One of the more difficult visual jokes contests. I chose ADD one, and it seemed many other afflicted participants did as well.
Might be fascinating if you can get up to speed on the latest Julie Kelly fiasco on Twitter, and discuss it with King John today. She is the local MAGA Queen all over every show on 560 and 890. As my QAnon friends might say *connect the dots*.
You were critical of the DNC for not having a pro Palestinian speaker. I think it probably worked out better this way as we would have heard a lot of ‘both sides’ complaints and it could have cost more votes than it would have saved.
As they also try to maintain distance between Ilhan Omar and Walz. They for sure didn't want anyone asking any questions about what actual policy position Harris has. Essentially the speaker would have asked for an immediate cease fire and a ban on weapons shipments, and Harris would have had to say no or rehash the 'Biden is working on it' line.
To those "hold your nose" folks who state that they will vote for Trump for his "policies" claim its worth overlooking his multiple character flaws to push a specific agenda they personally favor. But while childish behavior may be tolerable, his capacity -- and stated intention -- to damage the tenets that hold the US together is not.
Robert Reich says it best in his 8/23 post:
"The essence of Trump’s failure as president — and the fundamental reason he doesn’t merit a second term — is not that he has behaved in childish and vindictive ways or is “weird.” It is that he sacrificed — and continues to sacrifice — the processes and institutions that undergird America to achieve his own selfish aims. He abused the trust we place in a president to preserve and protect the nation’s capacity for self-government. Trump is a traitor."
To vote for Trump because you like his policies better is like choosing Mussolini because he got public transportation to work. To choose policies you favor by voting for someone who has already been established as someone willing to overthrow democracy is traitorous to our Country, in my view.
It boggles my mind. What policies are those exactly that they like? Child separations at the border? Mass deportations? Dismantling regulatory agencies? Exiting NATO? Federal restrictions on reproductive rights? The list goes on. It's completely unbelievable that there are people that want the country to go in that direction, and yet so many do. Absolutely heartbreaking.
I guarantee you, if the DNC had caved to the protestors wanting a speaker, it would've been one of the Pro-Hamas, Jew hating scum who would've attacked Jews incessantly!
Even if a prepared script was given to the DNC beforehand, that's not what would've been used or said!
I don’t know about “incessantly”, but they certainly would have attacked subtly and with their usual arsenal of winks, nods and dog whistles. Whenever “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” is declared, it goes without saying that the words “of Jews” are being omitted for PR purposes.
I think that “Free Palestine” is a perfectly honorable slogan, as long as it is appended with “from Hamas”!
"Further, it was a mistake for convention organizers not to give a representative from the pro-Palestinian Uncommitted Movement a speaking slot on Thursday night."
I didn't watch any of the convention, I never do, so it wasn't a protest, but I agree 100% with your statement. The Democratic Party must also set itself apart from the GOP by actually being a democratic party that accounts for the spectrum of views of its members and by not providing them a speaking spot that made the Democratic Party look a bit less democratic.
BTW, one thing that I NEVER hear addressed in the Palestinian debate is that they were never compensated for their loss in the creation of the state of Israel, either by the Europeans who gave away what was not theirs to give, or the Israelis when they created Israel. The Palestinians had title to the property that Britain gave away.
IMO, this is the crux of the problem, the theft was never dealt with. The Europeans should have given or at least offered their Jewish victims European territory for the creation of Israel. If that failed, then the Europeans should have compensated fully the people who's land they were taking. Had that happened, the problems that we've been witnessing since the end of WWII wouldn't have happened. Problems yes, but not to the scale. Dispossessed people will not remain quiet victims.
The Palestinians in 1947 refused to compromise at all. Many residents in Mandatory Palestine were already Jews (not a majority though), so it was a matter of dividing the land they all, Palestinian and Jew, lived in. Two states were offered and the Palestinians refused, they wanted all or nothing. They got nothing. Now Israel is so used to having it all, they will never cede any part of what they consider Israel to create a Palestinian state. Bad decisions all around and their descendants have become even more entrenched. I believe a two-state solution is the only way forward but the parties actually involved have to believe it too.
i won't disagree with you - but please provide us with a link to a credible source that supports your contention that 'Two states were offered and the Palestinians refused, they wanted all or nothing.'
Palestinian Arabs refused the UN proposed partition into a Palestinian Arab state and Israeli Jewish state with a shared, internationally overseen, Jerusalem. Israel accepted, formed a country, and then decided they wanted more (including all of Jerusalem) and the 1948 war ensued and the Israelis took over land that would have been Palestine under the UN proposal for a partition. At no point did the Palestinian Arabs and their allies agree to the partition (2 state solution) that almost everyone outside the middle east *still* believes is the best way forward.
Europe has not got a very good history of being welcoming to the Jews. I have visited the towns where my ancestors migrated from. Those who stayed are gone.
David Leitschuh : curious as to just what policies/programs trump actually enacted, what promises he actually kept. Other than tax breaks for the 1%, can't think of anything he fulfilled. As for tough on security, he's a laughing stock around the world.
Rima, what do you mean? Don't we have a wall between the US and Mexico that Mexico paid for? And don't we have Trump's amazing, better than anything EVER health plan? Surely at the end of the Trump presidency we were all far healthier than ever before in the history of our country.
Haha, but careful. EZ chastised me a ways back for using sarcasm, so I don’t on his forum. I explained to him that I had just read a Huppke column and was still dripping with it.
