United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread

[Zachowon]

Got something for you

Spoiler

I'm sorry you dint seem to understand what a officer like him is supposed to do and rules he has to follow.

 

[Rocinante]

I'm sorry you dint seem to understand what a officer like him is supposed to do and rules he has to follow.

No it's just when others don't follow the rules, they get away with it and you don't complain. but of course they go after this guy because he might lean right wing... And it's the military so OF COURSE you're first in line to lick boot and defend it.

You're the only person I've ever even CALLED a bootlicker, I hate that phrase, but we can smell the boot on your breath from a mile away.

 

[Abhishekm]

I'm sorry you dint seem to understand what a officer like him is supposed to do and rules he has to follow.

Think the sentient is. Either there was a law or there was a 'law' amounting to 'don't make the boss look bad'. Either way don't think the people angry about it care much.

 

[VicSage]

Both of you stop that. Did the LtCol break UCMJ by speaking like this? According to the laws of the US military, yes, and he is getting his day in military tribunal for that. Is the reason for why this is happening likely reprehensible? Also yes. It is the catch 22 of any military member. You can break UCMJ, or you can remain silent on the inadequacies of your peers or superiors. We saw something similar happen with Captain Crozier last year with the "leak" from his ship regarding the lack of medical assistance. There is no good option here, especially as the laws against speaking out in the first place are nominally in place to prevent politicians from forcing soldiers to do things for their agendas. That they have been perverted to force people who object to bad ideas into silence is the flaw with any kind of law, that it will be twisted to the point of the spirit being broken, while remaining within the letter.

 

[CurtisLemay]

Bye Bye Infastructure Pie, Drove my Chevy to the Senate but the votes were short...this will be the day the bill dies...this will be the day the bill dies...

 

[Rocinante]

Both of you stop that. Did the LtCol break UCMJ by speaking like this? According to the laws of the US military, yes, and he is getting his day in military tribunal for that. Is the reason for why this is happening likely reprehensible? Also yes. It is the catch 22 of any military member. You can break UCMJ, or you can remain silent on the inadequacies of your peers or superiors. We saw something similar happen with Captain Crozier last year with the "leak" from his ship regarding the lack of medical assistance. There is no good option here, especially as the laws against speaking out in the first place are nominally in place to prevent politicians from forcing soldiers to do things for their agendas. That they have been perverted to force people who object to bad ideas into silence is the flaw with any kind of law, that it will be twisted to the point of the spirit being broken, while remaining within the letter.

The problem is that they selectively enforce it.

People like Zach don't complain much about the lefties getting away with breaking the rules. (And even defend THAT,) But someone who might not agree with the left establishment does, and he's in line to lick boot over it.

 

[Zachowon]

The problem is that they selectively enforce it.

People like Zach don't complain much about the lefties getting away with breaking the rules. (And even defend THAT,) But someone who might not agree with the left establishment does, and he's in line to lick boot over it.

What.
I am telling you how this shit works.
Ot takes people above you to file UCMJ charges.
So all those people that are for the left? They are often to high up.
Those that are lower will probably get it though.
It just doesn't make the media and Court Martials are not publicly viewed

 

[Rocinante]

What.
I am telling you how this shit works.
Ot takes people above you to file UCMJ charges.
So all those people that are for the left? They are often to high up.
Those that are lower will probably get it though.
It just doesn't make the media and Court Martials are not publicly viewed

I don't have to agree with how it works.

"This is just how it works," is not an excuse for people getting away with shit who shouldn't, and people getting punished for shit who shouldn't.

"This is just how it works," isn't a justification for SHIT.

Those people being too high up to get punished is a huge part of the fucking problem.

 

[BlackDragon98]

I'm sorry you dint seem to understand what a officer like him is supposed to do and rules he has to follow.

Why hasn't Milley been put in front of a firing squad for high treason yet?

US Military will (has?) ultimately become an/the instrument used to oppress the American people.

It is known.

 

[Zachowon]

I don't have to agree with how it works.

"This is just how it works," is not an excuse for people getting away with shit who shouldn't, and people getting punished for shit who shouldn't.

"This is just how it works," isn't a justification for SHIT.

Okay.
The military UCMJ makes it so the Military have specific things they have to follow, and only those above you can charge you for UCMJ
The military is a top down leadership, with exceptions.
For instance, an NCO can tell an officer they will not order someone to do something, and soldiers can tell NCOs the same.
Because as much as none of you seem to understand, we have some free will in the military.....

Why hasn't Milley been put in front of a firing squad for high treason yet?

US Military will (has?) ultimately become an/the instrument used to oppress the American people.

It is known.

Because the people above him won't do that.
Unless there is an independent review into what Milley did, or someone goes to the IG that what is happening goes against DoD/DA/etc policies and UCMJ.
Nothing will be done to Milley.

Why is it hard for you all to understand this?
Why is it hard to understand that Milley also has ZERO direct power over troops?
Why is it hard to understand what you are all freaking out about, not showing up with the two mostly combat arms branchesm

 

[Rocinante]

Okay.
The military UCMJ makes it so the Military have specific things they have to follow, and only those above you can charge you for UCMJ
The military is a top down leadership, with exceptions.
For instance, an NCO can tell an officer they will not order someone to do something, and soldiers can tell NCOs the same.
Because as much as none of you seem to understand, we have some free will in the military.....

Because the people above him won't do that.
Unless there is an independent review into what Milley did, or someone goes to the IG that what is happening goes against DoD/DA/etc policies and UCMJ.
Nothing will be done to Milley.

Why is it hard for you all to understand this?
Why is it hard to understand that Milley also has ZERO direct power over troops?
Why is it hard to understand what you are all freaking out about, not showing up with the two mostly combat arms branchesm

Zach, for the millionth time, it's not that we don't understand, it's that we don't AGREE with some of the decisions being made.

We understand them, we just aren't agreeing with them.

Yes, I understand how the military works, and as is, it's a corrupt shit show that isn't doing anything good for the American people.

By your own words it's corrupt. One of the top officials can commit treason and get away with it while someone lower says we need accountability and is now sitting in a military prison over it.

 

[Bear Ribs]

The problem is that they selectively enforce it.

People like Zach don't complain much about the lefties getting away with breaking the rules. (And even defend THAT,) But someone who might not agree with the left establishment does, and he's in line to lick boot over it.

Pretty sure he does, Zachowon complained plenty about Milley and said personage getting away with it. He just understands that there's nothing to be done at this stage because Milley's above the rank of any military fixing it, that's the job of the civilian oversight and until we get a president who cares it won't happen.

 

[Rocinante]

Pretty sure he does, Zachowon complained plenty about Milley and said personage getting away with it. He just understands that there's nothing to be done at this stage because Milley's above the rank of any military fixing it, that's the job of the civilian oversight and until we get a president who cares it won't happen.

He's defending the corrupt system that allows this shit to happen, and supports not doing anything to Milley because it's easier to wait for someone new, and let him get away with no consequences

 

[bintananth]

People competent enought to accrue fuck you levels of money or inherited a support base from parents competent enough to accrue it and successfully pass it on to their children generally can run circles around policies written by two bit hacks pulling stunts to induce bribes in the first place. Who saw that coming?

Doesn't even need to be fuck you levels of money.

Do it right and your entire fortune can be passed on in such a way that you don't get dinged with any death taxes and your descendants have to start filing tax returns before their first or second birthday and continuing until they get their first job telling the IRS "I don't make enough to owe taxes".

 

[CurtisLemay]

Pelosi delays vote on infrastructure bill as Dems fail to reach deal: LIVE UPDATES

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., left the Capitol in the wee hours of Friday morning, as she continued to express optimism that Democrats can come to a deal on their reconciliation bill and convince progressives to vote for the infrastructure bill.

www.foxnews.com

It seems it's all falling apart for the Dems.

 

[JagerIV]

That just sounds like an estate tax with a 100% bracket. If the issue is that the super-rich create and abuse loopholes, eliminate the loopholes; that's a different problem from the basic structure of the tax. Admittedly it's a fucking huge problem and there is an argument to be had that it's easier to just burn the whole thing down and build from scratch.

No, the core of my argument is the assumption that the government uses tax revenue. As long as revenue is to be raised there is a debate to be had over what ways are better or worse to raise that revenue by. And what standards we should use to judge better and worse. Where the money is spent is a different issue entirely.

Well, no. This is a very different purposal than a 100% bracket. 100% bracket means you should earn $12 million in wealth, or whatever, and stop. This still lets you accumulate wealth and give it to who you want, it just forces you to break up a fortune, but in a controlled way that makes sense to the people involved.

If your focus is on revenue raising, and not equity, then the Estate tax is, well, a terrible way to do it: it raises about $20 billion in income as of 2015. In a budget of $3,000 billion, and given all the compliance and enforcement costs of complying with it, the link above suggests the Estate tax reduces overall GDP by about 1%, so in order to raise $20 billion were by that estimate suppressing the economy by $200 billion dollars to raise $20 billion in revenue.

The estate tax as far as I can tell simply isn't justifiable as a revenue raising mechanism: it doesn't gain a bunch of money, and inflicts a lot of deadweight losses in driving people into suboptimal activities like structuring trusts, paying a lot of money to lawyers, and how expensive and difficult actually figuring out the true value of an estate actually is.

Therefore, an estate take has to be justified on non-revenue raising goals: a 1% reduction in GDP might be a worthwhile cost if excess concentrations of wealth are destabilizing to a country, so sacrificing 1% GDP now buys a more harmonious, efficient, and whatever else a less unequal society may allow. But, if were implementing it for other social goals besides revenue generation for the government, which it is terrible for, then we have to contend with the fact that it, well, is self evidently terrible at reducing wealth inequality, given how wealth inequality has by all those measurements increased despite the estate tax, and there are more effective schemes to achieve those goals, if we even agree that is a goal worth persuing, like what I outlined above.

 

[Abhishekm]

Doesn't even need to be fuck you levels of money.

Do it right and your entire fortune can be passed on in such a way that you don't get dinged with any death taxes and your descendants have to start filing tax returns before their first or second birthday and continuing until they get their first job telling the IRS "I don't make enough to owe taxes".

Fuck you levels of money is whatever level of money you require to no longer care about what others idiots think. It can be a billion dollars or it can be 2 grand. Depends on the person honestly.

It seems it's all falling apart for the Dems.

Its always falling apart for the opposition. Especially when its falling upward.

 

[LordsFire]

I am not in favor of redistributionism per se, for its own sake. But I am generally for progressive taxes as opposed to flat taxes as the main source of government revenue raised from the population on the theory that, dollar for dollar, taxes do relatively less harm to the richer than to the poorer. This goes for income tax and, yes, a wealth tax that is assessed once per lifetime on the wealthiest 0.1% or whatever the hell it is.

Whether or not the rich can 'afford' it more, is irrelevant to the fact that it is immoral to punish people for being productive and successful.

Your money is your money. It is not the government's money that you are allowed to use for a time, it is your money.

Property rights are essential to a healthy civilization, because ultimately property rights are human rights.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Whether or not the rich can 'afford' it more, is irrelevant to the fact that it is immoral to punish people for being productive and successful.

Your money is your money. It is not the government's money that you are allowed to use for a time, it is your money.

Property rights are essential to a healthy civilization, because ultimately property rights are human rights.

TAXATION IS THEFT

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I don't believe that all taxation is theft.

I do believe that taxing work is theft. Thus, I am for complete recovation of the Income tax. There should be NOTHING to dis-incentivize work.

I have no problem placing taxes on spending. I'm all for something like the Fair Tax which just removes all taxes (throw out all 70,000+ pages of tax law) for a single consumption tax.

I also think that Social Security should either end completely, since it's pretty absolutely worthless for anyone younger than 40 or 45 years old. Failing that, one should be able to exempt yourself from it in order to save/spend that money yourself. if you exempt yourself from it than you are NOT eligible for ANY SS benefits (retirement or disability or death).

Death tax shouldn't exist.

Payroll taxes shouldn't exist.

Capital Gains taxes shouldn't exist.

Property taxes. I don't like 'em, and I'd like to get rid of them. Maybe have those replaced by a seperate sales tax w/in a county to provide revenue for the locale.

Tariffs are fine. They're pretty much the only thing that the Founders wanted as a source of income for the Federal Government.

If you can't tell, I want the individual to be able to decide how they get taxed by how they spend. If you want to go get cool stuff or just stuff in general. Understand that's how you pay your taxes to the gub'mint. If you don't want to pay taxes then just save your money and let it grow tax free.