last nights debate (sry posted in wrong section)

Well not that I like Trump but seemed he owned Hillary pretty hard last night..   she barely gathered her words a few times.  

of course all the media will talk about now is that Trump wouldnt answer the "accept defeat question"    idk why that even matters.     and they freaked that he called her a "nasty woman"

another really funny point that was made on the news today was how many people had claimed voter fraud and election issues in the past,   actually many many times..   huge rolling stone articles about it,    new york times,    all sorts of political figures claimed this happened when Bush was elected.       Kinda funny that the same people are bashing trump for whining about it.    


were in big trouble either way but I gotta say as much as I think Trump is an idiot,   I think we are far worse off with Hillary at this point.   Main reasons in my mind are:  

Her terrible record in the middle east and horrible nuclear deals
Continuing obamacare,   tax payers pay for people who choose to be unhealthy
Her saying she is going to make all these changes but she has been in a position to help for many years and never accomplished any of what she talks about

If we as small business owners vote for Hillary then a big chunk of that tax money we fork over every year is going to cover health care for people who eat McDonalds daily and drink 96oz big gulps of soda.      Diabetes and laziness are 2 huge problems in the US.

Well, I have been trying to avoid this conversation, but since you brought it up.

Trump has shown to lack depth regarding foreign matters. That is expected as he isn't in politics, but he hasn't become any better since he got the nomination and that is a concern.

Trump's platform really is about taking the Country back to the way that it used to be with strong family values, strong military, law-abiding citizens, limited immigration, and manufacturing jobs. I wish those days would come back as well, but I don't think that is possible....times have changed too much.

Trump did win the second and third debate, despite giving some very ignorant foreign policy answers, in my view mainly because of Clinton's history and issue plans.

Clinton should be at her most comfortable talking about foreign relations and less about creating jobs and economy, but her performance as Secretary of State was not that good. She has proven to have made some very bad calculations and did again by suggesting no-fly zones which Obama, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Putin have said would likely end in war.

As a small business operator, the real division comes in the form of economic plans. Trump's is based on proven planks and Clinton is proposing straight up Communism. Did you notice how proudly she said it once it finally was tossed out there...."I am going where the money is and heavily taxing those that earn over $250,000." Then using it for free tuition and entitlement programs.

I never thought that the day would come when we see the press and this much of the country openly supporting Communism. Dark days are coming regardless of who wins the election, but Communism will be the absolute darkest.

So, yes, Trump won the debate in my estimation, but probably still lost the war.

Well both choices is horrible, I'm not voting for either one and quite frankly I hate both of them, but if economy is your priority, Trump's plan doesn't make sense at all, he plans to do a whole lot and also reduce taxes across the board ( I'm not opposing paying less than what I'm paying now which I can buy a brand new Lexus in cash every year with the tax $$ I paid every year ) but his plan will result in deficit and our national debt will be close to double if not more at the end of his term.
Now the other problem is with Clinton's economic plan, I probably will have to pay more taxes but the budget will be more balanced, call it entitlement or whatever you want to call it, I know the economy will be better under Clinton ( at least until 2020 ), I definitely will hold on to my hard earned $$ from now until any of these two bozos leave the white house.
However on a hate scale, I know I hate Trump a LOT more ( not because he's running as a Republican ), just his arrogant attitude and no respect to people, it's one thing to not have respect to your opponent but to disrespect people in general is not acceptable to me, and the icing on the cake is for him not willing to accept the outcome of the election is outrageous, those of you who support him probably will defend him and say what his supporters are saying about voters fraud, that's why we have legal system here, we're not a third world country, everything can be monitored, and challenged in court, he doesn't like it, just go challenge it in court, which is what he's going to do anyway unless if he wins.
I don't understand one thing though, if he thinks the system is rigged, why didn't the GOP rig the nomination process to begin with ? They could've interfere and put John Kasich in ( which I would be happy to give my vote to btw ).

I have also been steering the lifeboat of hating both of them. It is like asking someone if they would like to be shot or electrocuted?

I have to disagree though on Clinton's economic plan. I really don't see how that could do anything except suppress industry and raise costs for goods and services.