Appointing conservative justices to the SC and District courts
Tariffs on imports from China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Restrictions on tech exports to China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Restrictions on US government tech purchases from China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Demanding NATO members meet their defense spending commitments (which on only 18 of 31 members do as of 2024)
New NAFTA trade deal
Passing a tax cut bill (I will expand on this in a separate note)
Revised energy policies to expand domestic oil production
Withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement
Withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal
Attempted and failed on infrastructure bills
Attempted and failed on DACA and immigration bills
Attempted and failed on building the wall
Tried and largely failed to reduce foreign US military deployments, but did not enter new areas
Tried and failed to make a nuclear deal with N. Korea
Promised to solve mid-east problem - endorsed single state solution, moved embassy to Jerusalem, obtained deal between Israel and UAE and Bahrain, initiated deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel
There are probably others. But that is what came to mind. One might not like his policies, but he did try to deliver. I think he lacks any policy knowledge or depth but relies on others. He is also a terrible politician and might have accomplished more if he was better.
Marc, interesting that you do not mention how he handled the Covid epidemic and his related policies.
You know, first ignore it, blame China, then explain it would burn out in the summer, then suggest non effective potions and finally begin a vaccine program.
I think his response to this issue was a key component as to why an incumbent President lost the election.
Even with the vaccine, more Americans died under the Biden administration. It was a complicated issue. Would Trump have lost the election if voters had known the death toll going forward?
David, Trump’s delay on this issue resulted in more deaths than was necessary.
It was this increase in deaths after Trump initially downplayed the pandemic that caused some folks to support Biden.
I also believe some people attributed deaths under Biden to “belong” to Trump due to his initial delay and misinformation campaigns.
As to your question about Trump losing the election if voters had known the death toll going forward. Moot point, I deal in what happened not hypotheticals.
David, we are talking in real time not future time. Anecdotally both me and many of my friends took the view that some of the folks dying during the Biden administration “belonged” to Trump and voted accordingly. Nothing hypothetical about it.
Certainly you can take the view it was Biden’s fault, but no hypothetical thinking is necessary here.
Trump's refusal to acknowledge the severity of the pandemic and his vanity-based refusal to wear a mask (to model behavior to help avoid preventable transmissions) - due to his not wanting to smear his daily make up - resulted in his cult followers not only similarly refusing to wear masks to help cut down on transmissions, but also to become hostile to science-based health measures (i.e., COVID vaccines) that would have cut down on COVID transmissions. One of the very clear correlations epidemiologists were able to show post pandemic was that heavily Red counts had much lower COVID vaccine rates, and correspondingly higher COVID deaths AFTER vaccines became available. IMO, Trump's sheer vanity probably caused tens of thousands of preventable COVID deaths and who knows how many preventable transmissions of the virus.
I agree on the impact on the election. I was just responding to the 'what policies did he enact and promises he kept' question. I agree that he was mostly daffy on covid and joined in the drunken-sailor spending that was part of the response. The vaccine program was a big success and there are a lot of serious people that see the evidence pointing to China. There is also a lot of data to show the shutdowns of businesses and schools were overdone and had huge negative consequences. But I wouldn't say Trump provided coherent or effective leadership on those issues. Instead, we got a lot of mask nonsense.
You think that that withdrawing from the Paris accords, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the deal to keep Iran non-nuclear were *positives*? I thought we were avoiding sarcasm here.
I chuckled at the Junior Playable Bagpipes gag, even though I don’t share the spirit of it at all. I’ve always found the sound of bagpipes to be sublime, and could never understand why they get a bad rap. Same thing with accordions.
This is particularly puzzling when one considers the glowing, knee jerk praise that automatically gets thrown toward so much contemporary music (even though most of it is worthless trash), often for no other reason than that it’s what the kids are listening to these days, and of course, appearances of hipness must be maintained.
Please. I’ll take “Amazing Grace” on bagpipes at Mr. Spock’s funeral any day, or Lawrence Welk proclaiming, “And now for my accordion solo. Would you like to join me Myron?”
Bagpipes are kind of like the oboe. Played well it's wonderful. But new ("junior") players are often horrifying to listen to. How my parents survived my first years as an oboist is beyond me.
Those of us who lived in apartments during the days when we were learning clarinet (two kids downstairs and I in autumn 1965) had no garages to retreat to. Our parents, siblings, and neighbors all deserve medals. No wonder so many parents acquiesced to acoustic guitars as an alternative!
Since I’d never heard (of) them until today, no, but now that I have, thumbs up! I don’t know that I’d want to hear one played for any extended length of time like I would bagpipes, but their drone does have an otherworldly allure. They seem like an ancient precursor for that electronic talk box thing that Joe Walsh and Peter Frampton made famous. Thanks for the tip.
I want to comment on what David said. It's understandable. My family is fill of liberals that want the border better controlled. Trump has lots of policies not much being talked about. His tax cuts were beneficial primarily for high wage earners. The general theory is that when the rich get richer, some of it will be passed down. That has not been happening. He has made clear his intention to eviscerate needed social plans with no thoughts on what else to do. He spent a good deal of his term upsetting our allies while praising the most repressive dictators. But here's a key point. Congress does most of the heavy lifting. There is nothing novel in anything Trump wants and they can be done without him if the Republicans take over Congress. If they don't, it's because it's not what the voters wanted. That leaves us with a vile man who serves as a poor example of a leader. Furthermore, some of his plans are downright horrifying, which conservatives don't seem to want to address. Sorry David- we can have conservative planning without Trump. Even if Harris is elected, that doesn't mean she'll get all of what she wants and frankly, she hasn't been very specific, either. Obama found out in his second term what the limitations are when opposed by Congress. So I'll take my chances with Harris.
