron DeSantis over Andrew Gillum*
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article220128585.html


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

crboggs said:


> Interesting...
> 
> *Everglades Trust endorses Ron DeSantis over Andrew Gillum*
> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article220128585.html


I gotta admit, I didn't see that coming. Also the comments on that article are gold.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

SomaliPirate said:


> I gotta admit, I didn't see that coming. Also the comments on that article are gold.


The Everglades Trust will now be attacked and demonized for breaking from the mob's narrative.

Watch...it won't take long...


----------



## brianBFD (Oct 25, 2017)

Your D candidate for governor was right next door yesterday in P'cola. Looks like his staffers are outting him. I'm surprised to see so many of those panhandle ******** embrace this guy.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...1ECXVP8fYb4mvjWEqHQdDo_VLY7GaNx1-CaiEgQAYP4b8
.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/3784...VjabnaKmrStfLeMwMuPRoE5YKVUHe9Pt1mBKt8y7bPbm4


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

Andrew Gillum is a catastrophe of epic proportions just waiting to happen...


----------



## brianBFD (Oct 25, 2017)

I think y'all should go ahead and elect him and let him run his single term course. After he makes a complete ass of himself and further plunges FL into the dark it will be years before you will re-elect another candidate like him.
Kinda like what happened when Jesse Jackson lost by such an embarrassing margin to be the D candidate he never ran for office again.


----------



## Zika (Aug 6, 2015)

Funny sign at an RV park just off I-10 heading into Tallahassee:

"Andrew Gillum is our mayor. Trust me, you don't want him for Your governor."

Tight race, but I won't be shocked if he's indicted for corruption and ethics violations--first degree misdemeanors--if he does take office. Not saying DeSantis is any better. But it sure would be refreshing if we had candidates who were actually worth voting for, instead of against.


----------



## brianBFD (Oct 25, 2017)

One of my co-workers that lives in P'cola says, "Politically, Florida is the new Louisiana."


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

Zika said:


> it sure would be refreshing if we had candidates who were actually worth voting for, instead of against.


There are places in the world that vote on candidate's ideas/policies, not their personalities/backgrounds/etc.


----------



## Zika (Aug 6, 2015)

yobata said:


> There are places in the world that vote on candidate's ideas/policies, not their personalities/backgrounds/etc.


Exactly. Which is why I wrote in my choice for governor.


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

unfortunately that write in is the same as a vote for that fine democrat (I'm trying to keep it clean since kids might read this....).


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

yobata said:


> There are places in the world that *vote on candidate's ideas/policies*, not their personalities/backgrounds/etc.


My vote is always (always!) based on ideas/policies/record.

I would assume that your comment is aimed at *new* people coming out to vote *for the first time* specifically because someone looks like them?

Because, ya know, that could also be considered "racist"...


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

crboggs said:


> My vote is always (always!) based on ideas/policies/record.
> 
> I would assume that your comment is aimed at *new* people coming out to vote *for the first time* specifically because someone looks like them?
> 
> Because, ya know, that could also be considered "racist"...


My comment was not that specific, but a generalization away from "personalities" and towards ideas... For instance, there are very few candidates spelling out specific plans for fixing issues, instead they just say things like "I alone can fix this". I need the HOW part to get behind someone...


----------



## Cam (Apr 5, 2017)

DuckNut said:


> Huh- what a load of crap. Everybody does not get the same deal- You are not taking 25% on the first 48K for families of 4 but those with dependents are being taxed on 20-48k.


In the system I mentioned, I am basically promoting the Capital Gains system for everyone. Today people with investment income have a significant advantage over those that earn their money through earned income. There is a reason Romney had a 15% federal income tax rate and someone like Trump probably hasn't paid income taxes at all.

Most wealthy people make most of their money outside earned income. My investments bring in about the same income as my salary. I pay far, far, far less tax on my investments than I do on my salary as it is taxed at a flat rate and doesn't incur federal payroll taxes.

Families that pay smaller total amounts of federal tax, are paying a significantly higher percentage rate in fixed taxes (sales, fuel, etc) to income than wealthier people. The total tax burden on low income and borderline middle income workers is significantly higher than wealthy people. Having been on both sides of this, I make way more money and pay a significantly smaller tax rate now than I did in my 20s when I was scraping by.


----------



## Zika (Aug 6, 2015)

lemaymiami said:


> unfortunately that write in is the same as a vote for that fine democrat (I'm trying to keep it clean since kids might read this....).


Maybe, maybe not. As a Navy veteran I paid my dues for that privilege. At least my conscience is clear and my vote was for a man of integrity, fairness and reason who never resorted to the race card to drum up votes, unlike either of the two main party candidates. My vote was also for a true champion of the outdoors and environment, not someone who developed their position based on focus group polling or had plenty of skeletons rattling around in their closet.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Cam said:


> The total tax burden on low income and borderline middle income workers is significantly higher than wealthy people.


50% of Americans pay zero federal income tax and the 25% pay 97% of all fed taxes collected. How much more should we pay? 100%? lol.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> 50% of Americans pay zero federal income tax and the 25% pay 97% of all fed taxes collected. How much more should we pay? 100%? lol.


The "50% of americans pay zero fed income taxes" statement includes kids, retirees, and a portion of people who earn less than the poverty line (which I believe is $22k/yr). Better get those 4 year olds to pony up!


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

yobata said:


> but a generalization away from "personalities" and towards ideas...


Yeah...alot of people are getting weary of identity politics. 

