President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

Lol
View attachment 732506
Inappropriate , wow that will make those Europeans toe the line.
 
Give it up. Seriously. Christianity calls for volunteerism as acts of love. Socialism calls for submission of wealth by force to the government for them to make decisions on how it's distributed.

Christianity== "Make selfless decisions with your time, talents and treasures, filling needs by the leading and priorities of God."
Socialism=="Let the secular gov't take your money and decision-making as self-protection against their threats of what will happen to you if you don't let them."

You're just wrong. Take the L and move along.
You have no idea what socialism is, your definition is dead wrong. You are closer to describing what trump wants.
 
I still don't know what "maga" is, despite many attempts for a definition, but, as a Christian, I interpret the Bible in the context of who Jesus was speaking to, and how the early church responded to those teachings.

For instance, I look at the fact that Jesus was speaking to ordinary people, he wasn't marching on Rome or leading a protest to Antipas or to Pontius Pilate. So, I understand His instruction to be targeted at ME, not at government. I can't fully live out my faith by letting government do the work while I take the credit. My desire to help others is not borne out of social responsibility, it derives from a changed spirit that now bears fruit willingly, not out of coercion or as a result of forced "goodness."

As to the early church response? Well, again, I don't see marches on capitals, or pleading with government authority to meet the people's needs.
I see Acts 2:45. I see James 1:27.

Put more simply, the life I live though my Savior, Jesus Christ, has to be lived in me, because government is not big enough for that life.
Best response to any post on this thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ritzwatch
I don't know how to sort out your question. We can't believe:
- the administration
- ICE
- the deportee
- his lawyer
- his family.

I guess it is going to come down to, "if you're here illegally, you are at risk of deportation to wherever we can send you". Everything else is secondary.
Which is the way it should be. Violent criminals are prioritized, but anybody here illegally is fair game for deportation. If someone doesn't want to risk that, then they should self-deport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz and McDad
wait you are against taxes and people, especially the rich, paying their fair share?
Methinks you don't understand the difference between progressive and regressive forms of taxation.

I'm all in favor of progressive taxation, as it redistributes wealth from those who sit on it (the rich) to those who inject it immediately into economic activity (the poor).

Tariffs operate as a regressive tax, meaning the poor will pay out more of their income on tariff taxes than the rich.

This is not really controversial at this point:

 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Methinks you don't understand the difference between progressive and regressive forms of taxation.

I'm all in favor of progressive taxation, as it redistributes wealth from those who sit on it (the rich) to those who inject it immediately into economic activity (the poor).
suddenly you care about the poor. Shouldn't have fought the Keystone, shouldn't have backed ACA, shouldn't have backed any number of green initiatives like dictating that a percentage of sales HAD to be some of the "green" Nazi cars, or gas stoves. shouldn't have backed increased minimum wages, should have paid some attention to the Bidenflation before pretending like you care about Trumpflation.

you have cheered pissing on the poor any time it suits your party.
 
Methinks you don't understand the difference between progressive and regressive forms of taxation.

I'm all in favor of progressive taxation, as it redistributes wealth from those who sit on it (the rich) to those who inject it immediately into economic activity (the poor).

Tariffs operate as a regressive tax, meaning the poor will pay out more of their income on tariff taxes than the rich.

This is not really controversial at this point:

Okay, but a regressive consumption-based tax such as a sales tax (or tariff passed on to the consumer) could theoretically generate more actual total tax dollars from the uber wealthy simply because it is consumption-based. Therefore, the uber wealthy's increase in total wealth through unrealized gains in investments isn't necessarily shielded from possible taxation. They pay taxes on what they buy, even if they finance the purchase using debt.
 
Methinks you don't understand the difference between progressive and regressive forms of taxation.

I'm all in favor of progressive taxation, as it redistributes wealth from those who sit on it (the rich) to those who inject it immediately into economic activity (the poor).

Tariffs operate as a regressive tax, meaning the poor will pay out more of their income on tariff taxes than the rich.

This is not really controversial at this point:

Progressive taxes do a poor job of "redistributing wealth" (the liberal goal) from the uber wealthy because those people aren't earning income through salaries and wages. They gain wealth largely through unrealized gains in investments. Progressive taxes do a great job of hammering the middle and upper-middle class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
And when does that happen? You magas just dream up ways to hate.
ironymeter2.gif
 
It's liberation day, as in liberating those dollars from your wallets.



I am sure you care about CA sales and state income taxe rates, which are the highest in the nation, affecting citizens. You would vote for Newsom in a heartbeat.
 
Advertisement





Back
Top