Agreed that the convention came off in a very positive way. The arrangements for space and transportation for the convention attendees seems to have worked well for them. I attribute the success with handling of demonstrations almost entirely to the tiny turnout. I think the largest demonstration was estimated at 3000 people. According to the Trib, the site the city set up with a stage and sound system was mostly unused, with most speakers that had signed up no-shows and the few that spoke with tiny audiences. I think it is pretty clear that only the fringiest fail to see that opposing/embarrassing Harris is a bad idea.
Both the Tribune and Sun Times are reminding us today that the convention is over and Brandon Johnson needs to return to trying to run the city. I have been as critical of him anyone else. I will grant him that he inherited many of the problems he faces. Some of his solutions are inane. I want to put my focus on gambling. That was too easy. Expecting a big boost in revenue from gambling assumed either that the city would either find a whole new slew of gamblers with money to throw away or that existing gamblers could be lured away from suburban venues, Las Vegas, or online. It hasn't happened. I don't think it will. I don't see downtown Chicago as more of a gambling mecca than Aurora, Joliet, or Des Plaines, not to mention northwest Indiana. Now maybe Bally's will find a way to tie gambling together with other things such as downtown entertainment, restaurants, shopping, or something else. I personally don't see it. If Johnson is counting on gambling or taxing people more than they are already taxed, he'd better think again. He also cannot simply rely on Sprinfield, either. And if Trump wins, forget DC. So it's time to get creative, Mr. Mayor. Your ideas and actions have already upset just about anyone not a CTU member.
Bally's is insane if it thinks people are going to go where the Trib printing plant currently is to gamble.
It's an appallingly stupid location for it, out of the way, with terrible traffic problems to get there.
I'm waiting for Bally's to go to Metra & demand them to build a station there, as the UP-N & UP-NW line go right by it.
As for Johnson, he's under orders from his bosses at the rotten teachers union to fire Pedro Martinez, because he sensibly opposes that insane idea of saddling the school board with a billion dollar debt from selling bonds to pay for the obscenely high pay raise the teachers want, most of whom don't actually live in the city, despite the law about it & then send their kids to either suburban schools or as the rotten president of that rotten union does, send her kid to a private school!
Totally agree. Medina is a better location than the permanent one and look at the problems they are having. I have already commented on the CTU issue. The city can't pay it's bills now. How will CTU feel when an auditor tells them to make cus to the pension benefits? And that's before we even mention CTU demands for a raise, more nurses, more aides, more librarians, building repairs, etc. Garry if you had $100,000 in credit card debt, what's the first thing you do? Go out and buy a mansion and a Maserati?
The DNC has been catching g a lot of heat for not allowing a Palestinian speaker. I ask why. Okay, everyone here knows I am biased, being Jewish. I still ask why. The number of speakers already allowed went long into the night. Should there have been a pro- Israel speaker? Lots of speakers pressed for abortion rights. But should there have been a separate speaker just for that? I also have concerns about Ukraine, public education and other issues. How many special interest speakers should there have been? Between street protests, campus protests, media coverage, and widely covered threats not to vote on November from protesters, I'm quite sure Democrats got the message. Giving them a separate convention slot could do nothing but enrage those opposed and give Republicans yet another campaign issue by accusing Democrats of supporting terrorism. To me it was the smart move politically. The protesters say they will sit it out rather than vote for either side? Very unwise! That's like votes for Trump. What do they think they will get from a Trump administration?
Once again, we are treated to the lies and misrepresentation of the Dems and the media on taxes. Harris has endorsed no new income taxes on people making less than $400,000 and to allow the Trump cuts (Tax Cuts and Jobs Act or TCJA) to expire in 2025 (because they were only for the rich and corporations).
But then there are the pesky facts about the TCJA:
The act cut all tax rates for all low and middle income tax payers: 15% went to 12%; 25% went to 22%; and 28% went to 24%. The rates for income over $300,000 – 33% went to 32%; 35% was unchanged; and 39% went to 37%. So allowing the law to expire is a 16% to 25% tax increase on incomes below $300,000 for a couple and $160,000 for an individual.
The standard deduction was doubled in the TCJA. This is an additional tax cut for the 70% of filers that do not itemize, and no cut for higher incomes that do itemize. It effectively creates a zero tax bracket for any couple earning less than $24,000 vs the old $12,000.
The child tax credit was doubled from $1,000 to $2,000 and a new credit of $500 for other dependents was added. The refundable portion (‘refund’ when no tax is paid) was increased 40%.
The mortgage deduction was capped at mortgage values below $750,000. The deduction for state and local taxes was capped at $10,000. Both of these are tax increases for the 70% of higher income people that live in high tax states (mainly income taxes and property taxes).
Increased the floor income for the Alternative Minimum tax to avoid increased taxes on middle income people.
The corporate tax rates were graduated from 15% to 33%, similar to individuals. This was replaced with a flat 21% tax rate. Which was an average increase for all corporate filers.
So the expiration of TCJA will result in a significant tax increase for all filers below $300,000. It will also be a significant tax reduction for incomes between $300,000 and $500,000 and an increase of about 4.8% for incomes above $500,000. Which is why Biden did not propose to repeal the act in his first year despite campaigning against it.
marc - i'm going to assume all of your points on the TCJA are substantially factual - both because you've built credibility with me, and i'm too lazy to fact-check your stuff.
i believe your facts are the truth - but not the whole truth.
so i did a search at perplexity.ai, with the following question -
how did the tax cuts and jobs act help high income taxpayers?
here's the response -
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 provided several benefits that disproportionately helped high-income taxpayers:
Reduced Top Tax Rates
The TCJA lowered the top individual income tax rate from 39.6% to 37%. This directly reduced taxes for the highest earners.