I am all for a balanced budget and reducing debt, but everyone should have to shoulder that burden and not a specific group of people, but nobody was willing to do that when Ross Perot proposed it decades ago. People today want things as long as someone else is paying for it.

I am still on the fence with voting for the first time in my life and unless something changes in the short time left, I might sit this one out.

As for Trump not agreeing to concede the election if he loses....maybe it is me, but I really don't understand the outrage? I especially don't understand that from a party that still claims that Al Gore was robbed by the Supreme Court. This isn't a new thing in US history. It was low-class, but that shouldn't shock anybody who has been watching Trump's campaign to this point.

Oh well, a tall Rum and Coke on election day and 4 more years of turning off the news.

Lol, a tall rum and coke sounds really good.
Let me give a little more of my 2 cents, under Clinton, I as well as most Americans will pay the same amount of taxes if not more, that will result in more money going in to federal and then states and then down to the people ( more county workers, street and bridge repair projects, etc ) and when people have more money, they spend them on carpet cleaning, so that's money in our pockets.
On the opposite, less taxes paid, especially by billionaires and people make more than 250 k, the opposite of what I just said up there will happen, trickle down economics had not worked and will not work anytime soon.
Like I said I'm not voting for Clinton, the moment she realizes she's going to lose the nomination / election, she's going to loosen something out for the banks / Wallstreet that donated to her campaign and that's going to be the end of it, hold on to your money folks

Problem is that those customers have money not because of low tax rates, but because they have a job.....owned by those people making $250k plus.

Her plan employs government workers, but unemploys everyone else. If you work near a government center, you will do very well, but the rest are going to take a hard hit.

I don't look at it as trickle down....for me it is simply a matter of more business growth equals more people employed. It is always the paycheck that matters.

Hillary needs to not tax people in the same bracket who bring in 250,000/yr and 50million/year

Imagine a plumber who starts a business and gets 4 trucks going, hes going to be in that bracket easily.. doesnt make any sense at all.

She bases everything on people who have normal jobs out of vocational school or college making around 80-100k per year or 50k per year and considers that the entire middle class.

WE NEED small businesses to have a better chance to grow the economy, a business that brings in even 750,000 a year is still a SMALL business in the grand scheme of things

you cant tax them the same as an apple ceo making a quarter billion a year

I don't get into political threads for a reason.

Mostly that is because some people have certain beliefs, and it doesn't matter what is actually true or not, they are going to believe what they had set in stone in their mind.

trickle down does and did work. What never has worked, is taxing people to death. The people with the money are the people that employ people. Make the environment hostile, and they leave. Be it the state or the country. I would think anyone living in California would easily see that. Many companies moved out of state because of the costs to operate there. Many retirees leave Cali for other places with much lower costs of living.

Socialism/communism doesn't work. It never has, and it never will.

Billions of dollars have been spent on bridge projects over the last 8 years, and those are usually disasters before it's all done. One local bridge done 5 years ago, had to be done again this summer. No one was held accountable.

Make the "poor" work for a living. Stop with the hand outs. Stop the spending of our money (taxes) on BAD investments.

But, it really doesn't matter what I think. Far too many people think socialism is the answer. I can't help if they are too uneducated to know the difference. I can't help that they refuse to see the damage they are doing, and what will happen in the end as a result of it.

The key for me is that she is talking about gross earnings and not net! My Brother grosses $345,000 annual running a construction company, but only nets about $145,000. He will be happy to know that he is now considered the uber rich and must pay a lot more in taxes.

He has already told me that he will eliminate employees as a result. How does that help the economy?

ACpower1 wrote:Hillary needs to not tax people in the same bracket who bring in 250,000/yr and 50million/year    

Imagine a plumber who starts a business and gets 4 trucks going,  hes going to be in that bracket easily..  doesnt make any sense at all.  

She bases everything on people who have normal jobs out of vocational school or college making around 80-100k per year or 50k per year and considers that the entire middle class.  

WE NEED small businesses to have a better chance to grow the economy,     a business that brings in even 750,000 a year is still a SMALL business in the grand scheme of things  

you cant tax them the same as an apple ceo making a quarter billion a year

This I couldn't agree more !! Unfortunately all of these damn lawyers in the senate and House of Representatives will never pass this kind of tax reform.

