Senate Races

[boutons_deux]

Democratic Challenger Holds Eight-Point Lead Over In bent In WI Senate Poll


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltra...+%28TPMNews%29

[boutons_deux]

Rubio Holds Slim Two-Point Lead Over Challenger In Latest Florida Senate Poll

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltra...+%28TPMNews%29

and "Little Marco" won't rule out Pres 2020 run.


======================

"I'm going to serve six years in the United States Senate, God willing, and I'm looking forward to it," Rubio said, before he and Murphy exchanged attacks over who could do more to protect the Everglades.

The “God willing” evasion was duly noted and Rubio was pressed on the question.

Three more times he slipped that “God willing” into his answers, as if God is responsible for his own personal ambition to get the out of the Senate

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1...28Daily+Kos%29

God doesn't give a , Little Marco

[boutons_deux]

Seven races that could flip the Senate: Trump’s impending defeat may lead to a down-ballot massacre

These critical contests will decide the Senate: Who are the candidates — and how do they feel about Donald Trump?

http://www.salon.com/2016/10/19/seve...llot-massacre/

[boutons_deux]

Silver's latest Senate prediction

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...=2016-forecast

[CosmicCowboy]

2018 republicans will take back any minor gains democrats make in the senate this year.

[CosmicCowboy]

2018 25 democrats up for reelection vs. 8 republicans and by then everyone will hate Hillary.

[Th'Pusher]

2018 republicans will take back any minor gains democrats make in the senate this year.

That gives them two years to appoint some young liberal judges.

[Splits]

That gives them two years to appoint some young liberal judges.

Yep. Hopefully Breyer and Kennedy retire in addition to Ginsburg.

[baseline bum]

Yep. Hopefully Breyer and Kennedy retire in addition to Ginsburg.

Hasn't Uncle Thomas been talking retirement?

[Splits]

Hasn't Uncle Thomas been talking retirement?

He's only 68. Hopefully he dies a horrible death, but I don't forsee him retiring when a D is in office

[CosmicCowboy]

That gives them two years to appoint some young liberal judges.

No doubt. That sucks. More for you young guys than me.

[Th'Pusher]

No doubt. That sucks. More for you young guys than me.

Why would liberal justices suck for young people?

[CosmicCowboy]

Meh. I'm pretty set financially for retirement and helping my kids. You guys are the ones that will suffer from the race to the bottom and mediocre nanny state substandard equality for all. When you punish success with exorbitant taxes you remove the incentive for risk.

[rmt]

Meh. I'm pretty set financially for retirement and helping my kids. You guys are the ones that will suffer from the race to the bottom and mediocre nanny state substandard equality for all. When you punish success with exorbitant taxes you remove the incentive for risk.

I think this is what the young don't realize. We, older people, are coasting toward retirement and what's left of SS and Medicare. We already have our homes, (in your case) business, investments - even Obamacare is rigged in our favor - 3x as opposed to the more realistic 5x a young person's cost. It's the young who won't have the opportunities we had - the available jobs because the economy is burdened with taxes, regulations, Obamacare (or, even worse, single payer), the crushing debt, and whatever social programs Hillary has in mind for you that you will be paying for - for all the people she'll let in to achieve her dream of "open borders" and "opportunity for every person in the hemisphere."

[pgardn]

Meh. I'm pretty set financially for retirement and helping my kids. You guys are the ones that will suffer from the race to the bottom and mediocre nanny state substandard equality for all. When you punish success with exorbitant taxes you remove the incentive for risk.

You mean like Donald's real estate write off's. Those incentives that younger people like myself make up for? So the US is like a bad bank nodding yes to horrible business ventures? This works both ways which peepslike to gloss over.

[pgardn]

Do you have any semblance of a thought of your own? Seriously, the morons on here pedo, your brother, breitbart wannabe, none of you have any ideas that are your own. You are so scared and brainwashed by these assholes that you are intellectually bankrupt.

If this is all you assholes can achieve, then for sakes stop stealing oxygen.

So you teach civility and diplomacy...

[CosmicCowboy]

You mean like Donald's real estate write off's. Those incentives that younger people like myself make up for? So the US is like a bad bank nodding yes to horrible business ventures? This works both ways which peepslike to gloss over.