Corporate Tax Cut
The corporate tax rate was slashed from 35% to 21%. This primarily benefited high-income individuals who own corporate stocks or receive pass-through business income.
Pass-Through Business Deduction
The law created a new 20% deduction for qualified business income from pass-through entities like S corporations and partnerships. This deduction tends to benefit higher-income business owners.
Estate Tax Changes
The TCJA doubled the estate tax exemption to $11.2 million for individuals and $22.4 million for married couples. This allows wealthy families to pass on more assets tax-free.
Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Changes
The law significantly increased the AMT exemption amount and phaseout thresholds. This reduced AMT liability for many high-income taxpayers who were previously subject to it.
Capital Gains Treatment
The TCJA retained the preferential tax rates on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. High-income taxpayers tend to have more investment income subject to these lower rates.
While the law did provide some benefits across income levels, analyses have shown that the largest tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income went to taxpayers in the highest income groups. The Tax Policy Center estimated that taxpayers in the top 1% would see an average tax cut of 3.4% of after-tax income, compared to 1.6% for taxpayers in the middle quintile.
I fact checked for you. All of Marc’s numbers were accurate. Allowing the TCJA to expire will increase taxes for joint earners under $300,000 by 16% to 25%, their standard deduction will be halved and the child tax credit will be halved. Making the claim of no increased taxes for anyone making less than $400,000 is less than honest. You are also correct that the top 5% earners who pay approximately 65% of all income tax revenue also benefit from TCJA. Their taxes will also increase.
I think that you hit the crux of the political issue. It is the issue of disproportionality, income inequality, and tax fairness. So even though the law benefits all tax filers under $300,000 annual income, it is a bad law because it also benefits filers above $600,000. I would debate all three of those issues, but my main issue is that coverage is exclusively on that issue and ignores the rest of the bill.
If there was a new law that required a 1% tax increase on all taxpayers, I am sure there would be significant hue and cry about the enormous disproportionate impact on low- and middle-income people. But the much larger change in allowing the TCJA to expire is ignored.
Thanks for your compliment on credibility, I try. I will now quibble with the AI.
Rate cut produces higher dollar benefit for high incomes, agreed,
Estate tax, agreed, Sorry I forgot about that. But I think this had the biggest benefit for middle wealthy - farmers, small business owners, etc. because the very/ultra wealthy already use trust and offshore strategies to avoid the estate tax. Like our governor whose billions are in offshore trusts established by his father and uncles.
The corporate tax cut benefited large stockholders both in share value and increased buybacks and dividends. But large shareholders include all pension funds and mutual funds, which benefits a very broad part of the population. Also, the 21% tax rate is still higher than the rate in all advanced economies, as was demonstrated by Sec. Yellen's successful effort to get 136 countries to agree on a minimum 15% corporate tax rate.
Similarly, the Pass-through QBI deduction does benefit business owners, but also benefits anyone that holds mutual funds which also report the pass through QBI.
The AI is just wrong about the AMT. The Tax Policy Center estimates that the expiration of the TCJA will negatively impact 7.6 million taxpayers. The exemptions primarily benefit payers under $170,000.
Since capital gains and dividend rates did not change, they shouldn't be included. The criticism seems to be that they were not increased, and they won't be due to the expiration.
Finally, in 2016 the top 1% paid 37.3% of total income tax. In 2021 (last year available from the IRS), the top 1% paid 45.8% of total income taxes. The top 10% went from 70% of total income tax paid in 2016 to 76% in 2021. So, the TCJA shifted the tax burden from the bottom to the top.
My tax accountant ran my taxes both under the new tax law (of course) and what it would have been under the old rules. Difference: practically zero. I guess I was neither rich enough or poor enough to benefit (or be penalized).
I am baffled at the continuing nonsense about a cease fire agreement in Gaza. I have no idea how Israel and Hamas can negotiate anything after the Israeli government assassinated the lead Hamas negotiator. What do they say to the next guy = 'don't worry. You can trust us. Unless we get a clear shot. And hey, you know we said our plan was to kill all of you anyway'. And the Hamas guys are BS-ing each other that they have some kind of leverage or that somehow things will get better for them. They must know that there is no permanent cease fire and that they have no future. Maybe the Hamas leaders could trade a hostage release for exile to Iran or Lebanon or Yemen.
Garry, an update. Watching Channel 5 news. Interview with Bally's chairman. Thinks it will do better than Medinal because it will be a "destination". Hotel, restaurants, entertainment venue. Okay, But just for example I can do that in Des Plaines. There is a ballpark across the road. There is both a shopping center and an outlet mall. There are restaurants and the Rosemont Theater. Why would I want to try and navigate downtown Chicago?
One of the more difficult visual jokes contests. I chose ADD one, and it seemed many other afflicted participants did as well.
Might be fascinating if you can get up to speed on the latest Julie Kelly fiasco on Twitter, and discuss it with King John today. She is the local MAGA Queen all over every show on 560 and 890. As my QAnon friends might say *connect the dots*.
Great quips today!!! Spock made me LOL tho! The ADD one made me think of my endless list making tho
yes, super-tough choice today. tho my pick [heirloom furniture] was not in the lead, my 2nd fave [project flow chart] was.
"QAnon friends"?
I would like to get up to speed as to what the second paragraph is about or who Julie Kelly is.
Original Star Trek fan that I am, I had to go with Spock.
