|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> She's the future /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1558669927 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 05/23/19 at 20:52:07 |
|
Title: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/23/19 at 20:52:07 https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/02/15/donald-trump-jr-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-twitter-amazon-new-york-loss-3-billion/ She's a complete idiot So I firmly believe that if we want to take that $3 billion dollars that we were willing to give to Amazon and invest it in our local community, we can do that. We can make those jobs. We can make 25,000 jobs. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/24/19 at 05:01:52 Sure, she's a complete idiot but she could very well gift wrap Trump a second term in 2020. She's the de facto leader of The Wacho Wing of the Democratic Party and she and her tribe aren't going to be happy with Biden or even Sanders. Lets face it Dems, if you can spell you name in the snow while peeing, you're out in 2020. That leaves Pocahontas or Cruela de Harris. Pocahontas is a complete idiot, Harris is not. My money is still on Harris for the moment, despite her recent blunders. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 08:15:53 The UL, FDS, Socialists are giving her a BIG pass. Simply because their wang goes up when they see her talk. Cause they know, she is only a C OCK Holster. And yes, the more she spews things like, 'Eat Tide Pods', The more Trump Wins ! (Bot, I didn't check, is AOC a member here ?) |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/24/19 at 08:46:05 ...and Trump thinks China pays the tariffs he imposes... He's a very stable genius... |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/24/19 at 09:26:14 7D6B7C61796C617A0E0 wrote:
Who is going to pay the tax increases Democrats will have to levy on corporations if they get back into power? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/24/19 at 09:46:57 Trump's tariffs will cost the average family $750 this year. ...but it's not a tax!... Yippie!... |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:00:52 4F7D7A6B6C7D6A55796A73180 wrote:
Who is going to pay the tax increases Democrats will have to levy on corporations if they get back into power? [/quote] nice deflection.... |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 10:06:44 I agree with the argument that she expresses opinions of authority on topics she knows little about. I think all politicians do this, including Trump. As referenced here he did say the Chinese Government pays import tariffs, which in entirely wrong. Also as referenced here he told US Military personnel that he gave them the largest raise in a decade which every person there knew was wrong. These things happen. It's obvious that on here pro-Trump will not bring up statements he made that are verifiably wrong, and AOC supporters will not bring up statements she made that are verifiably wrong. They will only bring up the positions of those they do not like because people are arguing over the person, and not the platform, or the activities and law that result. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:08:23 7555575F4255300 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 10:11:50 7F697E637B6E63780C0 wrote:
OK, which do YOU think is the dumber statement. Someone saying that a Country that Tariffs are imposed on, will lower the price they charge for that product. (thus that Country paying for the Tariff) Or someone saying, '...we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes...' |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:11:54 here's the quote that's in question by the might brain trust of Trump JR..... "“You know, I think it’s really important that we understand that we need to invest in our economy, but we need to invest in our people, and to give away $3 billion to a company that has a history of worker exploitation that’s paying below what the cost of New York City is not acceptable for us. We need to have good jobs, and they need to come to the table as in — you know, any company that wants to come to New York needs to come to the table as an equal partner, and you look at how Google came to New York; it was not nearly as controversial as this, and I think it’s because of, they were willing to work with local communities. What’s great is that our economy, our local economy, is already growing. So I firmly believe that if we want to take that $3 billion dollars that we were willing to give to Amazon and invest it in our local community, we can do that. We can make those jobs. We can make 25,000 jobs. But we don’t have to give away and allow our subway system to crumble so that Amazon essentially owns a part of New York City. We can create 25,000 jobs with Mom-and-Pops; we can create 25,ooo jobs with companies that are willing to come to the table, but we should not be giving away our infrastructure, our subway system, our schools, our teachers’ salaries, our firefighters’ budgets, to a company that has not shown good faith to New Yorkers. And we can ask for more because we deserve more.” tell me,POINT IT OUT, SPELL IT OUT like you're talking to a 3 year old, what exactly is wrong with any of that? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:13:32 51724F6C6E75727B1C0 wrote:
OK, which do YOU think is the dumber statement. Someone saying that a Country that Tariffs are imposed on, will lower the price they charge for that product. (thus that Country paying for the Tariff) oh, and that's NOT HOW IT WORKS... Or someone saying, '...we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes...' well, the only people saying '...we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes...' are republicans who are totally misleading you cons about the green new deal. so who's stupider, the person who says it, or YOU who believes it because you dare not question your mighty conservative god head leaders [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 10:28:31 1635292E1B282E33292E5A0 wrote:
So you need the phrase: 'So I firmly believe that if we want to take that $3 billion dollars that we were willing to give to Amazon' Spelled out in 3 year-old language ? OK in 3 year old language. The City, HAS, 3 billion, Right Now, to give away to someone else ??????? Or would it be a Tax abatement, over period of MANY years. Which would be MORE than covered, by the New Employees, PAYING Taxes. See that is exactaly why AOC, is such a dear, (outside of being a C ock Holster) She speaks in GIMME, GIMME, GIMME, GIMME. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/24/19 at 10:29:43 14372B2C192A2C312B2C580 wrote:
Who is going to pay the tax increases Democrats will have to levy on corporations if they get back into power? [/quote] nice deflection.... [/quote] I'm not deflecting. I'm pointing out that China will ultimately pay in lost business. We are in a strong position at the moment so its a good time to attack. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 10:30:41 7C5F4344714244594344300 wrote:
Perhaps you need to check what the, 'C ock Holster', SAID ! |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:40:47 50734E6D6F74737A1D0 wrote:
So you need the phrase: 'So I firmly believe that if we want to take that $3 billion dollars that we were willing to give to Amazon' Spelled out in 3 year-old language ? OK in 3 year old language. The City, HAS, 3 billion, Right Now, to give away to someone else ??????? Or would it be a Tax abatement, over period of MANY years. Which would be MORE than covered, by the New Employees, PAYING Taxes. See that is exactaly why AOC, is such a dear, (outside of being a C ock Holster) She speaks in GIMME, GIMME, GIMME, GIMME. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D do the math for me, show me how amazon employees pay $3 Billion to the state/city and you can do without the insults... but I guess I did ask for 3 year old language so if that's the best you can do and not grow up like the rest of us... [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 10:40:51 and AOC supporters will not bring up statements she made that are verifiably wrong. have an example? I can think of 4 right off the top of my head: "$21T in Pentagon accounting errors. Medicare for All costs ~$32T. That means 66% of Medicare for All could have been funded already by the Pentagon." Incorrect. At first I thought it was a typo until I realized she read some article and didn't understand the difference in one dollar being miscounted across multiple channels versus a new dollar for each miscount. National security spending has been documented since 1940 and as of 2018, cumulatively, the number is at 643,266,000,000. She claims the Pentagon alone, a portion of national security cost, miscount 21,000,000,000,000 all by itself. She also said: "Just last year we gave the military a $700 billion dollar budget increase, which they didn’t even ask for." Her campaign later admitted this was wrong, and alluded to it being intentionally misleading. The total budget neared 700million, the increase was 61. She stated that ICE needed to "Fill" 34 thousand beds. This is wrong, she referenced the 2016 Appropriations Act, and it says "shall maintain a level of not less than 34,000 detention beds through September 30, 2016." Filling beds and maintaining beds is like saying maintaining trucks is the same as driving them. https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr2029/BILLS-114hr2029enr.pdf Another one that is so obviously false one shouldn't even need to go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics to verify: "Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family." There's more, but people can see where I am coming from. And yes Trump has significantly more inaccurate statements, but my point isn't volume of inaccuracies, it's that most people argue over the person and not the policy. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 10:43:31 192B2C3D3A2B3C032F3C254E0 wrote:
Who is going to pay the tax increases Democrats will have to levy on corporations if they get back into power? [/quote] nice deflection.... [/quote] I'm not deflecting. I'm pointing out that China will ultimately pay in lost business. We are in a strong position at the moment so its a good time to attack.[/quote] okay, but we're fighting the wrong people.... the Chinese didn't do anything we didn't sign up for. we wanted to exploit their cheap labor, part of that deal was IP to them... the CEO's and dealmakers (like Trump) said ok... we signed up for it.. and now we're blaming them? deflection of responsibility, AMERICA = get rich quick, fix that then that'll make America Great again. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 10:48:10 "we wanted to exploit their cheap labor, part of that deal was IP to them... " This is not exactly how that works. Not every IP and duplicate item made in China is due to a negotiated release of that IP. The whole thing is a mess since it's hard to create a valuation, and there is a lot of moving parts. Chinese business is just as greedy as the US, they are not typically "victims" of some aggressive American strategy to get sweatshop prices out of poor workers. They outright steal or leverage, illegal yet unenforceable, a lot of product and content. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:01:34 1737353D2037520 wrote:
maybe, but Trump also uses his misleading inaccurate statement repeatedly to drive his fear messaging. I find it hypocritical that any Trump supporter finds AOC's exaggerations unacceptable, when their dear leader is the one setting the precedent. are you as mad, or madder at Trump for having MORE than you are at AOC? do you see her's as more egregious or something? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:07:24 59797B736E791C0 wrote:
no, but it's still true that WE WENT TO THEM. and, yes, they are the victims of us preaching our capitalistic way of life and then we go in and say look how poor your are... we shame them, then offer them "the way" and then exploit them. and if you have them make it.... they kinda need to know how to make it, you know, they need the IP... otherwise they can't make it... so, you want to give them knowledge and then say, no no no, you can't use that for anything besides what we tell you to??? um... good luck with that |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 11:11:55 0625393E0B383E23393E4A0 wrote:
A bit out of practice, in speaking 3 year old language, Also, don't speak Chinese, French, Ebonics, and Gimme/Gimme, (among others) |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:22:56 6645785B5942454C2B0 wrote:
Perhaps you need to check what the, 'C ock Holster', SAID ! [/quote] I've looked, I just spent like 30 minutes looking for any reference to this.... all i can find is there might have been an internal memo from her staff about farting cows... wow! that's condemnable!! besides that it's all a bunch of conservative SPIN hacks that are just lying. AND you believe them..... sad. and again... the only thingy holster here is your as shole... that's why you cant' think straight, got all that crap pounded up into your skull where your brain should be |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 11:24:07 "no, but it's still true that WE WENT TO THEM. and, yes, they are the victims of us preaching our capitalistic way of life and then we go in and say look how poor your are... we shame them, then offer them "the way" and then exploit them." Actually the Chinese government chose to hybridize a "Western" economic method with a "Communist" governmental structure. They did that. We didn't preach anything to the closed media of the average Chinese citizen or business owner as it would be illegal and difficult to do. Many, many came to us when permitted, by their government. Look up the Postal Union and how those costs were calculated and why, that will clear some things up. "so, you want to give them knowledge and then say, no no no, you can't use that for anything besides what we tell you to???" Yes. This is done all over the world, all of the time. Obviously theres no clear understanding of what IP is. That's like saying you design a product but if you ever contract someone other than yourself to build it, they get to build, sell and profit and there's nothing you can do about it. Ford vehicles once made in Mexico are a free-for-all and Ford has no right to say "You can only build a Ford vehicle, for Ford."? IP is very specifically the opposite |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:25:38 02211C3F3D2621284F0 wrote:
A bit out of practice, in speaking 3 year old language, Also, don't speak Chinese, French, Ebonics, and Gimme/Gimme, (among others)[/quote] okay try 2 year old.. if that's more your speed... since you obviously can't handle growing up anymore... you're about that age where you need to start wearing diapers again aren't you? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:36:57 725250584552370 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 11:36:57 "fair enough, so did the article misunderstand it and she just repeated it or ... is this a repeated directed thing she's been saying? " She was wrong, the article was accurate and not complex. The point is she stated something incorrect similar to other politicians. "so, she's corrected this then? and she's not repeating this and using it as a messaging campaign?" She has not corrected herself. Her campaign, after being confronted, released an email. "I want more context for this one...you're kind of splitting hairs" In official regulatory context "maintaining" is very different than "filling". As in 1000 storage containers being "maintained" or kept in useable state is different than "filled" or being volumetrically full of tangible product. A jail ordered to "maintain" 100 cells must have 100 useable cells, but some, or all, can be empty. A jail ordered to "fill" 100 cells, must have inmates in all 100. That, to me, is not splitting hairs, it is a common regulatory term used in many avanues of business or civic management. "are you saying no one is working 2 jobs? ... " No. I am saying that the term "everybody is working two jobs" is less accurate by a very very large discrepancy. That is a very inaccurate statement. "are you as mad, or madder at Trump for having MORE than you are at AOC? do you see her's as more egregious or something? " I have no opinion on trump or AOC, I couldn't imagine any reason I would consider anger an option because they say things that are wrong. We all do that. I am saying that when humans here post inaccuracies they do not take multiple parties into account. They aren't actually arguing the inaccuracy, they are arguing about the person. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 11:46:04 "you can't teach someone how to write and tell them you can only write what I allow you to. " Again not what IP is. You are confusing usage with manufacture, two totally different things. If you pay a manufacturer to make a gun, they can't make that gun beyond the terms of the agreement. MAKE the gun, not USE the gun. If I teach you to write, and I write a book, then pay you to write - verbatim- my book onto blank pages. You can not sell those copied pages. You can not sell versions of the book or book characters that you write. This literally happens all the time. My point is IP agreements are honored worldwide and have been for decades and decades, even in China. To say now that it's not possible makes little sense to me. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 11:52:50 6646444C5146230 wrote:
no, I am arguing about the inaccuracy, I TAKE TRUMP LITERALLY, NOT SERIOUSLY (which is a completely asinine statement btw) remember... oh, but we cant' dare treat AOC the same... |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 11:54:28 7F5C40477241475A4047330 wrote:
Let me help you out a bit. Here is what was Submitted. AFTER she Back peddled, and received all sorts of grief on her previous Statement: (which you really have to look for cause 80 % + of internet sights, have, REMOVED, references to her, C ock Holster Statements) https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi2nbyr5rTiAhUDLK0KHWbACKUQFjAAegQIABAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.congress.gov%2F116%2Fbills%2Fhres109%2FBILLS-116hres109ih.pdf&usg=AOvVaw27o69vi7gLKhxJQhSXuJsr The C ock HOLSTER Said: "working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is techno- logically feasible, including—" " ...overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector..." Yet her, Back peddling' , Is total forgiven, because she is a, C ock Holster. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 11:59:29 5B7864635665637E6463170 wrote:
You, (and others) are NOT. You are giving the, 'C ock Holster' a Great BIG PASS. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 12:05:39 not any more of a pass than YOU give to Trump, and somehow I'm not allowed to give AOC that pass but YOU are allowed to give Trump that pass and then some..... yeah... no |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 12:08:37 "so she made a mistake... was it an honest one that she's not pursuing as a messaging aspect of her campaign or is she doubling down and calling everything "fake news"" Yes. Again - the point is she stated something incorrect similar to other politicians. "so that's a correction... under her direction assumingly right? " I typically avoid assumption. I have witnessed situations where campaign managers act in defiance of their client's wishes as well as campaign managers act in accordance. I don't know here, so I will not make an assessment. "even so, I'll give you that she may not have a full understanding of all the details of everything, but her point of not wanting a quota for ICE detainees is a good one right? " I would have to see a cost to funding breakdown. "it may have been " and "I think in practice" is not a validating statement of fact to me. I have worked in Federal environments where the outside perspective is that funding is allocated by usage when it is not. The idea that I would get paid more per bullet used is a direct opposite outcome from what actually happens. "and no other politician ever exaggerates like that" I never said that, you did. I very specifically indicated that other politicians do, and even included everyone else on the planet: "because they say things that are wrong. We all do that. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by T And T Garage on 05/24/19 at 12:40:36 AOC rocks! She is the future of the democratic party and the conservatives are scared $hitless! GO AOC!!! Wish she were in my state. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 12:54:56 7B656A6B667B607D0F0 wrote:
So very glad to know you personally, LOVE a, Socialist, Fairy Dust Springing, Ultra Liberal, Who wants, Gimme/Gimme/Gimme, with not the FIRST Clue of how to pay for it ! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :-* |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 12:56:38 68484A425F482D0 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 12:58:38 5C7F426163787F76110 wrote:
So very glad to know you personally, LOVE a, Socialist, Fairy Dust Springing, Ultra Liberal, Who wants, Gimme/Gimme/Gimme, with not the FIRST Clue of how to pay for it ! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :-* [/quote] well, see first we hire a someone to put you in a dunk box and let you have a mega phone and allow people to pay to pull a lever to dunk you into some water... after they hear you for about 2 seconds they'll be lining up to dunk your sorry butt... see MN, even you have your place in the new Utopia!!! :p |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/24/19 at 13:12:42 0E2D31360330362B3136420 wrote:
WOW, the, '...new Utopia...'. A place, where, EVERYBODY, gets EVERYTHING they WANT, with out, having to do One Thing ? (Have you ever read: 'The Little Red Hen') ? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 13:35:10 "but you are assuming her mistakes are for ill intent, and you've never brought up Trump's inaccuracies here, so apparently those never bother you... but someone rude makes a comment about AOC and you're all over defending their stance... " Really? Going this route again even though all of this is documented? I never said anything about intent. Never. "and you've never brought up Trump's inaccuracies here" Incorrect. I have made threads specific to Trump's inaccurate comments. Explain how this thread, that I started, is not very specifically about Trump making an inaccurate statement: http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1546008345/4#4 I even brought it up in this very thread, I stated: "I think all politicians do this, including Trump. As referenced here he did say the Chinese Government pays import tariffs, which in entirely wrong. Also as referenced here he told US Military personnel that he gave them the largest raise in a decade which every person there knew was wrong." You can pretend I "never pointed out Trump's inaccuracies" but everyone here has seen me do this in the past. It's right here on these very forums. Until You asked, I have never brought up anything specific about AOC. "but someone rude makes a comment about AOC and you're all over defending their stance" Incorrect. I have never defended anyone's stance. YOU asked for examples. You did that, I didn't say anything about AOC as a person, I have no opinion of her. Find a thread where I made any comment about her. I said she, as well as Trump, (literally the words "including Trump") makes comments with authority about things they don't know about. That is all I said until I was asked for examples, then asked more questions about those examples and now you want to pretend I never criticize Trump when I did. Literally in this very thread? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 13:44:42 "so you want ICE out their hunting down immigrants to fill beds?" No. I said that this document does not say that even though it was claimed as such, incorrectly, by AOC: https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr2029/BILLS-114hr2029enr.pdf Again, the point was the claim that the document said "fill" when it does not. That's it. That is all I am saying. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by LostArtist on 05/24/19 at 13:54:36 4565676F7265000 wrote:
yeah, fair enough... sometimes I just like to argue for argument's sake :P |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 16:09:45 "yeah, fair enough... sometimes I just like to argue for argument's sake" Well if anything you provided empirical evidence of what I was originally saying. That people are arguing over the person and not the content. You did this to the point of fabricating and declaring your own inaccuracies, which to me exhibits the very issue. People want to defend the person instead of just admitting what they said was inaccurate and moving on. "but Trump also uses" Never said he didn't, actually said he did. "madder at Trump for having MORE than you are at AOC" Nope, just observing an inaccurate statement. "do you see her's as more egregious or something?" Nope, just observing an inaccurate statement. "but you are assuming her mistakes are for ill intent" Nope, just observing an inaccurate statement. Etc. Etc. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/24/19 at 19:19:43 253A3C3B2621102010283A367D4F0 wrote:
She's saying Let's take the money we were gonna GIVE Amazon and USE it to create jobs. She's dumbernshit. You Can't walk that back. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/24/19 at 19:38:13 "Let's take the money we were gonna GIVE Amazon and USE it to create jobs." On the surface that makes a lot of sense to people. Don't give money to greedy corporations, invest it in local business. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/24/19 at 19:49:07 They weren't Giving Money to Amazon, though, were they? Not making them pay property taxes doesn't create money to use. It's too simple to need an explanation, and yet, here I am.. TRYING to get adults to understand WHY she's an idiot. Do people actually believe New York was GIVING CASH to Amazon? Do people really not understand that the deal, a common deal, offered by cities to corporations as incentive to build, the state would Exempt them from property taxes for a period of time. Why does that confuse sophisticated adults? It's clear to me. Wal-Mart has been a YUGE beneficiary of that very idea. Running Amazon off cost that state tons of jobs. And it would not have Cost them anything. Zero. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/25/19 at 05:05:48 Jog, the reason why people find what she said to be a sensible comment is because they have the mindset that the government is automatically entitled to an individual or corporation's property, in this case a percentage of their revenue. I also think they consider economics to be a zero sum gain, that money is not created but rather is a fixed amount. If Amazon wins, NY loses. All of us work for a wealthy person or family. The family that owns the company I work for owns their own island with 7 houses on it. As far as I know, they sleep on mattresses stuffed with hundred dollar bills that I helped make for them. But I don't feel like I or the government has claim on anything more than a reasonable level of tax, much lower than what we do now for that matter. I don't know if it was this foolish woman ran Amazon off all by herself, I doubt that. But she certainly played a part and represents a New York ideology that any company should think twice about. One reason the economy surged after Trump is because they felt he was going to improve the climate for doing business, and he did. Yes, liberals like AOC cost NY millions in economic activity that was never generated. And for this, somehow she's celebrated as a hero. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/25/19 at 06:52:44 She SAID Let's use the Money We were Gonna give Amazon and create jobs. Now, that is only possible if she BELIEVES that New York was gonna GIVE Amazon money , when actually and obviously, the deal was, they simply wouldn't levy property taxes for some prearranged period of time. That's what is so indescribably stupid. That anyone would call her statements reasonable completely fails to grasp the obvious. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/25/19 at 07:57:50 022220283522470 wrote:
Today, that is exactaly what a generation now believes. Because the, 'Dumbing down', is working. Oversimplification of content, exactaly what today's, 'teachers' are taught to teach. Or what today's, 'teachers' simply don't know, because they themselves, are the result of earlier, 'Dumbing down'. 40 + years ago, AOC would not have had a chance in H ell of winning. 20 Years ago AOC, would have had more votes, but still not won. Today a dirty glass, with a 'D' on it can win, (in that district) The 'Dumbing down' is a fixed thing, all across the political spectrum. (Twice a year, I teach a class , 12-14 ave., on a very specific subject, as a volunteer. In the last 38 years I have SEEN, the absolute, complete, 'Dumbing down'. Most of these kids, TODAY, do NOT, know the meaning of the words: Ethics, Predication, Conservation, Preservation, Skill, Responsibility, Management, and their are many others) 38 to 30 years ago, they DID ! Here is the question: Is AOC, Deliberately talking really stupid, believing/KNOWING, other stupid people will follow. (Just the same as the Trump Haters say he is doing) Or is AOC, REALLY, that Stupid ? Does, 'Dumbing down', benefit, Ultra Liberal Fairy Dust Sprinkling Socialists? OR Does, 'Dumbing down', benefit, Conservative, ADULTS, (From all parties), |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/25/19 at 08:55:56 Trump is President,... stupid is redefined. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/25/19 at 15:40:25 5B4D5A475F4A475C280 wrote:
So you believe, AOC is not, Really Stupid ? |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/25/19 at 22:04:11 1107100D15000D16620 wrote:
And how exactly does that impact what the idiot A.O.Crazy said? Huhh? Deflection won't change what she said. She BELIEVES that New York HAS cash in hand, BECAUSE they Didn't GIVE it to Amazon. She's a FUKKING IDIOT. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/19 at 06:13:21 In a lot of ways, she's exactly like Trump, a mirror image. That's why she's attracting strong support for and strong against. If she has a good support staff that can navigate around all the obstacles that she creates (like this Amazon fiasco) and those from the outside, I predict she'll be Speaker and maybe even President. I also predict she'll be the one who orders my arrest, imprisonment and perhaps execution for refusing to yield everything I am to The State. That's what socialist dictators end up doing to those who cling to freedom. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/26/19 at 08:56:31 So is she a lot like Trump, or Stalin?... ;D She's a lot like neither... ...and she's ten times smarter than Trump... (make that a hundred). |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/19 at 09:23:38 Your TDS is disrupting your logic. You’ve know the name Donald Trump for decades. He’s brilliant in his own way as is she. The question is who is more likely to turn into a violent leader? She is. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/26/19 at 09:52:26 Web, you know that argument is ridiculous... Tell me the next time she offers to pay legal bills of violent fans, or tells them to punch someone in the face. AOCDS is treatable Oh look,... Deplorable vs adorable... ;D [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIs2L2nUL-0[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj2Xald7NYQ[/media] |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/26/19 at 12:14:28 3721362B33262B30440 wrote:
Can’t you see, AOC is just a fantasy ? Can’t you see that AOC is not at all, ‘right’, for the Job? She is NOT, a polished Politician, she is a bartender and a failed, wanna be dancer. She does NOT Learn/Study about topics, before she opens her, C ock holster, and spews forth. Their are so many members of her OWN Party, that Hate her ! Her hands are to small, she dies her hair, she has to shave her mustache, …, …, …, (and on and on and on) And if you can’t see that, If YOU do not agree with me, than YOU clearly are a: …, …, …, …, …, …, …, …, !!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh look,... Deplorable vs adorable.. Yep, that view of her, ‘C ock holster', is working, Just like she planned ! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/19 at 12:25:38 She helped cost her district an enormous opportunity. I’d take an off the cuff comment over that. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/26/19 at 12:50:09 685A5D4C4B5A4D725E4D543F0 wrote:
Your argument was,... 497B7C6D6A7B6C537F6C751E0 wrote:
..and that is true BS... You can hate her all you want,.. and there are many things you could point to that might be at least arguable... MORE VIOLENT?.... can't be more absurd. Trump is the first 6ft man I've ever seen with a Napoleon complex. (Must be the questionable weenie)... ;D OAC will have no such problem. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/26/19 at 13:08:10 6771667B63767B60140 wrote:
Nop, she most probably does Not have a weenie.. (Unless she is a he, and fooling us all) Yet every-time she opens her, 'C ock Holster', She shows the world, It is truly, Just a, C ock Holster. Because it is NOT, attached to any brain ! (Rather like B.S, and C.U., but they don't have a, C ock Holster) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/26/19 at 13:15:57 0F2C1132302B2C25420 wrote:
Don't go on about it,.. Trump already has a complex about not needing a holster... |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/26/19 at 15:16:05 7E687F627A6F62790D0 wrote:
What ? Are you saying you are already tired of hearing, ‘…AOC’s Mouth is nothing but a C ock Holster’…” (Even though you SAID, it is OK) Of course, no way, could any other people be tired of your, (and your Pets), saying very disparaging things, about the current POTUS. (Things that make, ‘C ock Holster’, pale by comparison.) Despite, the fact that even the UL, FDS, Socialists, are Benefiting, from the current POTUS’’s policies/actions. Credit for the statement: ‘ Mouth is a C ock Holster’ to Ron White. Actually a Comedian. (not pretend ones like tt posts) And credit to the fact it is NOT, ‘dirty’, goes to B.C. who said, to everybody, on TV, (to the like) ’sticking ones wange in someone else's MOUTH, is NOT Sex’ and to all the UL, FDS, that believed him then, and now. Trump already has a complex about not needing a holster… How in the heck, is that statement related to, AOC’s Mouth is, a C ock Holster ? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by pg on 05/26/19 at 15:59:28 It would appear that is fair game, I mean Colbert did say something on similar line about the POTUS..... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/26/19 at 16:15:45 70536E4D4F54535A3D0 wrote:
What ? Are you saying you are already tired of hearing, ‘…AOC’s Mouth is nothing but a C ock Holster’…” (Even though you SAID, it is OK) Of course, no way, could any other people be tired of your, (and your Pets), saying very disparaging things, about the current POTUS. (Things that make, ‘C ock Holster’, pale by comparison.) Despite, the fact that even the UL, FDS, Socialists, are Benefiting, from the current POTUS’’s policies/actions. Credit for the statement: ‘ Mouth is a C ock Holster’ to Ron White. Actually a Comedian. (not pretend ones like tt posts) And credit to the fact it is NOT, ‘dirty’, goes to B.C. who said, to everybody, on TV, (to the like) ’sticking ones wange in someone else's MOUTH, is NOT Sex’ and to all the UL, FDS, that believed him then, and now. Trump already has a complex about not needing a holster… How in the heck, is that statement related to, AOC’s Mouth is, a C ock Holster ? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D [/quote] There was a point.... ...you missed it entirely... To be fair,.. I never expected you to get it. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by WebsterMark on 05/26/19 at 17:09:19 Sure you can say that about her but why? It kinda seems too close to child porn or something. I'm not going near that. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/26/19 at 17:54:55 665453424554437C50435A310 wrote:
LOLOLOLOLO I love it. (Bot won't get it) |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/26/19 at 18:20:29 rr Stop dodging Stop deflecting She's so ignorant that she BELIEVES New York was gonna GIVE MONEY TO AMAZON, and now Since that didn't happen NOW New York can use THAT nonexistent Money, to CREATE JOBS! Just ADMIT IT She's a Frikken IDIOT. 786761667B7C4D7D4D75676B20120 wrote:
She's saying Let's take the money we were gonna GIVE Amazon and USE it to create jobs. She's dumbernshit. You Can't walk that back. [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Serowbot on 05/27/19 at 07:59:26 594640475A5D6C5C6C54464A01330 wrote:
..and Trump thinks China pays the tariffs he imposes... ...and Mexico will pay for the wall through tariffs... Can I get a "Trump's a friggin' idiot", please?... :-? AOC is young and has time to learn. Trump don't read. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by Eegore on 05/27/19 at 09:58:39 "Can I get a "Trump's a friggin' idiot", please?... " No. He gets a pass. Just like AOC gets a pass from her supporters. |
|
Title: Re: She's the future Post by MnSpring on 05/27/19 at 14:26:46 Used to be, that ignorance of something, had consequences. One case in point, Hubert Horatio "Skip" Humphrey III, was running for Gov in Minn. His chosen Lt. Gov., Was asked by the Press: "What are your thoughts on this New E-85 Fuel” She said: ‘Don’t ask me those complicated Scientific questions’ Where, (if she did not know what E-85 was), probably should have said: ‘I’ll get back to you on that’. Instead, it cost HHH & her the election. They WERE ahead, then after that statement, basically overnight they were far behind. That year Jessy Won, because of a DFI statement of a Lt Gov elect. The farmers that were receiving the highly subsidized, subsidy for E-85, decided to NOT vote for HHH, because his Lt Gov was a DFI. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |