I acknowledged the differences in geography and as I said from the first sentence no two things are exactly the same. There are things in Russia's favor and likewise headwinds against them in an effort to make the two as comparable as possible.
You still are in no position to be able to explain how long this should or shouldn't take. Are you implying the Russians had the red carpet rolled out for them, while in Iraq there were no serviceable roads? What exactly is your point from a military affairs expert such as yourself?
Ah, so you're back to the country is 'dying' verbiage is it? Seriously, get a grip.
It might not sit well with you, or make any sense, but it makes sense to our power brokers. We know exactly how to provoke a response, how to keep the peace, and how not to in Ukraine. We chose our path and Moscow chose its path. None of this is very surprising the more I read about how much we expected such a response to acts perceived as aggressive or provocative.
Not specifically, right now I am on the "Only russia knows what it's plans for ukraine are after it wins the war" camp. Everyone else is pretty much speculating. Annexing the place seems to not be on the table anymore (it'd be saturday morning cartoon madness) but that still leaves the puppet government and breaking it apart options (I don't know what other possibilities there could be). I am not sure of what other alternatives there could be...
No they don't. CNN is a neolib-infested cesspool. I have no use for aesthetic liberalism bankrolled by corporate interests.
And why would the majority of the people oppose them now? It wouldn't have anything to do with data and the current status of the pandemic in many countries, would it? Of course not, it's about you brave freedom fighters standing up against the oppressive government who want to muzzle you and then them finally relenting because you guys were just so damn patriotic and righteous, right?
Please continue to ignore all nuance and relevant underpinnings in such a discussion just so you think you're getting your point across.
No one thinks high taxes are "great". Taxes are a shakedown. One that sane people accept because we need paved roads and trash collection and don't want the poor, disabled, and retired to starve to death. I mean, maybe you wouldn't have a problem living without those kinds of things. So you're free to go find an unclaimed island or something.
You're incorrect about Russia's approach to the pandemic and you're incorrect about who European citizens would prefer to be lorded over by.
No they don't. CNN is a neolib-infested cesspool. I have no use for aesthetic liberalism bankrolled by corporate interests.
And why would the majority of the people oppose them now? It wouldn't have anything to do with data and the current status of the pandemic in many countries, would it? Of course not, it's about you brave freedom fighters standing up against the oppressive government who want to muzzle you and then them finally relenting because you guys were just so damn patriotic and righteous, right?
I would guess information relating to your confidential, classified and top secret demographic are locked inside the big warehouse with crates, along with Obama's birth certificate..... (I'm kidding about Obama's birth cert btw)
CNN and Fox News,, there is no middle ground. If people hate Trump they're CNN and vice versa. Its not hard to deduce where people stand.
Everyone has 2 choices in life. Support things that give people more options, more opportunities, more freedom and progress. Or the opposite.
I've always supported the former over the latter. Which is where our disagreement stems from.
There isn't any silly and childish "freedom fighter" stereotype that comes with that. Its up to the majority to decide what type of world they want to live in. And that's what the rest of us get stuck with apparently.
Please continue to ignore all nuance and relevant underpinnings in such a discussion just so you think you're getting your point across.
No one thinks high taxes are "great". Taxes are a shakedown. One that sane people accept because we need paved roads and trash collection and don't want the poor, disabled, and retired to starve to death. I mean, maybe you wouldn't have a problem living without those kinds of things. So you're free to go find an unclaimed island or something.
You're incorrect about Russia's approach to the pandemic and you're incorrect about who European citizens would prefer to be lorded over by.
I would guess information relating to your confidential, classified and top secret demographic are locked inside the big warehouse with crates, along with Obama's birth certificate..... (I'm kidding about Obama's birth cert btw)
I'd argue these are the middle ground lol. The Majority Report, Young Turks, and Secular Talk for example are far more left leaning news sources than any of the other shows on CNN IMHO. Though I think Fox might be further to the right than CNN is to the left. Could just be the Trump years that has me thinking that though. OAN and Newsmax seem further right. Than Fox to me.
Everyone has 2 choices in life. Support things that give people more options, more opportunities, more freedom and progress. Or the opposite.
I've always supported the former over the latter. Which is where our disagreement stems from.