You were critical of the DNC for not having a pro Palestinian speaker. I think it probably worked out better this way as we would have heard a lot of ‘both sides’ complaints and it could have cost more votes than it would have saved.
As they also try to maintain distance between Ilhan Omar and Walz. They for sure didn't want anyone asking any questions about what actual policy position Harris has. Essentially the speaker would have asked for an immediate cease fire and a ban on weapons shipments, and Harris would have had to say no or rehash the 'Biden is working on it' line.
To those "hold your nose" folks who state that they will vote for Trump for his "policies" claim its worth overlooking his multiple character flaws to push a specific agenda they personally favor. But while childish behavior may be tolerable, his capacity -- and stated intention -- to damage the tenets that hold the US together is not.
Robert Reich says it best in his 8/23 post:
"The essence of Trump’s failure as president — and the fundamental reason he doesn’t merit a second term — is not that he has behaved in childish and vindictive ways or is “weird.” It is that he sacrificed — and continues to sacrifice — the processes and institutions that undergird America to achieve his own selfish aims. He abused the trust we place in a president to preserve and protect the nation’s capacity for self-government. Trump is a traitor."
To vote for Trump because you like his policies better is like choosing Mussolini because he got public transportation to work. To choose policies you favor by voting for someone who has already been established as someone willing to overthrow democracy is traitorous to our Country, in my view.
It boggles my mind. What policies are those exactly that they like? Child separations at the border? Mass deportations? Dismantling regulatory agencies? Exiting NATO? Federal restrictions on reproductive rights? The list goes on. It's completely unbelievable that there are people that want the country to go in that direction, and yet so many do. Absolutely heartbreaking.
I guarantee you, if the DNC had caved to the protestors wanting a speaker, it would've been one of the Pro-Hamas, Jew hating scum who would've attacked Jews incessantly!
Even if a prepared script was given to the DNC beforehand, that's not what would've been used or said!
I don’t know about “incessantly”, but they certainly would have attacked subtly and with their usual arsenal of winks, nods and dog whistles. Whenever “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” is declared, it goes without saying that the words “of Jews” are being omitted for PR purposes.
I think that “Free Palestine” is a perfectly honorable slogan, as long as it is appended with “from Hamas”!
"Further, it was a mistake for convention organizers not to give a representative from the pro-Palestinian Uncommitted Movement a speaking slot on Thursday night."
I didn't watch any of the convention, I never do, so it wasn't a protest, but I agree 100% with your statement. The Democratic Party must also set itself apart from the GOP by actually being a democratic party that accounts for the spectrum of views of its members and by not providing them a speaking spot that made the Democratic Party look a bit less democratic.
BTW, one thing that I NEVER hear addressed in the Palestinian debate is that they were never compensated for their loss in the creation of the state of Israel, either by the Europeans who gave away what was not theirs to give, or the Israelis when they created Israel. The Palestinians had title to the property that Britain gave away.
IMO, this is the crux of the problem, the theft was never dealt with. The Europeans should have given or at least offered their Jewish victims European territory for the creation of Israel. If that failed, then the Europeans should have compensated fully the people who's land they were taking. Had that happened, the problems that we've been witnessing since the end of WWII wouldn't have happened. Problems yes, but not to the scale. Dispossessed people will not remain quiet victims.
The Palestinians in 1947 refused to compromise at all. Many residents in Mandatory Palestine were already Jews (not a majority though), so it was a matter of dividing the land they all, Palestinian and Jew, lived in. Two states were offered and the Palestinians refused, they wanted all or nothing. They got nothing. Now Israel is so used to having it all, they will never cede any part of what they consider Israel to create a Palestinian state. Bad decisions all around and their descendants have become even more entrenched. I believe a two-state solution is the only way forward but the parties actually involved have to believe it too.
i won't disagree with you - but please provide us with a link to a credible source that supports your contention that 'Two states were offered and the Palestinians refused, they wanted all or nothing.'
Have you heard of google?
https://www.un.org/unispal/history/#:~:text=In%201947%2C%20the%20UK%20turned,Read%20more.&text=After%20looking%20at%20alternatives%2C%20the,(II)%20of%201947).
Palestinian Arabs refused the UN proposed partition into a Palestinian Arab state and Israeli Jewish state with a shared, internationally overseen, Jerusalem. Israel accepted, formed a country, and then decided they wanted more (including all of Jerusalem) and the 1948 war ensued and the Israelis took over land that would have been Palestine under the UN proposal for a partition. At no point did the Palestinian Arabs and their allies agree to the partition (2 state solution) that almost everyone outside the middle east *still* believes is the best way forward.
The Jews didn't WANT an Israel in Europe. They wanted "the promised land."
Europe has not got a very good history of being welcoming to the Jews. I have visited the towns where my ancestors migrated from. Those who stayed are gone.
David Leitschuh : curious as to just what policies/programs trump actually enacted, what promises he actually kept. Other than tax breaks for the 1%, can't think of anything he fulfilled. As for tough on security, he's a laughing stock around the world.
Rima, what do you mean? Don't we have a wall between the US and Mexico that Mexico paid for? And don't we have Trump's amazing, better than anything EVER health plan? Surely at the end of the Trump presidency we were all far healthier than ever before in the history of our country.
Sorry, Melinda, I must have missed all that.
LOL!
Haha, but careful. EZ chastised me a ways back for using sarcasm, so I don’t on his forum. I explained to him that I had just read a Huppke column and was still dripping with it.
Well I paraphrase Rex Huppke as often as I can: The cheese has slipped off TFG's cracker and it ain't coming back.
I am still waiting for TFG's 'policies' on electrocution and sharks!
