Kamala is pretty damn close man, unrecognized capital gain taxes that’s pretty damn Marxist. Californian her home state is a sneeze away from full blown Marxism. Her VP choice has massive ties to the CCP. Harris makes Obama look like a republican.

---

He really shows his color when he gets on the Putin isn’t the bad guy stump and it’s the nazi Ukrainians fighting for the NWO monologue.

Taxing unrealized capital gains is not an idea Marx talked about.  Marx was about confiscation.  He wanted the whole thing, now.  Not a little bite every year.
The idea of using tax policy to make society more equitable can be credited to a lot of people, for sure Henry George, not all of these people are socialists.
But even George and his school didn't advocate taxing intangible wealth.  That's a new one.  Guys like George and Marx might have thought of it, and dismissed it as pointless, unworkable, and stupid.  Which it is.
Harris is either playing dumb or dumb herself.  Her stuff is too dumb for the academics who study Marxism, Georgism, Keynesianism, Hayekism, etc.

I mean her support and desire to implement is in the spirit of Marxism. Ultimately Marxist seek any path to eliminate, confiscate or restrict individual wealth and ownership for central control. I don’t think anyone argues the idea much less the implementation of an uncapitalized gains tax is a fast path to economic ruin. 

There has not been much her campaign has been specific about, probably by design, but this one is disastrous. Now her VP he is as close to a CCP asset as you can get.

---

It's been 43 days since the Democrats tried to kill Donald Trump and failed.

I heard on Twitter today that Trump.was actually behind it.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I did not claim to understand America's interest better than the average American.  I said the KGB and CIA understand our national interest better that the average American.

"National interest" is really a matter of personal opinion and is largely dependent on an individual's perspective.  Crime, inflation, housing, border security, economy, drug addiction, climate change, fair elections........take your pick.  Ask 10 people at random what the single most important issue is, and you may hear ten different answers.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status...2HWVg&s=19

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Taxing unrealized capital gains is not an idea Marx talked about.  Marx was about confiscation.  He wanted the whole thing, now.  Not a little bite every year.
The idea of using tax policy to make society more equitable can be credited to a lot of people, for sure Henry George, not all of these people are socialists.
But even George and his school didn't advocate taxing intangible wealth.  That's a new one.  Guys like George and Marx might have thought of it, and dismissed it as pointless, unworkable, and stupid.  Which it is.
Harris is either playing dumb or dumb herself.  Her stuff is too dumb for the academics who study Marxism, Georgism, Keynesianism, Hayekism, etc.

I mean her support and desire to implement is in the spirit of Marxism. Ultimately Marxist seek any path to eliminate, confiscate or restrict individual wealth and ownership for central control. I don’t think anyone argues the idea much less the implementation of an uncapitalized gains tax is a fast path to economic ruin. 

There has not been much her campaign has been specific about, probably by design, but this one is disastrous. 

I think you mean unrealized gains.  It's a crazy, unworkable idea.  How much gain does a person have in a painting he bought 40 years ago?  Or in a unique business?  I have seen a business appraised at one value, only to sell for 10 times that value a couple of years later.  The only way to get an accurate valuation on anything is to put it on the market and sell it.  That's why we tax realized gains, not unrealized gains.  Because a transaction is easily measured, but without a transaction taking place, an asset valuation is just a guess.  

And then, if we tax unrealized gains, how will we treat unrealized losses?  Would the government hand out refunds?  

And how many court cases would there be when the owner of the asset disputes the valuation the government wants to put on that asset?  If I own a Picasso, and the government says it has gained in value, from 9 million dollars last year to 10 million dollars this year, I might go to court to dispute it.  We'd be starting up a whole new industry of lawyers, accountants, and appraisers who exist just to dispute the unrealized gains claimed by the government, and the tax they want to assess.  

If we put a wealth tax on wealthy people, based on unrealized gains in their assets, how many wealthy people will just leave the country?  That happened in France before they repealed their wealth tax.

---

I mean her support and desire to implement is in the spirit of Marxism. Ultimately Marxist seek any path to eliminate, confiscate or restrict individual wealth and ownership for central control. I don’t think anyone argues the idea much less the implementation of an uncapitalized gains tax is a fast path to economic ruin. 

There has not been much her campaign has been specific about, probably by design, but this one is disastrous. 