I feel like that's an over simplification. Like... everyone in here is pro freedom. It's just some of us are pro positive freedom while others are pro negative freedom.
Negative freedom is freedom FROM something.
Positive freedom is freedom TO DO something.
Both are freedoms I think people should have... in concert. I think positive freedoms are more important though. There are some things I shouldn't have freedom from. That no one should have freedom from.
There isn't any silly and childish "freedom fighter" stereotype that comes with that. Its up to the majority to decide what type of world they want to live in. And that's what the rest of us get stuck with apparently.
I don't think you understand what anyone left of center supports or their views. Many don't want higher taxes on the middle class and lower, they want higher taxes on the wealthy, or at least higher percentage paid than what middle class and poor people pay. Same with businesses. If the wealthy and businesses paid their fair share of taxes, then the "free stuff" could easily be affordable, especially if the government stopped wasting so much on crap like defense and warfare.
Ironically, I don't see most right wingers complaining about bad businesses getting free handouts or bailouts.
The federal government has a severe spending problem. But without understanding the nature of the issue, we can’t adequately address it.
americansforprosperity.org
(this chart ends in 2018 but Covid and the recent years only accelerated this trend)
(read in particular - Myth #3: “Really? Couldn’t we pay slightly more in taxes to cover the deficit? Or tax the rich?”)
Even with huge increases, up to 100% of income for those making 500k or more a year. Which ofc would have unintended consequences because those making 500k a year would react to 100% rates, or even some other high bracket by any number of things: firings, outsourcing, moving, quitting, etc - sorry but the wealthy ARE job-creators (and can be net job-destroyers if disincentivized) whether you like to admit it or not.
We spend way, way more than we 'make' from tax revenues. Talking about increasing the taxes on the wealthy for free shit is window dressing. It doesn't address the root problem, spending.
The difference is entirely made up from debt financing.
The US' biggest product and export is debt - USD we 'print' (now digitally) and our bonds. Servicing this debt is becoming a function of taking out debt to pay our interest on our previous debt, which is growing larger not smaller. Any 5 year old can tell you how that math is unsustainable. Debt to service debt can not continue forever. Exponential growth (whether it be debt or population) cannot be sustained forever. Eventually there will be a 'pop'
This is all underpinned by what has been called our "Exorbitant Privilege" (and easy access to relatively-cheap hydrocarbons, subject to change. see: peak oil)
(what happens if production has a big fall... don't fool yourself into thinking correlation and causation not being a thing here)
Without which the house of cards falls apart.
We need the world to want our dollars. Particularly in energy. Which is one of many reasons pushing blocs of countries off the dollar could start a chain-reaction that hurts us economically more than you can imagine. Hyperinflation is a real possibility. Although most think it will look like high deflation, then hyperinflationary pressures to the point you won't be able to account for anything. I'm not just talking about $10/gal gas, I'm talking your life will be completely upended; everything about it. Stagflation is also probable.
Which is one reason we keep such a large military, and a presence in the Middle East which just so happens to transact/sell oil in dollars, while we sell them arms and fight their wars. However, there are rumblings about that even in OPEC+ nations, particularly right now.
There's a reason our mil budget dwarfs the next 10 nations COMBINED. How do you think we pay for all that? Just because America is soooo rich due to our 'exceptionalism'? We don't have the monopoly on resources and technology. Not even the first-to-market head start really even. No, it's entirely a function of rigging the markets in our favor, and other nations tacitly going along due to lack of alternatives.
This has been called the USD the 'cleanest dirty shirt'... however, look to the horizon for the SDRs, Yuan or other basket of currencies, simple bilateral-trade agreements bypassing the dollar entirely, Euro dominance... probably something akin to a CBDC crypto basket, but maybe something also gold-backed (the gold has left the West and is now held in the East in countries like India, China, and even Russia... this is called planning ahead!).
There is absolutely no reason the dollar will be used as a reserve currency in perpetuity. Once it is not, we'll have a LOT of currency in circulation and demand will fall through the floor. Do you remember supply vs demand? That means it won't be worth anything. That will happen very fast once the world decouples.