Appointing conservative justices to the SC and District courts
Tariffs on imports from China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Restrictions on tech exports to China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Restrictions on US government tech purchases from China (retained and expanded by Biden)
Demanding NATO members meet their defense spending commitments (which on only 18 of 31 members do as of 2024)
New NAFTA trade deal
Passing a tax cut bill (I will expand on this in a separate note)
Revised energy policies to expand domestic oil production
Withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement
Withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal
Attempted and failed on infrastructure bills
Attempted and failed on DACA and immigration bills
Attempted and failed on building the wall
Tried and largely failed to reduce foreign US military deployments, but did not enter new areas
Tried and failed to make a nuclear deal with N. Korea
Promised to solve mid-east problem - endorsed single state solution, moved embassy to Jerusalem, obtained deal between Israel and UAE and Bahrain, initiated deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel
There are probably others. But that is what came to mind. One might not like his policies, but he did try to deliver. I think he lacks any policy knowledge or depth but relies on others. He is also a terrible politician and might have accomplished more if he was better.
Marc, interesting that you do not mention how he handled the Covid epidemic and his related policies.
You know, first ignore it, blame China, then explain it would burn out in the summer, then suggest non effective potions and finally begin a vaccine program.
I think his response to this issue was a key component as to why an incumbent President lost the election.
Pete,
Even with the vaccine, more Americans died under the Biden administration. It was a complicated issue. Would Trump have lost the election if voters had known the death toll going forward?
David, Trump’s delay on this issue resulted in more deaths than was necessary.
It was this increase in deaths after Trump initially downplayed the pandemic that caused some folks to support Biden.
I also believe some people attributed deaths under Biden to “belong” to Trump due to his initial delay and misinformation campaigns.
As to your question about Trump losing the election if voters had known the death toll going forward. Moot point, I deal in what happened not hypotheticals.
Peter,
Got it. I’ll have to think about the hypothetical that deaths under the Biden administration “belong” to Trump.
David, we are talking in real time not future time. Anecdotally both me and many of my friends took the view that some of the folks dying during the Biden administration “belonged” to Trump and voted accordingly. Nothing hypothetical about it.
Certainly you can take the view it was Biden’s fault, but no hypothetical thinking is necessary here.
Trump's refusal to acknowledge the severity of the pandemic and his vanity-based refusal to wear a mask (to model behavior to help avoid preventable transmissions) - due to his not wanting to smear his daily make up - resulted in his cult followers not only similarly refusing to wear masks to help cut down on transmissions, but also to become hostile to science-based health measures (i.e., COVID vaccines) that would have cut down on COVID transmissions. One of the very clear correlations epidemiologists were able to show post pandemic was that heavily Red counts had much lower COVID vaccine rates, and correspondingly higher COVID deaths AFTER vaccines became available. IMO, Trump's sheer vanity probably caused tens of thousands of preventable COVID deaths and who knows how many preventable transmissions of the virus.
I agree on the impact on the election. I was just responding to the 'what policies did he enact and promises he kept' question. I agree that he was mostly daffy on covid and joined in the drunken-sailor spending that was part of the response. The vaccine program was a big success and there are a lot of serious people that see the evidence pointing to China. There is also a lot of data to show the shutdowns of businesses and schools were overdone and had huge negative consequences. But I wouldn't say Trump provided coherent or effective leadership on those issues. Instead, we got a lot of mask nonsense.
You think that that withdrawing from the Paris accords, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the deal to keep Iran non-nuclear were *positives*? I thought we were avoiding sarcasm here.
I chuckled at the Junior Playable Bagpipes gag, even though I don’t share the spirit of it at all. I’ve always found the sound of bagpipes to be sublime, and could never understand why they get a bad rap. Same thing with accordions.
This is particularly puzzling when one considers the glowing, knee jerk praise that automatically gets thrown toward so much contemporary music (even though most of it is worthless trash), often for no other reason than that it’s what the kids are listening to these days, and of course, appearances of hipness must be maintained.
Please. I’ll take “Amazing Grace” on bagpipes at Mr. Spock’s funeral any day, or Lawrence Welk proclaiming, “And now for my accordion solo. Would you like to join me Myron?”
Bagpipes are kind of like the oboe. Played well it's wonderful. But new ("junior") players are often horrifying to listen to. How my parents survived my first years as an oboist is beyond me.
Melinda, I played the clarinet (wet your reeds) and my practice location was in the garage.
And thus my folks were able to handle my playing.
Agree, a well played oboe is a beautiful thing to listen to.
Those of us who lived in apartments during the days when we were learning clarinet (two kids downstairs and I in autumn 1965) had no garages to retreat to. Our parents, siblings, and neighbors all deserve medals. No wonder so many parents acquiesced to acoustic guitars as an alternative!
As they say, an ill wind that nobody blows good.
Any views on didgeridoos?
Since I’d never heard (of) them until today, no, but now that I have, thumbs up! I don’t know that I’d want to hear one played for any extended length of time like I would bagpipes, but their drone does have an otherworldly allure. They seem like an ancient precursor for that electronic talk box thing that Joe Walsh and Peter Frampton made famous. Thanks for the tip.