I think you mean unrealized gains.  It's a crazy, unworkable idea.  How much gain does a person have in a painting he bought 40 years ago?  Or in a unique business?  I have seen a business appraised at one value, only to sell for 10 times that value a couple of years later.  The only way to get an accurate valuation on anything is to put it on the market and sell it.  That's why we tax realized gains, not unrealized gains.  Because a transaction is easily measured, but without a transaction taking place, an asset valuation is just a guess.  

And then, if we tax unrealized gains, how will we treat unrealized losses?  Would the government hand out refunds?  

And how many court cases would there be when the owner of the asset disputes the valuation the government wants to put on that asset?  If I own a Picasso, and the government says it has gained in value, from 9 million dollars last year to 10 million dollars this year, I might go to court to dispute it.  We'd be starting up a whole new industry of lawyers, accountants, and appraisers who exist just to dispute the unrealized gains claimed by the government, and the tax they want to assess.  

If we put a wealth tax on wealthy people, based on unrealized gains in their assets, how many wealthy people will just leave the country?  That happened in France before they repealed their wealth tax.

Canada just did this. It will cost them a ton of tax dollars and investment money in their country.  Anyone that could have sold any assests before this law can go into effect and now no longer are doing business there.

The last time the US raised corporate taxes like is proposed all the Pharma companies moved their HQ to Dublin.  They came back once Trump lowered the tax rate. The people in Dublin are all for this, it is a cottage industry there.

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

Kamala and the DNC in general agree with Marx on a very high, 30,000 foot level of "if you see a problem, blame the rich."
But they have a lot of company on that one. At different points in history most religions have agreed about that one. St Francis of Asisi, famously denounced wealth and he has followers even today. Lots of people dislike the rich. But they arrive at that point from different places and they come away from it with very different plans.

Kamala is not a Marxist. No one in the DNC is.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Kamala and the DNC in general agree with Marx on a very high, 30,000 foot level of "if you see a problem, blame the rich."
But they have a lot of company on that one.  At different points in history most religions have agreed about that one. St Francis of Asisi, famously denounced wealth and he has followers even today. Lots of people dislike the rich.  But they arrive at that point from different places and they come away from it with very different plans. 

Kamala is not a Marxist.  No one in the DNC is.

Lucky2Last also blames the rich.  Maybe he's a secret Marxist.

---

Kamala and the DNC in general agree with Marx on a very high, 30,000 foot level of "if you see a problem, blame the rich."
But they have a lot of company on that one. At different points in history most religions have agreed about that one. St Francis of Asisi, famously denounced wealth and he has followers even today. Lots of people dislike the rich. But they arrive at that point from different places and they come away from it with very different plans.

Kamala is not a Marxist. No one in the DNC is.

It's not the rich that are the problem. It's the rich with globalist ideologies and beliefs that then buy up their politicial pawns with their wealth that are the problem.

We have a "democracy" here, when, it's just a plutocracy using it to their benefit the majority of the time.

Especially through our educational system and MIC.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

The rich are a problem, too. And, by rich, I am not talking about the couple you know up the road that makes a million dollars a year. I'm talking about the billionaires who can literally prevent free markets and freedom of expression through their political and economic influence. But, yeah, other than that, it's mostly the global elites.

---

Kamala and the DNC in general agree with Marx on a very high, 30,000 foot level of "if you see a problem, blame the rich."
But they have a lot of company on that one.  At different points in history most religions have agreed about that one. St Francis of Asisi, famously denounced wealth and he has followers even today. Lots of people dislike the rich.  But they arrive at that point from different places and they come away from it with very different plans. 

Kamala is not a Marxist.  No one in the DNC is.

Universal healthcare, nationalized education, universal basic income, unrealized gains taxation, firearm confiscation, mandatory insurance participation, all major platforms of the modern day progressive left over the last 15 years. Your right Karl Marx wasn’t radical enough for the DNC but that platform is a Marxist platform and Harris has on record advocated or worked for administrations that advocated those polices.

---

I mean her support and desire to implement is in the spirit of Marxism. Ultimately Marxist seek any path to eliminate, confiscate or restrict individual wealth and ownership for central control. I don’t think anyone argues the idea much less the implementation of an uncapitalized gains tax is a fast path to economic ruin. 

There has not been much her campaign has been specific about, probably by design, but this one is disastrous. 

I think you mean unrealized gains.  It's a crazy, unworkable idea.  How much gain does a person have in a painting he bought 40 years ago?  Or in a unique business?  I have seen a business appraised at one value, only to sell for 10 times that value a couple of years later.  The only way to get an accurate valuation on anything is to put it on the market and sell it.  That's why we tax realized gains, not unrealized gains.  Because a transaction is easily measured, but without a transaction taking place, an asset valuation is just a guess.  