The left raised the stakes in that game under Obama and now they're getting a little taste as Trump rallies his base. They don't like it any more than we did...but they double down and things get even worse...


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Cam said:


> Families that pay smaller total amounts of federal tax, are paying a significantly higher percentage rate in fixed taxes (sales, fuel, etc) to income than wealthier people. The total tax burden on low income and borderline middle income workers is significantly higher than wealthy people.


This simply is not true. 5% of 10 is exactly the same percent as to 250. What is different is the actual amount. If you earn 10 and have 5% taken out it is more noticeable than if you made 250. But the percent is exactly the same. But in reality it is not the same because if you make 250 the percent is higher than if you make 10. The only time income is taxed less than the going rate is if it qualifies as long term gains


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

crboggs said:


> Yeah...alot of people are getting weary of identity politics.
> 
> The left raised the stakes in that game under Obama and now they're getting a little taste as Trump rallies his base. They don't like it any more than we did...but they double down and things get even worse...


But they certainly cry a hell of a lot louder!


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

yobata said:


> The "50% of americans pay zero fed income taxes" statement includes kids, retirees, and a portion of people who earn less than the poverty line (which I believe is $22k/yr). Better get those 4 year olds to pony up!


Actually it doesn’t include those people. At all.


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

Cam said:


> In the system I mentioned, I am basically promoting the Capital Gains system for everyone. Today people with investment income have a significant advantage over those that earn their money through earned income. There is a reason Romney had a 15% federal income tax rate and someone like Trump probably hasn't paid income taxes at all.
> 
> Most wealthy people make most of their money outside earned income. My investments bring in about the same income as my salary. I pay far, far, far less tax on my investments than I do on my salary as it is taxed at a flat rate and doesn't incur federal payroll taxes.
> 
> Families that pay smaller total amounts of federal tax, are paying a significantly higher percentage rate in fixed taxes (sales, fuel, etc) to income than wealthier people. The total tax burden on low income and borderline middle income workers is significantly higher than wealthy people. Having been on both sides of this, I make way more money and pay a significantly smaller tax rate now than I did in my 20s when I was scraping by.


Correct


----------



## sjrobin (Jul 13, 2015)

This i


DuckNut said:


> This simply is not true. 5% of 10 is exactly the same percent as to 250. What is different is the actual amount. If you earn 10 and have 5% taken out it is more noticeable than if you made 250. But the percent is exactly the same. But in reality it is not the same because if you make 250 the percent is higher than if you make 10. The only time income is taxed less than the going rate is if it qualifies as long term gains


It is true and this is exactly what Cam stated. Most wealthy Americans pay the the long term capital gains tax rate of 15% plus whatever normal income tax rate bracket they fall into.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

Cam said:


> In the system I mentioned, I am basically promoting the Capital Gains system for everyone. Today people with investment income have a significant advantage over those that earn their money through earned income. There is a reason Romney had a 15% federal income tax rate and someone like Trump probably hasn't paid income taxes at all.
> 
> Most wealthy people make most of their money outside earned income. My investments bring in about the same income as my salary. I pay far, far, far less tax on my investments than I do on my salary as it is taxed at a flat rate and doesn't incur federal payroll taxes.
> 
> Families that pay smaller total amounts of federal tax, are paying a significantly higher percentage rate in fixed taxes (sales, fuel, etc) to income than wealthier people. The total tax burden on low income and borderline middle income workers is significantly higher than wealthy people. Having been on both sides of this, I make way more money and pay a significantly smaller tax rate now than I did in my 20s when I was scraping by.


jesus. sweet jesus. people who have investment income have it because they worked their ass off and saved to invest rather than spending everything they make.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

devrep said:


> jesus. sweet jesus. people who have investment income have it because they *worked their ass off and saved to invest* rather than spending everything they make.


Libs don't care. They want their piece of your pie.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

sjrobin said:


> This i
> 
> 
> It is true and this is exactly what Cam stated. Most wealthy Americans pay the the long term capital gains tax rate of 15% plus whatever normal income tax rate bracket they fall into.


Don't disagree but the truly wealthy pay more than 15%. There are 3 brackets for LTCG.

But they are taxed at 28% or higher on ordinary income. So they get rewarded for working their asses off and saving money for this privilege.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

yobata said:


> The "50% of americans pay zero fed income taxes" statement includes kids, retirees, and a portion of people who earn less than the poverty line (which I believe is $22k/yr). Better get those 4 year olds to pony up!


C'mon man, you know this is not true. It is of taxpayers. But not including those which do not file returns. Factual statistics, not irrational.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...k-at-who-does-and-doesnt-pay-u-s-income-tax/#


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

sjrobin said:


> This i
> 
> 
> It is true and this is exactly what Cam stated. Most wealthy Americans pay the the long term capital gains tax rate of 15% plus whatever normal income tax rate bracket they fall into.


Capital gains tax is a tax on profit from an investment of money you ALREADY PAID INCOME TAX ON. Its been proven time after time that when capital gains tax increases people stop risking the money they ALREADY PAID TAXES ON and sit on their money. this slows the economy and decreases the number of jobs that are created by these investments.


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

some people are paid more than others and are able to RISK their money (Their money, not yours) in investments. investing is risky. some people don't make enough to invest. sorry life is not a game where everyone gets a trophy.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

devrep said:


> jesus. sweet jesus. people who have investment income have it because they worked their ass off and saved to invest rather than spending everything they make.