I want to comment on what David said. It's understandable. My family is fill of liberals that want the border better controlled. Trump has lots of policies not much being talked about. His tax cuts were beneficial primarily for high wage earners. The general theory is that when the rich get richer, some of it will be passed down. That has not been happening. He has made clear his intention to eviscerate needed social plans with no thoughts on what else to do. He spent a good deal of his term upsetting our allies while praising the most repressive dictators. But here's a key point. Congress does most of the heavy lifting. There is nothing novel in anything Trump wants and they can be done without him if the Republicans take over Congress. If they don't, it's because it's not what the voters wanted. That leaves us with a vile man who serves as a poor example of a leader. Furthermore, some of his plans are downright horrifying, which conservatives don't seem to want to address. Sorry David- we can have conservative planning without Trump. Even if Harris is elected, that doesn't mean she'll get all of what she wants and frankly, she hasn't been very specific, either. Obama found out in his second term what the limitations are when opposed by Congress. So I'll take my chances with Harris.
Agreed that the convention came off in a very positive way. The arrangements for space and transportation for the convention attendees seems to have worked well for them. I attribute the success with handling of demonstrations almost entirely to the tiny turnout. I think the largest demonstration was estimated at 3000 people. According to the Trib, the site the city set up with a stage and sound system was mostly unused, with most speakers that had signed up no-shows and the few that spoke with tiny audiences. I think it is pretty clear that only the fringiest fail to see that opposing/embarrassing Harris is a bad idea.
Both the Tribune and Sun Times are reminding us today that the convention is over and Brandon Johnson needs to return to trying to run the city. I have been as critical of him anyone else. I will grant him that he inherited many of the problems he faces. Some of his solutions are inane. I want to put my focus on gambling. That was too easy. Expecting a big boost in revenue from gambling assumed either that the city would either find a whole new slew of gamblers with money to throw away or that existing gamblers could be lured away from suburban venues, Las Vegas, or online. It hasn't happened. I don't think it will. I don't see downtown Chicago as more of a gambling mecca than Aurora, Joliet, or Des Plaines, not to mention northwest Indiana. Now maybe Bally's will find a way to tie gambling together with other things such as downtown entertainment, restaurants, shopping, or something else. I personally don't see it. If Johnson is counting on gambling or taxing people more than they are already taxed, he'd better think again. He also cannot simply rely on Sprinfield, either. And if Trump wins, forget DC. So it's time to get creative, Mr. Mayor. Your ideas and actions have already upset just about anyone not a CTU member.
Bally's is insane if it thinks people are going to go where the Trib printing plant currently is to gamble.
It's an appallingly stupid location for it, out of the way, with terrible traffic problems to get there.
I'm waiting for Bally's to go to Metra & demand them to build a station there, as the UP-N & UP-NW line go right by it.
As for Johnson, he's under orders from his bosses at the rotten teachers union to fire Pedro Martinez, because he sensibly opposes that insane idea of saddling the school board with a billion dollar debt from selling bonds to pay for the obscenely high pay raise the teachers want, most of whom don't actually live in the city, despite the law about it & then send their kids to either suburban schools or as the rotten president of that rotten union does, send her kid to a private school!
Totally agree. Medina is a better location than the permanent one and look at the problems they are having. I have already commented on the CTU issue. The city can't pay it's bills now. How will CTU feel when an auditor tells them to make cus to the pension benefits? And that's before we even mention CTU demands for a raise, more nurses, more aides, more librarians, building repairs, etc. Garry if you had $100,000 in credit card debt, what's the first thing you do? Go out and buy a mansion and a Maserati?
I'd buy a Gulfstream G-700!
The DNC has been catching g a lot of heat for not allowing a Palestinian speaker. I ask why. Okay, everyone here knows I am biased, being Jewish. I still ask why. The number of speakers already allowed went long into the night. Should there have been a pro- Israel speaker? Lots of speakers pressed for abortion rights. But should there have been a separate speaker just for that? I also have concerns about Ukraine, public education and other issues. How many special interest speakers should there have been? Between street protests, campus protests, media coverage, and widely covered threats not to vote on November from protesters, I'm quite sure Democrats got the message. Giving them a separate convention slot could do nothing but enrage those opposed and give Republicans yet another campaign issue by accusing Democrats of supporting terrorism. To me it was the smart move politically. The protesters say they will sit it out rather than vote for either side? Very unwise! That's like votes for Trump. What do they think they will get from a Trump administration?
Once again, we are treated to the lies and misrepresentation of the Dems and the media on taxes. Harris has endorsed no new income taxes on people making less than $400,000 and to allow the Trump cuts (Tax Cuts and Jobs Act or TCJA) to expire in 2025 (because they were only for the rich and corporations).
But then there are the pesky facts about the TCJA:
The act cut all tax rates for all low and middle income tax payers: 15% went to 12%; 25% went to 22%; and 28% went to 24%. The rates for income over $300,000 – 33% went to 32%; 35% was unchanged; and 39% went to 37%. So allowing the law to expire is a 16% to 25% tax increase on incomes below $300,000 for a couple and $160,000 for an individual.
The standard deduction was doubled in the TCJA. This is an additional tax cut for the 70% of filers that do not itemize, and no cut for higher incomes that do itemize. It effectively creates a zero tax bracket for any couple earning less than $24,000 vs the old $12,000.
The child tax credit was doubled from $1,000 to $2,000 and a new credit of $500 for other dependents was added. The refundable portion (‘refund’ when no tax is paid) was increased 40%.
The mortgage deduction was capped at mortgage values below $750,000. The deduction for state and local taxes was capped at $10,000. Both of these are tax increases for the 70% of higher income people that live in high tax states (mainly income taxes and property taxes).
Increased the floor income for the Alternative Minimum tax to avoid increased taxes on middle income people.
The corporate tax rates were graduated from 15% to 33%, similar to individuals. This was replaced with a flat 21% tax rate. Which was an average increase for all corporate filers.
