Grafton, NH

Anyway, I honestly don't understand your seeming hostility towards me.

I understand that your weak, pathetic, ineffective party of toadies has failed to come anywhere close to budging the minimum wage in fifteen years, despite your claims that they are the party that wants to do so the most, but I certainly had no impact on that.

Quote: Mission146

Anyway, I honestly don't understand your seeming hostility towards me.

You advocate Libertarian ideas, and these are not to be trusted, because they largely aim for the opposite of socialism. How is he going to explain to his Commissar that he agreed with a Libertarian without first parsing it all out?

Quote:

I understand that your weak, pathetic, ineffective party of toadies has failed to come anywhere close to budging the minimum wage in fifteen years, despite your claims that they are the party that wants to do so the most, but I certainly had no impact on that.

It's a party that actually only cares about clinging to power.

Quote: GenoDRPh

I advise you to keep current on current events, if you are going to speak knowledgably about them:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-biden-student-loan-forgiveness-program/#:~:text=Supreme%20Court%20strikes%20down%20Biden%20student%2Dloan%20forgiveness%20program,-By%20Amy%20Howe&text=By%20a%20vote%20of%206,%24400%20billion%20in%20student%20loans.

Okay, so this took me maybe five minutes.

It appears that Biden was attempting to forgive all student loans in contravention of Congressional Act and doing so under a justification that allowed for doing so only in the event of a war or national emergency...which was for deferments anyway. I'm honestly not sure what the national emergency is supposed to be, but we are, obviously, not officially involved in a war right now.

In contrast, the IRS was the entity to announce that they would be doing the $600 thing and there was no Congressional law to that specific effect, much less decades of various Congressional laws firmly establishing the laws and procedures. Beyond that, the IRS appears to be delaying any such enforcement for a year anyway:

https://www.cnbc.com/select/irs-600-reporting-rule-delayed/#:~:text=The%20new%20%E2%80%9D%24600%20rule%E2%80%9D,K%20for%20reporting%20the%20income.

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-announces-delay-for-implementation-of-600-reporting-threshold-for-third-party-payment-platforms-forms-1099-k

Also, the IRS Rule only applies to third-party payment processors in the first place, so if SOOPOO hands cash to his dog sitter, the IRS wouldn't know a thing about that anyway, and also, why would either party ever file official documents over that? AZDuffman first raised that objection...but I am going to be WAY MORE GENEROUS than I should be and assume that he didn't already know that only applies to third-party payment processors. As a result, the IRS isn't specifically demanding that SOOPOO reports paying his dog sitter more than $600 annually (provided he not use a third-party to do it) in the first place. Even if they were demanding that, there's really no way to enforce it.

More than all of that, the dog sitter is not SOOPOO's employee because SOOPOO's household is not a business.

THEREFORE, anything having to do with this Supreme Court decision is moot. Also, what I would do as POTUS is moot because the IRS Rule (which isn't a Congressionally passed law) to begin with only applies to third-parties, such as Paypal, Venmo, Cash App and others. It's also not in effect yet. As my original objection to SOOPOO went: why would either party ever report that in the first place?

Quote: Mission146

Anyway, I honestly don't understand your seeming hostility towards me.

I understand that your weak, pathetic, ineffective party of toadies has failed to come anywhere close to budging the minimum wage in fifteen years, despite your claims that they are the party that wants to do so the most, but I certainly had no impact on that.

It isn't seeming...

Once again I remind you that the Dems have not been able to increase the min wage because they've lack a majority in the House to pass a bill for most of the time period you cited, lacked a filibuster proof majority in the Senate or had a Republican as President for some of that time.

I dare you to cite any bill in Congress since 2009 that included a MW increase that the majority of Republicans supported. Congressional votes are all public records. It should be easy for a knowledgeable person such as yourself.

Quote: odiousgambit

You advocate Libertarian ideas, and these are not to be trusted, because they largely aim for the opposite of socialism. How is he going to explain to his Commissar that he agreed with a Libertarian without first parsing it all out?

It's a party that actually only cares about clinging to power.

Libertarian ideas aren't to be trusted because they (a) don't work and (b) cause actual damage to the populace.

Which party seeks to suppress the vote, lie about the results, refuse to accept the true results, incites and supports an insurrection over the results and continues to lie about the results? Hint: It isn't the party currently in the White House.

Quote: GenoDRPh

It isn't seeming...

Once again I remind you that the Dems have not been able to increase the min wage because they've lack a majority in the House to pass a bill for most of the time period you cited, lacked a filibuster proof majority in the Senate or had a Republican as President for some of that time.

I dare you to cite any bill in Congress since 2009 that included a MW increase that the majority of Republicans supported. Congressional votes are all public records. It should be easy for a knowledgeable person such as yourself.