And then, if we tax unrealized gains, how will we treat unrealized losses?  Would the government hand out refunds?  

And how many court cases would there be when the owner of the asset disputes the valuation the government wants to put on that asset?  If I own a Picasso, and the government says it has gained in value, from 9 million dollars last year to 10 million dollars this year, I might go to court to dispute it.  We'd be starting up a whole new industry of lawyers, accountants, and appraisers who exist just to dispute the unrealized gains claimed by the government, and the tax they want to assess.  

If we put a wealth tax on wealthy people, based on unrealized gains in their assets, how many wealthy people will just leave the country?  That happened in France before they repealed their wealth tax.

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I think you mean unrealized gains.  It's a crazy, unworkable idea.  How much gain does a person have in a painting he bought 40 years ago?  Or in a unique business?  I have seen a business appraised at one value, only to sell for 10 times that value a couple of years later.  The only way to get an accurate valuation on anything is to put it on the market and sell it.  That's why we tax realized gains, not unrealized gains.  Because a transaction is easily measured, but without a transaction taking place, an asset valuation is just a guess.  

And then, if we tax unrealized gains, how will we treat unrealized losses?  Would the government hand out refunds?  

And how many court cases would there be when the owner of the asset disputes the valuation the government wants to put on that asset?  If I own a Picasso, and the government says it has gained in value, from 9 million dollars last year to 10 million dollars this year, I might go to court to dispute it.  We'd be starting up a whole new industry of lawyers, accountants, and appraisers who exist just to dispute the unrealized gains claimed by the government, and the tax they want to assess.  

If we put a wealth tax on wealthy people, based on unrealized gains in their assets, how many wealthy people will just leave the country?  That happened in France before they repealed their wealth tax.

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

There’s a segment of libertarians and conservatives that are never going to back Trump. It doesn’t make them any less conservative or libertarian, Trump is hard to support. I’m literally only supporting Trump because Harris is so radical I have no choice. I don’t think Trump is that much better but at this point my focus is just avoid the cliff we are barraling towards.

---

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

There’s a segment of libertarians and conservatives that are never going to back Trump. It doesn’t make them any less conservative or libertarian, Trump is hard to support. I’m literally only supporting Trump because Harris is so radical I have no choice. I don’t think Trump is that much better but at this point my focus is just avoid the cliff we are barraling towards.

My concern is after this election. Once we get to 2028 I will have a hard time voting for either party. I just don't see much hope or promise out there.

Neither side should have a boogeyman to finger point at anymore.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

I think you mean unrealized gains.  It's a crazy, unworkable idea.  How much gain does a person have in a painting he bought 40 years ago?  Or in a unique business?  I have seen a business appraised at one value, only to sell for 10 times that value a couple of years later.  The only way to get an accurate valuation on anything is to put it on the market and sell it.  That's why we tax realized gains, not unrealized gains.  Because a transaction is easily measured, but without a transaction taking place, an asset valuation is just a guess.  

And then, if we tax unrealized gains, how will we treat unrealized losses?  Would the government hand out refunds?  

And how many court cases would there be when the owner of the asset disputes the valuation the government wants to put on that asset?  If I own a Picasso, and the government says it has gained in value, from 9 million dollars last year to 10 million dollars this year, I might go to court to dispute it.  We'd be starting up a whole new industry of lawyers, accountants, and appraisers who exist just to dispute the unrealized gains claimed by the government, and the tax they want to assess.  

If we put a wealth tax on wealthy people, based on unrealized gains in their assets, how many wealthy people will just leave the country?  That happened in France before they repealed their wealth tax.

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

I like some of Trump's policies and I like some of what I believe will be Harris' policies.  So, when I make up my mind, it might come down to what kind of person I want in the White House.

---

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

I like some of Trump's policies and I like some of what I believe will be Harris' policies.  So, when I make up my mind, it might come down to what kind of person I want in the White House.

Whaf Harris policies do you like that aren't stolen from Trump? Can't wait to hear this.

---

Interesting that you understand this and still believe Trump is the enemy.

I like some of Trump's policies and I like some of what I believe will be Harris' policies.  So, when I make up my mind, it might come down to what kind of person I want in the White House.

List the policies you like from both candidates. Interested to see what your two column notes look like.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

I like some of Trump's policies and I like some of what I believe will be Harris' policies.  So, when I make up my mind, it might come down to what kind of person I want in the White House.