So the expiration of TCJA will result in a significant tax increase for all filers below $300,000. It will also be a significant tax reduction for incomes between $300,000 and $500,000 and an increase of about 4.8% for incomes above $500,000. Which is why Biden did not propose to repeal the act in his first year despite campaigning against it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act
https://www.yahoo.com/news/irs-data-prove-trump-tax-130007569.html
“Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
Marc Martinez may get my 2024 vote!
marc - i'm going to assume all of your points on the TCJA are substantially factual - both because you've built credibility with me, and i'm too lazy to fact-check your stuff.
i believe your facts are the truth - but not the whole truth.
so i did a search at perplexity.ai, with the following question -
how did the tax cuts and jobs act help high income taxpayers?
here's the response -
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 provided several benefits that disproportionately helped high-income taxpayers:
Reduced Top Tax Rates
The TCJA lowered the top individual income tax rate from 39.6% to 37%. This directly reduced taxes for the highest earners.
Corporate Tax Cut
The corporate tax rate was slashed from 35% to 21%. This primarily benefited high-income individuals who own corporate stocks or receive pass-through business income.
Pass-Through Business Deduction
The law created a new 20% deduction for qualified business income from pass-through entities like S corporations and partnerships. This deduction tends to benefit higher-income business owners.
Estate Tax Changes
The TCJA doubled the estate tax exemption to $11.2 million for individuals and $22.4 million for married couples. This allows wealthy families to pass on more assets tax-free.
Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Changes
The law significantly increased the AMT exemption amount and phaseout thresholds. This reduced AMT liability for many high-income taxpayers who were previously subject to it.
Capital Gains Treatment
The TCJA retained the preferential tax rates on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. High-income taxpayers tend to have more investment income subject to these lower rates.
While the law did provide some benefits across income levels, analyses have shown that the largest tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income went to taxpayers in the highest income groups. The Tax Policy Center estimated that taxpayers in the top 1% would see an average tax cut of 3.4% of after-tax income, compared to 1.6% for taxpayers in the middle quintile.
I fact checked for you. All of Marc’s numbers were accurate. Allowing the TCJA to expire will increase taxes for joint earners under $300,000 by 16% to 25%, their standard deduction will be halved and the child tax credit will be halved. Making the claim of no increased taxes for anyone making less than $400,000 is less than honest. You are also correct that the top 5% earners who pay approximately 65% of all income tax revenue also benefit from TCJA. Their taxes will also increase.
I think that you hit the crux of the political issue. It is the issue of disproportionality, income inequality, and tax fairness. So even though the law benefits all tax filers under $300,000 annual income, it is a bad law because it also benefits filers above $600,000. I would debate all three of those issues, but my main issue is that coverage is exclusively on that issue and ignores the rest of the bill.
If there was a new law that required a 1% tax increase on all taxpayers, I am sure there would be significant hue and cry about the enormous disproportionate impact on low- and middle-income people. But the much larger change in allowing the TCJA to expire is ignored.
Thanks for your compliment on credibility, I try. I will now quibble with the AI.
Rate cut produces higher dollar benefit for high incomes, agreed,
Estate tax, agreed, Sorry I forgot about that. But I think this had the biggest benefit for middle wealthy - farmers, small business owners, etc. because the very/ultra wealthy already use trust and offshore strategies to avoid the estate tax. Like our governor whose billions are in offshore trusts established by his father and uncles.
The corporate tax cut benefited large stockholders both in share value and increased buybacks and dividends. But large shareholders include all pension funds and mutual funds, which benefits a very broad part of the population. Also, the 21% tax rate is still higher than the rate in all advanced economies, as was demonstrated by Sec. Yellen's successful effort to get 136 countries to agree on a minimum 15% corporate tax rate.
Similarly, the Pass-through QBI deduction does benefit business owners, but also benefits anyone that holds mutual funds which also report the pass through QBI.
The AI is just wrong about the AMT. The Tax Policy Center estimates that the expiration of the TCJA will negatively impact 7.6 million taxpayers. The exemptions primarily benefit payers under $170,000.
Since capital gains and dividend rates did not change, they shouldn't be included. The criticism seems to be that they were not increased, and they won't be due to the expiration.
Finally, in 2016 the top 1% paid 37.3% of total income tax. In 2021 (last year available from the IRS), the top 1% paid 45.8% of total income taxes. The top 10% went from 70% of total income tax paid in 2016 to 76% in 2021. So, the TCJA shifted the tax burden from the bottom to the top.
My tax accountant ran my taxes both under the new tax law (of course) and what it would have been under the old rules. Difference: practically zero. I guess I was neither rich enough or poor enough to benefit (or be penalized).
I am baffled at the continuing nonsense about a cease fire agreement in Gaza. I have no idea how Israel and Hamas can negotiate anything after the Israeli government assassinated the lead Hamas negotiator. What do they say to the next guy = 'don't worry. You can trust us. Unless we get a clear shot. And hey, you know we said our plan was to kill all of you anyway'. And the Hamas guys are BS-ing each other that they have some kind of leverage or that somehow things will get better for them. They must know that there is no permanent cease fire and that they have no future. Maybe the Hamas leaders could trade a hostage release for exile to Iran or Lebanon or Yemen.
Garry, an update. Watching Channel 5 news. Interview with Bally's chairman. Thinks it will do better than Medinal because it will be a "destination". Hotel, restaurants, entertainment venue. Okay, But just for example I can do that in Des Plaines. There is a ballpark across the road. There is both a shopping center and an outlet mall. There are restaurants and the Rosemont Theater. Why would I want to try and navigate downtown Chicago?