What about those that didn't work their ass off at all and just got it handed to them by their parents/grandparents/etc?


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

DuckNut said:


> C'mon man, you know this is not true. It is of taxpayers. But not including those which do not file returns. Factual statistics, not irrational.
> 
> http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...k-at-who-does-and-doesnt-pay-u-s-income-tax/#


Tell me how this has changes over time. the link you posted shows that the top 1% paid an average tax rate of 26.8-27.5%, yet in "the good old days" of the 1950s the top 1% paid an average tax rate of 42%... I don't understand why many of you are defending the top earners in the country - you just aren't part of that group - vote for YOUR interests... #ClassConsiousness


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

I will assume what you posted is accurate because I do not know what the tables were back then but I will go with that.

Is it safe to then assume that the proportions remain fairly stable as well? Meaning the top 25 pay 50% of all taxes. 

I do know that in the 50s the top tax rate was 91% for those over 200k.

So if the top rate was 91 what was the rate for the average worker?

Extrapolating this my guess is that as earnings went up the marginal tax rate went down and thus the effect on the populous remainder fairly constant between then and now.

I do know from many different reports that prove when marginal tax rates increase, income reported by taxpayers goes down and results in less tax revenue.

You are correct yobata, I am not part of the 1% club. I will vote my conscious to support this class of risk takers because they are the ones who place help wanted signs. Without these hard working souls we would have far more to worry about than what percent of their income should we take to pay for the less driven individuals.

I have said it before, this is not an easy topic and the story Robinhood is based on it. I agree that one needs to vote their conscious because all politicians are corrupt but before you make up your mind you need to understand the attack from the generals viewpoint before awarding the pot of gold to the privates. If all you (rhetorical) want to do is take from the generals and give to the privates, you end up with 1 happy class (privates) and 12 other classes are filled with animosity.

This is one of those topics where everybody will not come out winners.


----------



## LowHydrogen (Dec 31, 2015)

yobata said:


> Tell me how this has changes over time. the link you posted shows that the top 1% paid an average tax rate of 26.8-27.5%, yet in "the good old days" of the 1950s the top 1% paid an average tax rate of 42%... I don't understand why many of you are defending the top earners in the country - you just aren't part of that group - vote for YOUR interests... #ClassConsiousness


I think that a lot of people want to pay less in taxes and want everyone else to pay less in taxes because they feel like the people collecting the money are not good stewards of their money, and feel like the expenditures don't align with their values....


----------



## LowHydrogen (Dec 31, 2015)

I know I personally gave up carrying health ins a couple years back because my family never goes to the doc and my insurance more than doubling to over 1600/month didn't seem worth it. Well, I decided to sell a rental property that year, little did I know that my "shared responsibility payment" aka the fine for the privilege of not carrying ins also applies to capital gains income (the sale of my rental property) not just earned income. Let me tell you what I about had a meltdown. Taxed at a very high rate already then tack another 2.5% on for not buying insurance. 
Yeah I'm pretty effing bitter about it still, the title of the fine is enough to make my blood boil.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

yobata said:


> What about those that didn't work their ass off at all and just got it handed to them by their parents/grandparents/etc?


If they were to inherit a pile of cash when granny dies, they had to pay their fair share of estate tax, currently 40%. Then add on state taxes and it goes higher.


----------



## brianBFD (Oct 25, 2017)

LowHydrogen said:


> I think that a lot of people want to pay less in taxes and want everyone else to pay less in taxes because they feel like the people collecting the money are not good stewards of their money, and feel like the expenditures don't align with their values....


Wouldn't it be a great thing if we could select where our taxes went and what they were used for?


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

DuckNut said:


> If they were to inherit a pile of cash when granny dies, they had to pay their fair share of estate tax, currently 40%. Then add on state taxes and it goes higher.


The cutoff is plenty high. Something like 1 in 10,000 estates have to pay. It aint the family farmer paying it as some politicians would have us believe. The only folks paying it are the same people bankrolling the pols who are trying to get rid of it.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

Again, top 25% pay 87% of all taxes. How much more should they pay? What entitles you to steal money from someone because their parents worked hard to give their children something? Why do you think you entitled to steal my finite time on earth and give it to someone else? Do you believe in people being free?


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

yobata said:


> What about those that didn't work their ass off at all and just got it handed to them by their parents/grandparents/etc?


Expected this response.  I would argue that someone at some point in their family history either worked hard or took the risk that benefited the following generations. And there are plenty of examples where generations of a family have worked together to build or maintain a business.

But to your point...lots of those who have never had to work for anything seem to skew towards the entitled left IMHO.


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

K3anderson said:


> Again, top 25% pay 87% of all taxes. How much more should they pay? What entitles you to steal money from someone because their parents worked hard to give their children something? Why do you think you entitled to steal my finite time on earth and give it to someone else? Do you believe in people being free?


That would make sense considering the top 25% own 87% of the wealth in this nation.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

trekker said:


> That would make sense considering the top 25% own 87% of the wealth in this nation.


So should we steal it from them? Because that's me. And probably you.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

K3anderson said:


> So should we steal it from them? Because that's me. And probably you.


Hooray for wealth redistribution! Let's take $ from productive people and give it to unproductive people! That's the sure fire way to encourage more people to work.


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

trekker said:


> That would make sense considering the top 25% *CREATED* 87% of the wealth in this nation.


FIFY...


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

crboggs said:


> FIFY...