Whaf Harris policies do you like that aren't stolen from Trump? Can't wait to hear this.

Pro-Harris:  I believe man-made climate change is real and we should try to do something about it.  I believe we should continue to support Ukraine.  I believe we should continue to support NATO and we should continue to build alliances with other countries.  I don't like Trump's proposal to put massive tariffs on imported products.  I don't want to try to round up every illegal and deport them.  I don't want to put prayer back in the schools, and I am mildly pro-choice on abortion.  

Pro-Trump: I don't like affirmative action or any race or sex-based "solutions" to perceived problems.  I do want to get control of the border.  I don't think soaking the rich is a good idea at all.  I am totally against a wealth tax.  I don't want to pay off student loans.  I don't want to do price controls and I don't like her anti-gouging proposals.  I am for free markets.  

I'm sure I can come up with some others, but those are good examples.  Caldrac asked for both, so I did both.

Neither one of them is addressing the biggest and most dangerous thing facing this country, and that is the massive federal debt.

---

Whaf Harris policies do you like that aren't stolen from Trump? Can't wait to hear this.

Pro-Harris:  I believe man-made climate change is real and we should try to do something about it.  I believe we should continue to support Ukraine.  I believe we should continue to support NATO and we should continue to build alliances with other countries.  I don't like Trump's proposal to put massive tariffs on imported products.  I don't want to try to round up every illegal and deport them.  I don't want to put prayer back in the schools, and I am mildly pro-choice on abortion.  

Pro-Trump: I don't like affirmative action or any race or sex-based "solutions" to perceived problems.  I do want to get control of the border.  I don't think soaking the rich is a good idea at all.  I am totally against a wealth tax.  I don't want to pay off student loans.  I don't want to do price controls and I don't like her anti-gouging proposals.  I am for free markets.  

I'm sure I can come up with some others, but those are good examples.  Caldrac asked for both, so I did both.

Continue to support NATO? Trump agrees with that, but rightfully wants everyone to pay their fair share, which they clearly aren't. 

The Harris administration excluding Elon Musk from their EV summit tells me she isn't serious about addressing climate change. 

The threat of tariffs make companies think twice about moving their operations to other countries. I don't see a negative in that.

Agree on every pro Trump point

---

Whaf Harris policies do you like that aren't stolen from Trump? Can't wait to hear this.

Pro-Harris:  I believe man-made climate change is real and we should try to do something about it.  I believe we should continue to support Ukraine.  I believe we should continue to support NATO and we should continue to build alliances with other countries.  I don't like Trump's proposal to put massive tariffs on imported products.  I don't want to try to round up every illegal and deport them.  I don't want to put prayer back in the schools, and I am mildly pro-choice on abortion.  

Pro-Trump: I don't like affirmative action or any race or sex-based "solutions" to perceived problems.  I do want to get control of the border.  I don't think soaking the rich is a good idea at all.  I am totally against a wealth tax.  I don't want to pay off student loans.  I don't want to do price controls and I don't like her anti-gouging proposals.  I am for free markets.  

I'm sure I can come up with some others, but those are good examples.  Caldrac asked for both, so I did both.

Neither one of them is addressing the biggest and most dangerous thing facing this country, and that is the massive federal debt.

Interesting takes. I am more of a Nationalist. I don't want us involved with Ukraine, Israel or ANY foreign interest anymore until we at least get our house in order first.

Which means resolving the federal debt issue, the border issue and tightening up on other loose spending habits. Taking care of our working class, our veterans and our retired tax payers.

I am 50/50 on the prayer and national pride stuff in schools, along with the abortion stuff. I think Trump had the right of it though, by leaving the abortion stuff up to the states and backing out of it federally.

I think the same measures should be taken in the public school system as well. Leave it up to the public to decide what their kids see and pray to. That would at least appeal and appease some of the undecided I think.

We'll see what happens. I know we're not going to get everything though. Regardless of who wins. I feel like a direct conflict is inevitable with Iran or a failed state in the middle east.

I think Ukraine and Russia's conflict needs to be put to bed for good with peace being brokered so both countries can find some degree of common ground.

With or without NATO involvement. It needs to be addressed with as little as much bloodshed as possible and especially at the least expense possible to the US Taxpayer.

The other issue I want to see real consideration and stabs taken at, is, this crazy amount of monopolization of the housing market being gobbled up by massive asset companies to turn into a renter's market.

There needs to be some form of guidelines or caps put on this... for the sake of what's left of the American Dream.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."