No country can keep this privilege indefinitely:
And we are hastening the world to usher in whatever the next reserve currency is or will be. Once that happens, we won't be able to pay for that huge military (for better or worse), and even less domestically. We'll be just another Britain in the world *if* we land on our feet, but so much debt has been built up the transition won't be very fun. If this happens from a domino effect with Russia/China/India having a snow-ball mentality with other nations it will feel like it happened overnight in retrospect.
One reason taking Russia off of SWIFT has been handled with kid's gloves. The next "Lehman Moment" in the world could likely destabilize the financial markets the world over and usher in a changing of the guard for reserve currency status. We could see ground-zero for that in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Some thought it would have been Covid, but since that seemed to affect everyone more or less the same there wasn't an upset. Oh, well, everyone except China - the ONLY economy to see GROWTH during Covid (2020) - things that make you go 'hmmmm...'
Think economic devastation on par with nuclear devastation.
============
TLDR: talking about taxing the rich makes one feel good, but is meaningless.
The 'rich' already pay much more in taxes as a block than they proportionately 'should' - maybe a consumption tax that is universal would be better than an income tax. In any event, this is why a strong middle class is needed because it can be taxed appropriately to pay for government expenditures. Hurting the middle class not only creates a larger class divide between the rich and the poor, but less class mobility, which is actually a real thing despite what socialists claim. This means more revenues for aiding the poor; rising tides raise all ships.
But none of this matters because it's a small drop in the ocean of our spending regardless of raising or lowering rates here and there in this bracket or the other. This is like tylenol for a fever due from an infection. Sure, the fever is temporarily alleviated, but if the root infection is not treated in time the body will die no matter how much fever can be abated with OTC fever reducers.
Republicans and Democrats arguing over minute tax breaks or increases is theater, and more a play to their bases and donors.
Meanwhile, TINSTAAFL reigns supreme.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
Income via taxes doesn't cover expenses.
There is a projected runaway effect from our CBO, based on current spending. Taxing the wealthy can't stem the tide going out.
We can move some 'defense' budget to 'non-defense' but that's a relatively small piece of the pie compared to our other non-defense discretionary spending added to our mandatory spending. And, for how long could we do this? IF we don't maintain our military presence, we can't force the petrodollar to continue, then all these pies will shrink considerably.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
There's always this gem:
Which doesn't happen by a fluke. It's by design, and tied to the dollar being so desired because we force that paradigm to continue.
One hand washed the other - the military's size and presence keeps us on the dollar, the dollar keeps its value and desirability, this desirability allows us to 'print' more, more dollars allows us to pay for the military's size and presence, the cycle continues.
Shrinking the military's size and presence puts a negative pressure on the dollar's desirability.
CNN and Fox News,, there is no middle ground. If people hate Trump they're CNN and vice versa. Its not hard to deduce where people stand.
Everyone has 2 choices in life. Support things that give people more options, more opportunities, more freedom and progress. Or the opposite.
I've always supported the former over the latter. Which is where our disagreement stems from.
There isn't any silly and childish "freedom fighter" stereotype that comes with that. Its up to the majority to decide what type of world they want to live in. And that's what the rest of us get stuck with apparently.
I've made my positions pretty clear and have not lied about them, so your insistence on binary categorization just shows a lack of or refusal of depth in thinking. That's not really my problem. It's not really a meaningful talking point when talking about FACTS either. Russians have had covid restrictions, a lessening of them is the same thing most countries are doing in response to Omicron.
Sure, "stuck with". If you believe in collectivism of any sort. You seem to think that's evil or derogatory, so I'm not sure why you would invoke it.
What's with your insistence on painting me as an extremist or fringe? Because I think the very wealthy should pay more taxes? What's the motivation there even?
Raise taxes on the wealthy, yes. Don't allow people to grow their wealth free of taxation. That seems basic enough to cover it.
"Driving the wealthy out of the country"..... where? The wealthy don't keep their money in places where it can be taxed anyway. The wealthy are multinational. You act as if any meaningful action can be taken without actual reform. It's not happening either way. America exists on the very foundation of privatization of gains and the socialization of losses. I hope you yourself are very wealthy, then maybe your indignation at the plight of the billionaire would be a bit more logical.
If it's a very basic and fundamental point, then you're failing at understanding it.
"Driving the wealthy out of the country"..... where? The wealthy don't keep their money in places where it can be taxed anyway. The wealthy are multinational.
Because the right are brainwashed into being pro-business and pro-wealthy, even when both entities would screw over workers happily. It didn't drive the wealthy out of the country though, that's just bullshit made up to get people to oppose increasing taxes and so the wealthy can get support from people. They can afford to pay the taxes, but they don't want to because of greed. They're the ones making the choice, and if they and these businesses were really Americans first or cared about Americans, they wouldn't be moving jobs out of the country. They're only doing that because it maximizes profits.
Businesses, politicians, and the wealthy do what they can to divide people and keep it that way, including moving businesses out of country and outsourcing and blaming the workers so people won't be able to come together and hurt the three groups. Kellogg's tried to stop their workers from getting what they want, but thanks to people working together, they gave in, and the workers won.
Which is what? This conversation was about making the wealthy actually pay taxes on what they earn. Inheritance tax is a tax, yes, but it exists for other reasons than income tax. Do you really want to compare taxes on money that you earn with money that you don't? I don't think that really serves your point here.
I guess if you don't pay meaningful taxes due to loopholes, actually paying the taxes your bracket would require would be seen as a tax raise, wouldn't it? Or does 3% income tax seem fair to you? I'm certain you don't pay that little.
And yes, I said what I said as a critique of the system, glad you noticed.
I'm sorry, but I really don't think you need to be lecturing anyone on debating. You're habitually incorrect or misguided in regards to the even the most basic and essential information, insist on speaking in vague generalities, rarely expand upon them when someone engages with you, and constantly change the subject or stop replying when you're challenged.
You're not even here to debate, you're here to try to convince yourself or others that you're capable of profundity. You're not.
I feel like Joe Biden or Brandon as I like to call him, has not done enough for this country. I asked myself what Joe Biden has done, and all I could really think of was talk and encourage... like getting vaccine and wearming mask. That is a good thing that he is talking, but it is not enough, he needs to do something. I THINK Brandon should resign! The phrase "all bark, no bite" really makes sense here to me.
I feel like Joe Biden or Brandon as I like to call him, has not done enough for this country. I asked myself what Joe Biden has done, and all I could really think of was talk and encourage... like getting vaccine and wearming mask. That is a good thing that he is talking, but it is not enough, he needs to do something. I THINK Brandon should resign! The phrase "all bark, no bite" really makes sense here to me.
if my assumption of xi0's demographic is right, his demographic is not silent, they've brought up his mental stability many times. I know the left have, especially during the presidential campaign.
I feel like Joe Biden or Brandon as I like to call him, has not done enough for this country. I asked myself what Joe Biden has done, and all I could really think of was talk and encourage... like getting vaccine and wearming mask. That is a good thing that he is talking, but it is not enough, he needs to do something. I THINK Brandon should resign! The phrase "all bark, no bite" really makes sense here to me.
EDIT: To be clear, I keep asking because there are different brands of lefty, and not all of us agree on the same things. Is he a socialist? Is he a SocDem like me? Is he a DemSoc? Tankie? Communist? Nazbol? Liberal? Left-leaning centrist?
I dislike the bit about the judges tbh. Not that I dislike biden specifically appointing judges but rather that the appointment of judges keeps getting more and more political even though the appointment of such positions should be as apolitical as possible. Judge appointments have become a clownshow basically. And the worst of it is that judge's political leaning have an actual effect that is very noticeable. Even at the supreme court level you can pretty much predict how justices are voting based on their political ideology. Biden hasn't handled this in quite the same way as trump or McConnel but hasn't exactly done much to push this in a healthy direction. Unfortunately fixing this would be more about a commitment all parties involved have to basic democratic principles over conservative/progressive politics...
I dislike the bit about the judges tbh. Not that I dislike biden specifically appointing judges but rather that the appointment of judges keeps getting more and more political even though the appointment of such positions should be as apolitical as possible. Judge appointments have become a clownshow basically. And the worst of it is that judge's political leaning have an actual effect that is very noticeable. Even at the supreme court level you can pretty much predict how justices are voting based on their political ideology. Biden hasn't handled this in quite the same way as trump or McConnel but hasn't exactly done much to push this in a healthy direction. Unfortunately fixing this would be more about a commitment all parties involved have to basic democratic principles over conservative/progressive politics...