They could pass the Republican plan right now and it would still be an increase. What would moderate Republicans do on the open floor? Vote against the plan that they, themselves, proposed? It passes the Senate, easily. Even if the Republican Senate plan failed to get through the House and make it to Biden’s desk, voting against it would be political suicide in anything even approaching a moderate district. Those Republicans get voted out at next opportunity and the Democrats could pass a less moderate plan as they, almost certainly, would come to control both the House and Senate.

I’m not going to bother with what you dared me to do. First of all, it assumes that any bill has ever made it out of committee, which I don’t know. Secondly, it ignores that Democrats once held both House and Senate under Obama. Third, I doubt if the majority of Republicans have supported any bill, but as I’ve already mentioned, Democrats don’t need the majority of Republicans to support it; in the worst case scenario, they need a handful of moderate Republicans to support it.

Originally, you expressed doubt that any moderate Republicans even introduced a MW bill. They have. You were wrong. Instead of moving the goalpost, just live with it.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Libertarian ideas aren't to be trusted because they (a) don't work and (b) cause actual damage to the populace.

Which party seeks to suppress the vote, lie about the results, refuse to accept the true results, incites and supports an insurrection over the results and continues to lie about the results? Hint: It isn't the party currently in the White House.

Um…Do you think that Libertarians are Republicans? We have no doubts about the vote. We lost, massively, and received scarcely over 1% of the National popular vote.

As far as the first part, I don’t think increasing the MW is strictly a, ‘Libertarian idea,’ as both Democrats and Republicans have introduced Senate bills that would do so. I believe many Libertarians would get rid of the MW entirely, though I wouldn’t; I recognize we have to work towards Libertarian ideals, pragmatically, and within the confines of a long extant system.

As far as Minimum Wage is concerned, I’d say what does the most active damage to the populace is the fact that FedMW hasn’t changed in fifteen years.

Quote: Mission146

They could pass the Republican plan right now and it would still be an increase. What would moderate Republicans do on the open floor? Vote against the plan that they, themselves, proposed? It passes the Senate, easily. Even if the Republican Senate plan failed to get through the House and make it to Biden’s desk, voting against it would be political suicide in anything even approaching a moderate district. Those Republicans get voted out at next opportunity and the Democrats could pass a less moderate plan as they, almost certainly, would come to control both the House and Senate.

I’m not going to bother with what you dared me to do. First of all, it assumes that any bill has ever made it out of committee, which I don’t know. Secondly, it ignores that Democrats once held both House and Senate under Obama. Third, I doubt if the majority of Republicans have supported any bill, but as I’ve already mentioned, Democrats don’t need the majority of Republicans to support it; in the worst case scenario, they need a handful of moderate Republicans to support it.

Originally, you expressed doubt that any moderate Republicans even introduced a MW bill. They have. You were wrong. Instead of moving the goalpost, just live with it.

If the Republicans have such a great plan, why can't they pass it in the GOP controlled house? It's because of GOP opposition. Why can't you understand that? Any plan would have to survive a filibuster in the Senate over GOP opposition, When was the last time the Dems had 60 seats in the Senate?

You're the one who keeps saying the Dems don't want to pass a MW increase, I keep asking you to prove it, amigo. But you can't. Live with it.

Quote: GenoDRPh

If the Republicans have such a great plan, why can't they pass it in the GOP controlled house? It's because of GOP opposition. Why can't you understand that? Any plan would have to survive a filibuster in the Senate over GOP opposition, When was the last time the Dems had 60 seats in the Senate?

You're the one who keeps saying the Dems don't want to pass a MW increase, I keep asking you to prove it, amigo. But you can't. Live with it.

I’m not saying they can’t pass it. With enough Democrat support, they could pass the Republican’s Senate bill. If the bill went through the Senate, got sent to the House and failed with significant Democrat support, then I’d be willing to blame the Republicans pretty exclusively. Since the Republican bill won’t even make it to the full Senate for a vote, because it won’t make it out of the Democrat majority committee, it’ll be irrelevant anyway.

There’s no real filibuster anymore and the Republican plan absolutely would get sixty Senate votes.

More than, unlike what your posts might lead one to believe, I just care that the Minimum Wage hasn’t gone up in fifteen years. I look at the entire Government and say this is inexcusable. The impression I get is you don’t care if it goes up or not; you care about being able to point the finger at Republicans, which is my point about Democrats, in general, and is also the reason why the minimum wage hasn’t changed in fifteen years.

I don’t have a dog in the fight, and really, there is no fight. It’s a deliberate stalemate. There’s no compromise because, in today’s political climate, compromise isn’t beneficial for them. Record numbers of voters all for nothing of significance to be done for them. It’s disgusting, as is this conversation.

I also don’t know what about this conversation you think would ever compel me to vote Democrat. I’ve always hated the Republican Party, mostly because of their social positions, but have also started to hate the Democratic Party for a wide variety of reasons. If you think my exchanges with you make me hate the Democratic Party less, then get your doctor to prescribe me whatever you’re on and you can fill it for me.