If I hire another tech full time, under the current tax bracket my taxes will be about half, but I'm going to bring home about 20 k less at the end of the year ( assuming I pay 36 k / year for that tech ), if my tax bracket goes down the decision would've been easier, however I just can't convince myself enough that if tax brackets goes down for everyone, we would be as busy as we are now ( therefore defeating the purpose of hiring another tech ), not doubting your theory Rob, but that's just how it's been, when people have money they won't prioritize things, but when they have less money, cleanings become a luxury and will be put way behind foods on the dining table.

I wish I'm paying less taxes, I do, but if the cost of that is sluggish economy which will impact me and my family, I would rather paying what I'm paying now and still making good take home $$ as well as feeding a full time tech and a part time tech.

I know some of you are standing behind billionaires because they are the "job creators" and that they deserve the biggest tax breaks in the planet, but if I as a small business owner am paying close to 30k a year if not more in taxes, you think they deserve NOT to pay a single dime in taxes ? Because they are feeding a whole lot of employees and their family's mouth ? Those employees are working their butts off, a lot of them are paid minimum wage, is that a living wage ? The main reason why they need governments assistance is due to that, if they pay "living" wages, they wouldn't need governments assistance to live and believe me, they can afford it, one less mansion and one less private jet every year is not going to kill them.

We definitely differ in opinions, but just one final note, any trickle down economics this country did in the past ALWAYS resulted in recession, don't take my word for it, just google it, oh unless if you look at Fox News result then you will see that trickle down economics actually worked really well under Bill Clinton, that turned minus to surplus, lol

Ok, I'm done, I'm not going to look at this thread again, you guys have fun thinking whatever you want to think

Yes, trickle down under Billy the willy worked so well, the housing bubble burst (because of the socialist polices enacted).

I don't think anyone is saying "don't tax billionaires". I just think you don't know HOW a progressive tax scale works. Those at the top pay more as a percentage, then those in the middle or the bottom. No reason at all why anyone should pay what we in the middle are forced to pay (or more!)

I have seen the "working poor" get more in tax returns, then they paid in. Why? EVERYONE should be paying something in taxes. No reason ANYONE should be getting all they paid in (or MORE) back in taxes.

Helping businesses grow is the key......small, medium, and large. It is the whole source of jobs in America outside of a government gig. A business grossing 250k should not be getting beat up.

I understand the argument that trickle down never reached the lower class and some say it didn't reach far enough to the middle class. Even if we accept this as truth, how does stimulating the "middle out" as Clinton calls it going to be any different.?

If it doesn't trickle down, then the lower class still doesn't benefit form her plan....no different than any trickle down plan by Trump. The only difference is a greater loss of jobs and higher costs for goods and services for everyone.

I just don't accept her Communism plan as anything that is feasible. I don't make $250k, so the taxes will not be mine. I just have to pay more for everything so that kids can go to college for free and come away with a degree and no job prospects....don't see the advantages.

Like I said though, I don't believe either candidate will be successful, so I withhold my vote.

Sweden is an example of a country where everyone gets health care and it works out great for them, but their country is completely different than ours. People there are healthy and very few are overweight, people walk instead of driving, ride bikes instead of driving.. they eat healthy.

US is not Sweden. We have sooo many lazy unhealthy overweight people here its honestly one of the biggest problems in our country. Americans are spoiled and our consumption of everything from Mcdonalds to Oil is out of control.


If Hillary is president we will be paying a huge amount of our tax money to people who:

-Choose not to work by being overweight
-Eat Mcdonalds 10x/week because its cheaper/easier than the grocery store (another major problem in US)
-Drink 96oz big gulps of high fructose corn syrup.

You would be blown away to learn how many people in the US live like this. That is a recipe for diabetes.

and now the huge pharm companies make billions and billions from these people needing 10 pills a day to stay alive.

Almost all diseases are curable the ancient Chinese way... through diet. If one generation became sick or ill they would help them as much as they can, but they would focus on the next generation and curing these problems over the course of the next generation through diet.

Problem is eating healthy vegetables and less meat doesnt make anyone billions of dollars.