Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Alexandria Ocasoi-Cortez - Needs her own thread.....


swordfish

Recommended Posts

Having friends (clients) in the Empire state particularly in NYC I find them on both sides of the debate.  Bottom line, this company was planning on using the tax breaks (which were honestly a little too much) to upgrade an extremely blighted property in an extremely blighted section of the town in return for having an HQ in NYC.  I try to consider the source(s).  Amazon wants to produce a product (fulfillment and transportation) at the lowest cost it can, so it will lean that way and did.  Whereas AOC and her side of anti-corporate protesters see Amazon coming in as a bully.  In the end, those 25,000 jobs will go elsewhere and the added state and local revenues from the corporate profits and employee withholding will as well, and that section in Long Island City will remain a defunct piece of decay in a dying state already losing revenue paying companies......

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

In her eyes, she struck a blow to corporate America, so it's a win. In reality NY is off the hook for the incentives, so it's a win for NY. In the long run, the area is out of 25K jobs. I'm still not convinced this was a good deal for who got it. 

While I appreciate her general fervor, she needs to be careful that she's not reading her own press releases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, swordfish said:

Having friends (clients) in the Empire state particularly in NYC I find them on both sides of the debate.  Bottom line, this company was planning on using the tax breaks (which were honestly a little too much) to upgrade an extremely blighted property in an extremely blighted section of the town in return for having an HQ in NYC.  I try to consider the source(s).  Amazon wants to produce a product (fulfillment and transportation) at the lowest cost it can, so it will lean that way and did.  Whereas AOC and her side of anti-corporate protesters see Amazon coming in as a bully.  In the end, those 25,000 jobs will go elsewhere and the added state and local revenues from the corporate profits and employee withholding will as well, and that section in Long Island City will remain a defunct piece of decay in a dying state already losing revenue paying companies......

  

I've wondered this since it was announced. Logistically, how good of a fit is Long Island, tax breaks/reduced property costs or not?

I'm sure with Amazon pulling the plug there are already some big winners and big losers with regards to property sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leftist Tax Schemes Bash the Rich, but Depend on Their Success: http://reason.com/archives/2019/02/15/leftist-tax-schemes-bash-the-rich-but-de

Quote

Nineteenth century historian Thomas Carlyle called economics "the dismal science" because of its predictions about scarcity and poverty. Those are immutable features of all societies, which explains why his snarky term remains widely used. Modern economics writer Thomas Sowell captured the same idea, but expanded upon it. "The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it," he wrote. "The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics."

In other words, even though the laws of economics are as unchangeable as the laws of physics, the laws of politics remain unchanged, too. Elected officials will always promise more free stuff for the populace that is affordable once, they say, the rich pay their "fair share." They claim the increased tax rates and new spending will not have any ill effect on the economy, either. These old ideas are making a big comeback as the Democratic Party's progressive wing expands its influence in Washington, D.C. Free-market folks need to start pushing back.

I promised not to pay attention to U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the lefty Democratic Congresswoman from New York, given that her half-baked ideas do not merit serious debate. However, conservatives have picked on her every move, thus turning her into a star. So now we have no choice but to pay attention when she says, "I do think a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don't have access to public health is wrong," as she recently told a reporter.

 

We actually are discussing whether the government should allow the existence of billionaires. Here is an economic conundrum. The progressive experiment depends on wealthy people's continued economic success. California, which smugly touts itself as the national resistance to the Trump administration, is particularly dependent on tax revenues from billionaires and capital gains taxes. Earth to Ocasio-Cortez and others who share her views: Those universal healthcare proposals that California Democrats are cooking up could not move forward if not for the large share of wealthy people existing in the Golden State.

A CNBC News report from late December focused on how that month's stock-market drops were "very bad news" for California's state budget. The market has largely recovered, but the article noted a fact we should all keep in mind: "(T)he state's top 1 percent of personal income tax earners—roughly 164,000 tax returns—generate about half of the personal income taxes in California." That sounds like they are paying well beyond their "fair share."

No wonder the Franchise Tax Board zealously polices whether high-income Californians who claim to have moved out of state actually have moved their permanent residences elsewhere. No wonder state officials noticed when 138 residents fled after voters approved Proposition 30 tax increases in 2012. That is a small number in a state with nearly 40 million people, but it matters if they are particularly wealthy. Last year, even Democratic legislators expressed concern after the federal tax bill reduced deductions for wealthy Californians.

This progressive approach to income taxes is reminiscent of their approach to tobacco taxation. They want fewer billionaires to exist and want to level the playing field by approving punitive, confiscatory tax rates. Every time they increase these income-tax rates, however, the state becomes more dependent on the revenue from the wealthiest people. Likewise, lawmakers pass more tobacco taxes to discourage smoking, but instead the states have become addicted to tens of billions of dollars in revenue from their sales. A CBS report from 2012 found that only 3 percent of the money from taxes and settlements were funding anti-tobacco programs.

Here are some more dismal truths. Government officials want as much revenue as possible so it can spend it with wild abandon. There will never be enough to satisfy them. In California, record-setting revenue has not stopped the calls for new taxes—on commercial properties, for instance—to fund ever-more costly programs.

Government is like rust. It never sleeps. Thinking of Ocasio-Cortez's statement, maybe it is more like ringworm: it keeps spreading unless one takes definitive steps to stop it. Returning to the old days of super-high tax rates is a fool's errand. As the Cato Institute's Chris Edwards wrote, "globalization has dramatically changed the economy over recent decades," leading to movable tax bases that can escape the clutches of the big spenders.

Increasing the top rate from 37 percent to 70 percent, as Ocasio-Cortez and other progressives now are proposing, means a massive wealth transfer from the private to the public sector. This is the new big push from the left. The right deserves brickbats, too, given the Trump administration's soaring deficits and its own costly spending priorities. This is a dismal situation, but I prefer Sowell to Carlyle. The problem is politics, not economics.

 

  • Disdain 1
  • Kill me now 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

And he speaks for all conservatives;)

I wonder what caused him to be so bold with his rhetoric.  No Klan talk when Obama, the Muslim, socialist, communist, Kenyan born, Muslim brotherhood supporting destroyer of American Greatness was in office.

What could have possibly changed that gave him the cajones to print Jim Crow Era nonsense in 2019??

Emboldened flunkies...."The Real New Normal" 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BARRYOSAMA said:

I wonder what caused him to be so bold with his rhetoric.  No Klan talk when Obama, the Muslim, socialist, communist, Kenyan born, Muslim brotherhood supporting destroyer of American Greatness was in office.

What could have possibly changed that gave him the cajones to print Jim Crow Era nonsense in 2019??

Emboldened flunkies...."The Real New Normal" 

I’m sure his contact info is available since he OWNS the paper, why don’t you contact him and ask him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

I’m sure his contact info is available since he OWNS the paper, why don’t you contact him and ask him?

It's a print only newspaper with no web site.  If you find an email for Goodloe Sutton I will ask him and CC you.

Still scratching my head as to why he might have been so brazen in 2019 to make these comments that seem to embarrass much of his own state.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BARRYOSAMA said:

It's a print only newspaper with no web site.  If you find an email for Goodloe Sutton I will ask him and CC you.

Still scratching my head as to why he might have been so brazen in 2019 to make these comments that seem to embarrass much of his own state.

Contact information, including a mailing address and telephone number can be found here:  http://drp.stparchive.com/Archive/DRP/DRP12132018p02.php

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BARRYOSAMA said:

It's a print only newspaper with no web site.  If you find an email for Goodloe Sutton I will ask him and CC you.

Still scratching my head as to why he might have been so brazen in 2019 to make these comments that seem to embarrass much of his own state.

How the hell would I know? I've never heard of the guy or the Op/Ed until you posted it. More to the point of my original post that you quoted. I was being sarcastic, he DOESN'T speak for all conservatives. I know, semantics.

According to Google, their phone number is (334) 813-5444

Edited by Impartial_Observer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a public user reply form.  Unsecured site but I rolled the dice.

Here is what I sent:

Mr. Sutton

Why were you so emboldened to make such an inflammatory statement in your recent editorial?  Any insight would be welcome.

Good Day,

Everett Stokes

I will keep you posted.  No answer to a phone call. It would seem that Mr. Goodloe has gone on radio silence after all these unfair, fake news attacks on a true southern gentleman.  

 I got your sarcasm.  If he doesn't speak for ALL conservatives, he must, in your estimation, speak for SOME conservatives.  Is this the point you were trying to make?  

Looks like Mr. Sutton also likes to attack NFL players, Muslims, Mexicans, and call women nasty names.  Hmmmm.  I wonder if he only speaks for the 3000 subscribers or is there a larger narrative here and that Sutton is just one example.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, foxbat said:

Not a question of must, but does he?

Hence my sarcastic comment about him speaking for all conservatives. Because every time some id1ot  makes a stupid comment like this, we all get stuck with it.  

Conversely Crazy Uncle Joe says "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." and everyone laughs it off, ohhhh, that's just Crazy Uncle Joe.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." and everyone laughs it off, ohhhh, that's just Crazy Uncle Joe.

It's a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

Hence my sarcastic comment about him speaking for all conservatives. Because every time some id1ot  makes a stupid comment like this, we all get stuck with it.  

Conversely Crazy Uncle Joe says "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." and everyone laughs it off, ohhhh, that's just Crazy Uncle Joe.

Was he talking about this gentlemen?:

jackie-robinson.jpg&w=800&c=sc&poi=face&

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

I don't know if I buy that....there was probably Klan talk plenty (unfortunately) when BO was president.  Perhaps, the media may decide when issues become front page news......

Upon further investigation there was. I wonder why this story caught caught fire....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TrojanDad said:

I don't know...purely speculation on my part...but it feels today, an agenda of new media (on both sides of the political spectrum) dictate what catches fire....as they attempt to reach their audiences.

Its about the politics....and ultimately the $$.  

Clicks no doubt drive decisions.  Wonder why the MSM thought this story might get clicks....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...