Dude...you just don't get it! Those old, antiquated methods of producing wealth are not sustainable. Here is how we create real, lasting wealth:


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

paulrad said:


> Dude...you just don't get it! Those old, antiquated methods of producing wealth are not sustainable. Here is how we create real, lasting wealth:


Look at all those pretty debt instruments!
_The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been._


----------



## crboggs (Mar 30, 2015)

If you like GDP and unemployment numbers in the 4% range...get out and vote...its really that simple...


----------



## devrep (Feb 22, 2009)

DuckNut said:


> If they were to inherit a pile of cash when granny dies, they had to pay their fair share of estate tax, currently 40%. Then add on state taxes and it goes higher.


not to mention that granny or whomever they inherited the money from ALREADY PAID TAXES ON IT!


----------



## kylet (Jun 29, 2017)

I'm not a fan of taxing income. Tax spending. Flat rate for everyone. It shouldn't be hard to figure out the required amount. No more exemptions/breaks/brackets. No more fraud, delinquent or non filers. Arrange for groceries to be tax free. Now people who don't want to pay taxes, technically don't have to. And people tired of watching people with yachts several houses and cars complain about how much they get taxed are happpy


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

crboggs said:


> FIFY...


Labor creates wealth. Bill Ford never created anything. Paris Hilton? Has She created wealth? Jared Kushner? Does Soros have a kid?


----------



## RunningOnEmpty (Jun 20, 2015)

How could this be a tight race? It blows my mind!


----------



## makin moves (Mar 20, 2010)

RunningOnEmpty said:


> How could this be a tight race? It blows my mind!


Most likely it's not. Just propaganda.


----------



## Cliff (Oct 13, 2016)

Do the top 25% pay 87% of all taxes or all federal income taxes?


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

Cliff said:


> Do the top 25% pay 87% of all taxes or all federal income taxes?


Very good point !


----------



## RunningOnEmpty (Jun 20, 2015)

makin moves said:


> Most likely it's not. Just propaganda.


Kinda like Hillary's huge lead in the polls


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Cliff said:


> Do the top 25% pay 87% of all taxes or all federal income taxes?


It refers to federal income tax.


----------



## State fish rob (Jan 25, 2017)

devrep said:


> not to mention that granny or whomever they inherited the money from ALREADY PAID TAXES ON IT!


Would not be the first time they got you coming and going


----------



## FlyBy (Jul 12, 2013)

trekker said:


> Labor creates wealth. Bill Ford never created anything. Paris Hilton? Has She created wealth? Jared Kushner? Does Soros have a kid?


Using that logic, heirs are not involved in the business they inherit so they should pay taxes to the government? How did the government, at any level, contribute to the business and qualify to be paid for it? They put roadblocks in the form of regulations to starting and running a business, taxed the money used to start a business, taxed the income derived from the business, and taxed property the business owned. The business owner dies and the government should assess more tax? Children and other heirs have more invested in a business than the government.


----------



## State fish rob (Jan 25, 2017)

Dont leave a will & see what uncle sam puts in his back pocket. Everyone can benefit from tax planning. Big $ or little $ ,its the only way to keep (most) what youve worked for. Put what you own in a trust and dare the tax man to touch it


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

The funniest thing about this tax cut was the individual tax cuts weren't made permanent while the corporate tax cut and the estate tax cut were made permanant. They will expire in a few years like the GW Bush tax cuts were gonna. You may remember, it took a Democrat President to make those tax cuts permanant. Republicans couldnt bring themselves to make tax cuts for middle class stiffs permanant. But they sure found the courage to make the estate tax repeal permanant.

Same old song.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

Ok Trekker, let's cut to the point here. When I die, why do you think you have a stronger claim on my assets than my children do?


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

paulrad said:


> Ok Trekker, let's cut to the point here. When I die, why do you think you have a stronger claim on my assets than my children do?


Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it. 

The USA has been very good to the ultra wealthy. If they have to surrender a fraction of their wealth for the betterment of the nation, they will still have enough wealth for their next 5 generations to not have to work. The tax laws are already written to allow them to avoid their tax bill. Nothing wrong with them paying up at the end.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

trekker said:


> Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it.
> 
> The USA has been very good to the ultra wealthy. If they have to surrender a fraction of their wealth for the betterment of the nation, they will still have enough wealth for their next 5 generations to not have to work. The tax laws are already written to allow them to avoid their tax bill. Nothing wrong with them paying up at the end.


You commie here often ...


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

http://cas2.umkc.edu/economics/peop.../courses/econ645/winter2011/generaltheory.pdf

Keynesian Economics is NOT Communism


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

trekker said:


> Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it.


OK let's say that I am 1 in 10000. The question remains - Why do you think you have a greater claim on my stuff than my own children do? Because first you guys go after the 1 in 10000..then a few years later it's the 1 in 1000...etc. That's the same play book you guys use for your gun control agenda too.


----------



## jmrodandgun (Sep 20, 2013)

trekker said:


> Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it.
> 
> The USA has been very good to the ultra wealthy. If they have to surrender a fraction of their wealth for the betterment of the nation, they will still have enough wealth for their next 5 generations to not have to work. The tax laws are already written to allow them to avoid their tax bill. Nothing wrong with them paying up at the end.


Get back to work.


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

The Estate/Gift (or generally called "Transfer") taxes are covered by the following:
US Amend 14 - Section 8
Federal Gift Tax 1932
Tax Reform Act 1976
and others


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

yobata said:


> http://cas2.umkc.edu/economics/peop.../courses/econ645/winter2011/generaltheory.pdf
> 
> Keynesian Economics is NOT Communism


I like my economic models the way I like my automatic pistols...Austrian.

Edit: I just did this for the one-liner. I actually don't like shooting Glock much.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> http://cas2.umkc.edu/economics/peop.../courses/econ645/winter2011/generaltheory.pdf
> 
> Keynesian Economics is NOT Communism


Go make me a sammich, for muh aggregate demand.


----------



## LowHydrogen (Dec 31, 2015)

SomaliPirate said:


> I like my economic models the way I like my automatic pistols...Austrian.
> 
> Edit: I just did this for the one-liner. I actually don't like shooting Glock much.


Agree. Life is too short to shoot ugly guns. HK all the way


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2018)

trekker said:


> Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it.
> 
> The USA has been very good to the ultra wealthy. If they have to surrender a fraction of their wealth for the betterment of the nation, they will still have enough wealth for their next 5 generations to not have to work. The tax laws are already written to allow them to avoid their tax bill. Nothing wrong with them paying up at the end.


The US has also been pretty darn good to the poor contrary to what you think! Taxes feed, cloth, and medicate the poor! Only in America can the poor also be fat! Please explain that! I see these people buying fn lobster for a family of 5 at the grocery using ebt! Same people buying kids powder doughnut breakfast with sodas and gummies at gas station in same parking lot as grocery store! Enough is enough! I’m for a hand up but this hand out is stealing from everyone that has/had a job! Death tax= BS and theft, inheritance tax= BS and theft.
You want money and wealth, go fng earn it!
Ps, my annual income is lower than most on here! I bring home poverty pay from my 40hr week job but love what I do and that’s the trade off. I make my money fixing boats and organic small time farming. So don’t tell me I just don’t understand as I’ve lost everthing and am still rebuilding with my own blood, sweat, and tears!


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

Boatbrains said:


> Death tax= BS and theft, inheritance tax= BS and theft.
> You want money and wealth, go fng earn it!


In 2015, the safety net programs accounted for just 10 percent of all federal spending. Included in this percentage are Supplement Security Income (SSI), which provides cash support to the elderly and disabled poor; unemployment insurance; Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, which is what is commonly referred to as "welfare"; SNAP, or food stamps; school meals for low-income children; low-income housing assistance; child care assistance; assistance with home energy bills; and programs that provide help to abused and neglected children. In addition, programs that primarily help the middle class, namely the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, are included within this 10 percent.

The bulk of your taxes go towards military spending, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.

The estate tax has been around since 1880, upheld by the Supreme Court - don't allow Frank Luntz changing the name to "death tax" to illicit the response he wants...


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2018)

There is nothing temporary about the assistance programs you refer to, do the research and you will see how many millions have abused that system for way too long! Again, I might not sound like the nasty hateful republican many think we are for saying this but I believe in a hand up based program! I don’t believe people driving nicer cars than I can afford while having better teeth than my dental insurance and personal budget will cover, talking and texting on a phone that I purchased and paid for should continue getting these benifits for as long as they want! That’s all I’m saying here. I proudly support our military, police forces, fire departments with my tax money and would proudly assist a hand up type welfare/assistance program that has a limited term you can collect and a limited number of times you can collect.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> In 2015, the safety net programs accounted for just 10 percent of all federal spending. Included in this percentage are Supplement Security Income (SSI), which provides cash support to the elderly and disabled poor; unemployment insurance; Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, which is what is commonly referred to as "welfare"; SNAP, or food stamps; school meals for low-income children; low-income housing assistance; child care assistance; assistance with home energy bills; and programs that provide help to abused and neglected children. In addition, programs that primarily help the middle class, namely the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, are included within this 10 percent.
> 
> The bulk of your taxes go towards military spending, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.
> 
> The estate tax has been around since 1880, upheld by the Supreme Court - don't allow Frank Luntz changing the name to "death tax" to illicit the response he wants...


Who cares how long its been around. Its still theft.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

yobata said:


> In 2015, the safety net programs ...


LOLOL!! "Safety net programs" you say! I just love it when I'm in the grocery store and some fat shitholer is checking out in front of me with an EBT card and a cart full of high dollar food that I don't buy because I can't afford it. Wouldn't it make more sense to get these people spayed and neutered so at least they don't spread their disease to another generation?


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

Boatbrains said:


> There is nothing temporary about the assistance programs you refer to, do the research and you will see how many millions have abused that system for way too long! Again, I might not sound like the nasty hateful republican many think we are for saying this but I believe in a hand up based program! I don’t believe people driving nicer cars than I can afford while having better teeth than my dental insurance and personal budget will cover, talking and texting on a phone that I purchased and paid for should continue getting these benifits for as long as they want! That’s all I’m saying here. I proudly support our military, police forces, fire departments with my tax money and would proudly assist a hand up type welfare/assistance program that has a limited term you can collect and a limited number of times you can collect.


Actually. I know people that used programs till they got well enough to work. Big difference between providing for the general welfare and gibs or welfare generally. The former being temporary and the later being whatever the tax slaves will put up with.


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2018)

EdK13 said:


> Actually. I know people that used programs till they got well enough to work. Big difference between providing for the general welfare and gibs or welfare generally. The former being temporary and the later being whatever the tax slaves will put up with.


Agreed!


----------



## yobata (Jul 14, 2015)

paulrad said:


> Wouldn't it make more sense to get these people spayed and neutered so at least they don't spread their disease to another generation?


^ Eugenics masquerading as "common sense"


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

Boatbrains said:


> The US has also been pretty darn good to the poor contrary to what you think! Taxes feed, cloth, and medicate the poor! Only in America can the poor also be fat! Please explain that! I see these people buying fn lobster for a family of 5 at the grocery using ebt! Same people buying kids powder doughnut breakfast with sodas and gummies at gas station in same parking lot as grocery store! Enough is enough! I’m for a hand up but this hand out is stealing from everyone that has/had a job! Death tax= BS and theft, inheritance tax= BS and theft.
> You want money and wealth, go fng earn it!
> Ps, my annual income is lower than most on here! I bring home poverty pay from my 40hr week job but love what I do and that’s the trade off. I make my money fixing boats and organic small time farming. So don’t tell me I just don’t understand as I’ve lost everthing and am still rebuilding with my own blood, sweat, and tears!


Fyi, the death tax and inheritance tax is the same thing. Only in America do you have working stiffs programmed to advocate for the super wealthy.


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2018)

trekker said:


> Fyi, the death tax and inheritance tax is the same thing. Only in America do you have working stiffs programmed to advocate for the super wealthy.


FYI, stealing is stealing whether it’s from the super poor or the super wealthy! Hey, if you wanna start supporting all these deadbeats please by all means necessary... be my guest.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

yobata said:


> ^ Eugenics masquerading as "common sense"


Eugenics. Lucky for us we have the opposite.


----------



## Fishshoot (Oct 26, 2017)

Boatbrains said:


> There is nothing temporary about the assistance programs you refer to, do the research and you will see how many millions have abused that system for way too long! Again, I might not sound like the nasty hateful republican many think we are for saying this but I believe in a hand up based program! I don’t believe people driving nicer cars than I can afford while having better teeth than my dental insurance and personal budget will cover, talking and texting on a phone that I purchased and paid for should continue getting these benifits for as long as they want! That’s all I’m saying here. I proudly support our military, police forces, fire departments with my tax money and would proudly assist a hand up type welfare/assistance program that has a limited term you can collect and a limited number of times you can collect.


----------



## Fishshoot (Oct 26, 2017)

We all support “these deadbeats”, including the biggest one of all the US government, purchaser of $1000 hammers, coffee mugs etc. social security is not free or an evil, everyone of us has been paying into since we’ve been working. The government has just been taking it and using it as it pleases.


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

Boatbrains said:


> FYI, stealing is stealing whether it’s from the super poor or the super wealthy! Hey, if you wanna start supporting all these deadbeats please by all means necessary... be my guest.


Supporting deadbeats ?


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Yobata, your figures are a bit skewed. You depict the spending as a low number and according to your statement amounts to $200 bil or so. However, if you add in all of the other stuff including the items you took out, the amount is a whole lot bigger.

Medicaid by itself is more than the figure you fed to us.

Recalculate using the figures above and see what you come up with.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

trekker said:


> Unless you are 1 in 10000 in wealth you wont have to worry about it.
> 
> The USA has been very good to the ultra wealthy. If they have to surrender a fraction of their wealth for the betterment of the nation, they will still have enough wealth for their next 5 generations to not have to work. The tax laws are already written to allow them to avoid their tax bill. Nothing wrong with them paying up at the end.


Are you serious? No really, are you?

The richest give their money to charities who do great things with the money. But let's assume there are two choices you can make before you die. 1) give money to charity or other causes they believe in or 2) give it to the government so they can spend it oh so wisely?

Unless you win the Poweball I am quite sure you are not in this category and even if you were I would never wish to see your hard earned money be quested to the government. That would simply be an insult to your work ethics which got you there.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

In big cities some people take "mugging money" with them wherever they go. If a potential mugger comes up to them, they just give them the mugging money in the hopes that the mugger will just go away and buy some crack rather than killing/raping them. Welfare is the same thing. We just keep giving them this welfare $$ to keep them from rioting and going apesh*t.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

Check out the welfare in the great country of Mexico

Another program created to help low-income families was the FIDELIST. This program was created in 1984 and essentially subsidized the prices of corn tortillas. It ran until 1990 when it was replaced by the Tortilla sin Costo, which provided subsidized or free tortillas for 2.1 million low-income families and equaled approximately 3% of Mexico’s total corn consumption. However the current tortillas program for low income people in Mexico, as offered by the Mexican government is simply to provide a 2-year loan at 6% interest to setup a tortilla business, there are no 'free tortillas' for the poor.

Love it. Don't work, don't get money. They even took away your daily allotment of tortillas and replaced it with a kick in your azz to go start a business and get to work.


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

I'm certainly not advocating for increased welfare, lol. Got a little problem at Lake O? How boat hurricane relief? Is that just tacked onto the deficit? Need a few more fire fighters out west?

Did Trump get rid of the hedge fund loophole as promised?

The president signed a tax bill giving his family a 300 to 500 million dollar tax cut.

But screw it, lets talk about welfare.

Same ol crap. Spend a decade sending half our factories overseas so the rich can get richer, and then cut their taxes and then top it all off by blaming the broke ass folks who used to work in those factories.

Well programmed.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

It's funny that Yobata mentions Eugenics. What do you think the progressive taxation that you support is? It favors the lowest common denominator in terms of income having more children and punishing the middle class. 50 years ago families had one parent work and the other stay and raise children. They also had much larger families. To keep the same standard of living today, both parents work and have fewer children. The people who pay nothing have many more children and pay for them with the money stolen from the first family.


----------



## K3anderson (Jan 23, 2013)

I'm also confused by the income inequality angle. You left wing kooks dislike "income inequality", but want to import more poor people. Wouldn't that make income inequality worse? Seems like it would make more sense to import more middle class people so it evens out? This whole ideology is quite confusing to be honest.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

K3anderson said:


> It's funny that Yobata mentions Eugenics. What do you think the progressive taxation that you support is? It favors the lowest common denominator in terms of income having more children and punishing the middle class. 50 years ago families had one parent work and the other stay and raise children. They also had much larger families. To keep the same standard of living today, both parents work and have fewer children. The people who pay nothing have many more children and pay for them with the money stolen from the first family.


The reason the paradigm shifted to a two income family is because the newer generation has a house twice the size, drive cars where the price exceed 50% of of their annual income.

We have become a nation of disposable income...dispose of it all on grandure and lavish lifestyle as long as the check covers the weekly expenses.


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

Wages haven't risen in 30 years when measured against inflation, while executuve pay has risen 10,000 percent.

It takes two wage earners in a family of four to have halfway decent stuff.

Something flawed with that model.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

No there isn't.

Get a better education and climb the beanstalk.

If you don't like the conditions, only you can change them.


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

DuckNut said:


> No there isn't.
> 
> Get a better education and climb the beanstalk.
> 
> If you don't like the conditions, only you can change them.


Nothing wrong with wages not going up for 30 years, while the overall wealth of the nation has exploded?

Interesting.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

trekker said:


> Wages haven't risen in 30 years when measured against inflation, while executuve pay has risen 10,000 percent.
> 
> It takes two wage earners in a family of four to have halfway decent stuff.
> 
> Something flawed with that model.


Hey Trekker, I think you have a very valid point here. You're correct that wages are not keeping pace with inflation. You're also correct that there is a class of top-tier looters that make their billions unethically. You're also correct that most families have to have two wage earners now. Something is indeed wrong with this model!

But think about this. Suppose that there was a group of people that weren't really loyal to America...or any host country for that matter - instead they were only loyal to their own group. Further suppose that these people managed to work their way into positions of power within the media, government, banking, education and entertainment. Perhaps they've even infiltrated into your religion. They might have done this via intelligence and eloquence or it might have been via plain old nepotism or some combination of both. It really doesn't matter how they got there - what matters is that the have a lot of power and their interests are not in line with our interests. Does that sound like a possibility? Does that seem like a situation that might be happening?

If you want to know who rules over you, then ask yourself who you aren't allowed to criticize. Can you think of any people today that might be bucking against an entrenched group of very powerful people - potentially the same group that I described above? Can you think of any historical figures that came into conflict with that group of elites? Can you see any parallels?


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

trekker said:


> Nothing wrong with wages not going up for 30 years, while the overall wealth of the nation has exploded?
> 
> Interesting.


Like I said in the post you quoted: Get a better education

The relationship between wages and inflation are highly correlated. Some people call it wage push inflation.

Inflation is not static across the country, it is localized and it may even be so localized that two different sides of a city may respond differently.

Inflation is a result of excess money supply or excess demand. If you have a town that has 10k people and had the same amount for a decade the inflation for that area is almost nil as would be the wage increase. If a town is growing by 10% per year the inflation would be far greater than that of a stagnant community. Would it be 10%? Not necessarily. Could be less or it could be significantly more.

Look at Sidney, NE. Home prices have shit the bed by 30% in the last several months. Why would this community be struggling so much when the rest of the country is dying from inflation as you indicate? Could you give me your best shot as to why this is happening?



trekker said:


> Nothing wrong with wages not going up for 30 years, while the overall wealth of the nation has exploded?


Wages have gone up and as a result of increasing wages the cost of everything has gone up as well - that is inflation. The two are related.

Part of the reason wealth has increased is because people have better educations today and typically there are less barriers to entry for any given business. People have become their own worst enemies in growing their personal wealth and it is not due to the cost of watermelon.


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)




----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

Duck,

It's not that simple. It's a lot more than getting a better education and working harder or whatever. Let's suppose he follows your advice and goes out to get an education in IT. He's going to come out of that education being in debt like crazy and he's absolutely not going to be able to expect some great paying job. Why? Here's a few reasons:
1. Free Trade allows for the free movement of people across borders. Companies in the US have no loyalty to the US (see my post above) and have taken to hiring H1B visa holders from offshore. These people aren't any better than Americans, but they will work for cheaper. At my work we have a web guy that works remotely from Uganda.  It's total BS. I'm quite certain that there are plenty of talented American web guys that would love to work here.
2. When corporations aren't hiring H1B's they're shutting down factories and moving operations offshore. They do this for cheaper labor and also to get away from the host of rules and regulations that stifle business here. Not to mention that they can be a safer from predatory lawyers looking to sue them in American courts.
3. If he does manage to get a job, it's probably going to be some lower level support position. Why? Because that's how everyone starts out. It doesn't matter about your education. And those lower level support positions don't pay very well - at all. I've got buddies at my work that could probably make more at McDonalds.


----------



## SomaliPirate (Feb 5, 2016)

paulrad said:


> Duck,
> 
> It's not that simple. It's a lot more than getting a better education and working harder or whatever. Let's suppose he follows your advice and goes out to get an education in IT. He's going to come out of that education being in debt like crazy and he's absolutely not going to be able to expect some great paying job. Why? Here's a few reasons:
> 1. Free Trade allows for the free movement of people across borders. Companies in the US have no loyalty to the US (see my post above) and have taken to hiring H1B visa holders from offshore. These people aren't any better than Americans, but they will work for cheaper. At my work we have a web guy that works remotely from Uganda. It's total BS. I'm quite certain that there are plenty of talented American web guys that would love to work here.
> ...