Well yeah. If you tax the out of profits but don't allow loss write offs you massively decrease the incentive to invest which obviously effects jobs and the economy. The nasty "rich" don't make money by being stupid. They balance risk and reward and will simply move their investments somewhere else in the world where they can make money.

[rmt]

You mean like Donald's real estate write off's. Those incentives that younger people like myself make up for? So the US is like a bad bank nodding yes to horrible business ventures? This works both ways which peepslike to gloss over.

When one makes money on investments, one pays taxes on that money. When one loses money on that investment, would you please explain to me what you object with offsetting that loss against any POSSIBLE future investment gain? Remember you can't use it to offset, say, income from a job and that offset is spread out over many years.

pgardn, when I (and CC) started out with basically nothing, the rules and regulations (e.g. I never had insurance until I got my 1st full time job at 21) were not so punishing that I could not save - for a home, for retirement, for investments. Now, not only is there a lack of jobs, but whatever money you earn is taxed, doesn't earn much interest, forced to pay for health insurance/penalty, etc. This is going to continue on steroids when Hillary wins - more social programs = more taxes - no matter what the promises about taxing the rich (those who are paying for her $2 billion campaign?). Look at the promises from Obamacare which is shouldered by the middle class.

[pgardn]

Well yeah. If you tax the out of profits but don't allow loss write offs you massively decrease the incentive to invest which obviously effects jobs and the economy. The nasty "rich" don't make money by being stupid. They balance risk and reward and will simply move their investments somewhere else in the world where they can make money.

And if they are really heavily involved like Donald, they may be deemed to big to fail. And he was.

[Warlord23]

Well yeah. If you tax the out of profits but don't allow loss write offs you massively decrease the incentive to invest which obviously effects jobs and the economy. The nasty "rich" don't make money by being stupid. They balance risk and reward and will simply move their investments somewhere else in the world where they can make money.

This rationale is often quoted but unproven in the modern era. Back in the day, capital was finite and scarce because it was tied to gold. So an investor had to allocate scarce capital based on the expected return. In this scenario, taxation does act as an inhibitor to investment.

Cut to the present - there is a glut of capital. Central banks have flooded the economy with new money supply. Corporations have tons of cash on hand, a good amount of it sitting in tax havens - same goes for ins utional investors. Capital has been over-allocated to real estate, propping up property bubbles. China is mass producing without a market - commodity prices have been lower than historical averages thanks to oversupply. In this situation, if a businessman has a genuine opportunity with good RoI, he will definitely get investment - irrespective of tax rates.

[pgardn]

When one makes money on investments, one pays taxes on that money. When one loses money on that investment, would you please explain to me what you object with offsetting that loss against any POSSIBLE future investment gain? Remember you can't use it to offset, say, income from a job and that offset is spread out over many years.

pgardn, when I (and CC) started out with basically nothing, the rules and regulations (e.g. I never had insurance until I got my 1st full time job at 21) were not so punishing that I could not save - for a home, for retirement, for investments. Now, not only is there a lack of jobs, but whatever money you earn is taxed, doesn't earn much interest, forced to pay for health insurance/penalty, etc. This is going to continue on steroids when Hillary wins - more social programs = more taxes - no matter what the promises about taxing the rich (those who are paying for her $2 billion campaign?). Look at the promises from Obamacare which is shouldered by the middle class.

Uhhh like you can make absolutely horrible decisions and not get punished. Do you know the bankruptcy rules in Texas rmt? Your homestead is off limits. Just think about abuse that occurs when you can always fall back on money that can't be touched by the banks you owe and then you CONTINUE to make ty decisions. Stupidity is rewarded with a good bankruptcy attorney. Get it? And you complain about poor people sponging...

And I got a meeting now. Dammit.