----------



## EdK13 (Oct 3, 2013)

SomaliPirate said:


>


Rare and highly under rated.


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

Tucker is awesome. But I'll tell you what I don't like Tucker nearly as much as I hate Shapiro. I've always hated that little POS. Every time I see him, I just get this incredible urge to beat the crap out of him with a pipe. Not sure what it is about him.... Maybe I should just turn Gritty loose on him? 

But Tucker really did tear him a new one. Trekker, you should watch Ed's video. There's a lot in there to take note of. Pay attention to who it is arguing and whose interests they have in mind.


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

paulrad said:


> Duck,
> 
> It's not that simple. It's a lot more than getting a better education and working harder or whatever. Let's suppose he follows your advice and goes out to get an education in IT. He's going to come out of that education being in debt like crazy and he's absolutely not going to be able to expect some great paying job. Why? Here's a few reasons:
> 1. Free Trade allows for the free movement of people across borders. Companies in the US have no loyalty to the US (see my post above) and have taken to hiring H1B visa holders from offshore. These people aren't any better than Americans, but they will work for cheaper. At my work we have a web guy that works remotely from Uganda. It's total BS. I'm quite certain that there are plenty of talented American web guys that would love to work here.
> ...


Paul, 
I am not going to disagree with you at all on many of the points you wrote. However, advanced education is a couple rungs up the ladder from the get go especially because he now has real world experience. IT is a really good example of how it was once a great profession and it got flooded with people, it has died on the vine. His circumstance would be no different if he got his degree in basket weaving either. Degree choices do make a difference.

What I was explaining was the support for my statement disagreeing with the comment of wages not keeping up with inflation. They are so correlated they could be interchangeable. The comment wages haven't gone up in 30 years is total lunacy. Ask your father what his wage was when he started his career and what it was when he ended it. Also ask him what he bought his house for and what it's worth now. If these two questions come out as "the same" I will buy you a bottle of bourbon.

The comment of inflation depleting wages is a common narrative by the masses who do not understand how inflation leads to higher wages and the impact of wages on inflation and vice versa.

A great example of run away inflation is the oil boom of North Dakota. Minot, ND experienced price increases almost unheard of because of the high paying oil jobs and the thousands of people flocking there for them. Rents that were in the mid hundreds went to the upper end of $1,000's. This is inflation and how it is affected by wages.


----------



## Guest (Nov 22, 2018)

DuckNut said:


> Paul,
> I am not going to disagree with you at all on many of the points you wrote. However, advanced education is a couple rungs up the ladder from the get go especially because he now has real world experience. IT is a really good example of how it was once a great profession and it got flooded with people, it has died on the vine. His circumstance would be no different if he got his degree in basket weaving either. Degree choices do make a difference.
> 
> What I was explaining was the support for my statement disagreeing with the comment of wages not keeping up with inflation. They are so correlated they could be interchangeable. The comment wages haven't gone up in 30 years is total lunacy. Ask your father what his wage was when he started his career and what it was when he ended it. Also ask him what he bought his house for and what it's worth now. If these two questions come out as "the same" I will buy you a bottle of bourbon.
> ...


So in terms that my dumbarse can understand... your saying a $15 hr minimum wage just might equate to a $10 gal of milk??? I see now!


----------



## trekker (Sep 19, 2015)

Spin it how ya want. In the last 30 years, Healthcare cost increases alone have outpaced the average wage increase.

I'm a union railroader. We just ratified a contract with a 17% raise over 3 years. Just so you guys know I'm not whining about my personal position in life. Im doing fine.

For the vast majority of workers though, the explosion of wealth in this country has not "trickled down".


----------



## paulrad (May 10, 2016)

Yes IT as a career choice is dying. I make less money now than I did 7 years ago. And that's not adjusting for inflation. You said he should get an education to earn more money. What should he study? 

I don't think that wages and inflation is a 1:1 correlation either. I would agree that increasing the minimum wage is inflationary (and stupid). But fractional reserve banking is also inflationary. Any fed adjustment that makes it easier to take out a loan is also going to be inflationary because it speeds up money velocity.

But government needs inflation in order to buy votes and bankers profit from the process of creating money out of nothing (and thereby creating inflation). And that leads back to my point that there is a class of elites that is siphoning off the wealth of the people in this nation. 

Trekker,
You're right. But dig deeper. Who is benefitting? Do you think this is the first time in history this type of thing has happened?


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

You're right Paul, the two are not 1:1. One will precede the other and then the laggard will catch up until parity is found.

Fractional banking is a very low on the totem pole of inflationary concerns. It is however how our entire banking system is set up.

Remember the banking crisis and how package products were worthless but the banks were allowed to make up a value for them while the customers saw a big fat zero on their statements. They changed the rule and suddenly all of the banks got in trouble almost overnight. But what many don't realize we had inflation during that period that was greater than any time in the past decade.

Money is everywhere these days. Communist China is rivaling the US for the highest number of billionaires and Russia is not far behind.


----------



## LowHydrogen (Dec 31, 2015)

Interesting reading back through this one about candidates, and how DeSantis could only be counted on to perpetuate environmental problems.

Maybe the tide is turning for the better...


----------