[rmt]

[QUOTE=Bonnerific;8755682]

When one makes money on investments, one pays taxes on that money. When one loses money on that investment, would you please explain to me what you object with offsetting that loss against any POSSIBLE future investment gain? Remember you can't use it to offset, say, income from a job and that offset is spread out over many years.

pgardn, when I (and CC) started out with basically nothing, the rules and regulations (e.g. I never had insurance until I got my 1st full time job at 21) were not so punishing that I could not save - for a home, for retirement, for investments. Now, not only is there a lack of jobs, but whatever money you earn is taxed, doesn't earn much interest, forced to pay for health insurance/penalty, etc. This is going to continue on steroids when Hillary wins - more social programs = more taxes - no matter what the promises about taxing the rich (those who are paying for her $2 billion campaign?). Look at the promises from Obamacare which is shouldered by the middle class.[/

This is like that fake charter school argument you tried to lie about. You omit so many facts and so much context.

So are you a liar? Or just ignorant?

Congratulations on a post without your usual filth. When I mention charter school, I am speaking from my personal experience. I realize that other charter schools in other parts of the country may not be the same - probably not since we are the 4th largest district in the nation and so have more resources than usual. You will believe whatever it is that you want to believe about me - at least, I respect your right to have opinions different from my own.

[Warlord23]

When one makes money on investments, one pays taxes on that money. When one loses money on that investment, would you please explain to me what you object with offsetting that loss against any POSSIBLE future investment gain? Remember you can't use it to offset, say, income from a job and that offset is spread out over many years.

pgardn, when I (and CC) started out with basically nothing, the rules and regulations (e.g. I never had insurance until I got my 1st full time job at 21) were not so punishing that I could not save - for a home, for retirement, for investments. Now, not only is there a lack of jobs, but whatever money you earn is taxed, doesn't earn much interest, forced to pay for health insurance/penalty, etc. This is going to continue on steroids when Hillary wins - more social programs = more taxes - no matter what the promises about taxing the rich (those who are paying for her $2 billion campaign?). Look at the promises from Obamacare which is shouldered by the middle class.

This here is the crux of the issue. Through the course of your life, the economic framework of the world has changed - but most people possess almost no understanding of it. Nixon ended gold convertibility, central banks followed the lead of Milton Friedman and the Monetarists, exchange rates went from fixed to floating to mixed models, the Euro happened, global trade exploded, capital allocation went trans-national via large corporations.

You can sense that things have changed. But your explanation of this change is based on listening to unqualified TV and talk radio hosts who themselves have little understanding of economics. Hence you blame the welfare state, tax policy, regulation etc without empirical evidence. And you think a moron like Trump can somehow solve this complex problem that he has no clue about.

[rmt]

Uhhh like you can make absolutely horrible decisions and not get punished. Do you know the bankruptcy rules in Texas rmt? Your homestead is off limits. Just think about abuse that occurs when you can always fall back on money that can't be touched by the banks you owe and then you CONTINUE to make ty decisions. Stupidity is rewarded with a good bankruptcy attorney. Get it? And you complain about poor people sponging...

And I got a meeting now. Dammit.

You lost the money you risked - you're offsetting against POSSIBLE (not guaranteed) future GAINS - if you don't gain, you can't offset. I think the homestead rule is pretty much nationwide - they don't want to make people homeless. What would you suggest to guard people against their own stupidity? The US is a nation of second chances - would you prefer that if you made a mistake, you could never recover in your lifetime?

[CosmicCowboy]

This rationale is often quoted but unproven in the modern era. Back in the day, capital was finite and scarce because it was tied to gold. So an investor had to allocate scarce capital based on the expected return. In this scenario, taxation does act as an inhibitor to investment.

Cut to the present - there is a glut of capital. Central banks have flooded the economy with new money supply. Corporations have tons of cash on hand, a good amount of it sitting in tax havens - same goes for ins utional investors. Capital has been over-allocated to real estate, propping up property bubbles. China is mass producing without a market - commodity prices have been lower than historical averages thanks to oversupply. In this situation, if a businessman has a genuine opportunity with good RoI, he will definitely get investment - irrespective of tax rates.

You are right. There is a huge amount of capital sitting on the sidelines because they can't find investments with a reasonable risk factored return on investment. Personally I can borrow all the money I want for me or my business because I have a 780 credit score and a substantial net worth but I can't imagine being a 20 something in this current environment that wants to start a significant business without having family money or a private backer...the banks would laugh you out the door.