You were doing well until you got into the crime and demographic argument. Nevada is a crime-ridden shithole. It would be the poorest state in the union right next to the South if it weren't for its illegal monopoly on gambling for so many years. Californians are only moving to Nevada because of costs. So many of these people are just retiring. The rest of California is invading the rest of country.

The Northeastern states are considered some of safest in country despite having tons of immigrants and illegals. So there's no correlation. It seems the correlation between crime and immigration is based on how close you are to the Mexican border.

Lastly, most of the immigrants in the Northeast are unskilled and are not lowering wages. They certainly might be taking lower class jobs from some Americans though. And California tech industry is not leaving anytime soon. The infrastructure is all there, as are schools that gear towards tech workers like Stanford. The big companies don't mind the high tech wages, they're making money over fist.

Quote:Quote:

The Northeastern states are considered some of safest in country despite having tons of immigrants and illegals. So there's no correlation. It seems the correlation between crime and immigration is based on how close you are to the Mexican border.

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

Quote:Quote:

Lastly, most of the immigrants in the Northeast are unskilled and are not lowering wages. They certainly might be taking lower class jobs from some Americans though. And California tech industry is not leaving anytime soon. The infrastructure is all there, as are schools that gear towards tech workers like Stanford. The big companies don't mind the high tech wages, they're making money over fist.

When you've got 90%+ Whites it's pretty easy to subsidize 10% of the population that does nothing.

The bill was amended five times today. Now that we passed the bill, can we find out what was in it?

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:Quote:

The Northeastern states are considered some of safest in country despite having tons of immigrants and illegals. So there's no correlation. It seems the correlation between crime and immigration is based on how close you are to the Mexican border.

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

Quote:Quote:

Lastly, most of the immigrants in the Northeast are unskilled and are not lowering wages. They certainly might be taking lower class jobs from some Americans though. And California tech industry is not leaving anytime soon. The infrastructure is all there, as are schools that gear towards tech workers like Stanford. The big companies don't mind the high tech wages, they're making money over fist.

When you've got 90%+ Whites it's pretty easy to subsidize 10% of the population that does nothing.

Sorry, that's true in some states like Vermont, New Hamp, Idado..which have proper gun laws I might add despite being liberal.

New Jersey has one of the lowest white percentages and frankly, many Hispanics who identify as white, however, its still one of the states with the lowest crime rates and pretty much all the crime is concentrated in Irvington/Camden/Trenton type cities and only by African-Americas. New York is also near New Jersey and Manhatten as an island is the safest big city in the whole world. New York itself still ranks towards the top despite being full of immigrants. Many of the illegals who come to the Northeast only come here to work, which is why you don't see increased crime rates

Btw Hawaii is actually towards the bottom when it comes to crime, expect it has no latinos or blacks. How did that happen?

Your a smart guy Samseau but your descriptions of society is way too broad. The world is much more complicated.

I do want to mention that I like Samseau and think hes probably the best politics/history posters on here

Quote: (12-02-2017 09:06 PM)godzilla Wrote:  

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:Quote:

The Northeastern states are considered some of safest in country despite having tons of immigrants and illegals. So there's no correlation. It seems the correlation between crime and immigration is based on how close you are to the Mexican border.

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

Quote:Quote:

Lastly, most of the immigrants in the Northeast are unskilled and are not lowering wages. They certainly might be taking lower class jobs from some Americans though. And California tech industry is not leaving anytime soon. The infrastructure is all there, as are schools that gear towards tech workers like Stanford. The big companies don't mind the high tech wages, they're making money over fist.

When you've got 90%+ Whites it's pretty easy to subsidize 10% of the population that does nothing.

Sorry, that's true in some states like Vermont, New Hamp, Idado..which have proper gun laws I might add despite being liberal.

New Jersey has one of the lowest white percentages and frankly, many Hispanics who identify as white, however, its still one of the states with the lowest crime rates and pretty much all the crime is concentrated in Irvington/Camden/Trenton type cities and only by African-Americas. New York is also near New Jersey and Manhatten as an island is the safest big city in the whole world. New York itself still ranks towards the top despite being full of immigrants. Many of the illegals who come to the Northeast only come here to work, which is why you don't see increased crime rates

Btw Hawaii is actually towards the bottom when it comes to crime, expect it has no latinos or blacks. How did that happen?

These are good counter examples. The Northeast is not a good counter-example. That's all my point was.

[quote='Samseau' pid='1693126' dateline='1512259834']
[quote]The Northeastern states are considered some of safest in country despite having tons of immigrants and illegals. So there's no correlation. It seems the correlation between crime and immigration is based on how close you are to the Mexican border.
[/quote]

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

[quote]Lastly, most of the immigrants in the Northeast are unskilled and are not lowering wages. They certainly might be taking lower class jobs from some Americans though. And California tech industry is not leaving anytime soon. The infrastructure is all there, as are schools that gear towards tech workers like Stanford. The big companies don't mind the high tech wages, they're making money over fist.
[/quote]

When you've got 90%+ Whites it's pretty easy to subsidize 10% of

Delete

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

If one were to move to this area of the US, where would be best in terms of medium sized cities? (Basically, not living in some isolated small town without much nightlife etc).

^Thats an interesting question. Keep in mind. It's fucking freezing up there during the winter. Upstate New York smaller cities used to be heavy manufacturing cities and are bit depressed. Same goes for Western Massachusetts. Connecticut cities are pretty ghetto.

I've been to Syracuse, Rochester, and Binghamton a few times and I would not recommend it, though each of them have colleges, so there are women to be hunted as least.

Manchester, NH and Portland, ME were quite nice when I visited years ago and might be a good place to start. New Jersey and Massachsetts Shores are quiet during the winter but bumping during the summer. I visited a college friend in Burlington in college. Way too liberal for me but a nice college town.

Overall

Positives

Really Peaceful
Lax gun laws(even in communist Vermont)
Cost of Living isn't too high
Lots of outdoor things(most the area is near mountains)
Best pizza

Negatives

Cold
Higher income/corporate taxes
Lack of job opportunities outside of NYC and Boston.


EDIT: I should add that the majority of European cities will be much whiter and more peaceful than the majority of cities in the USA. The only thing we lack here is Muslims.

Handy dandy tax plan man came up with a calculator to see how the new tax plan impacts you:

http://taxplancalculator.com/

**edit**

I fucked up my calculation. I stand to save between 2-3k depending on the version.

Quote: (12-04-2017 04:44 PM)Repo Wrote:  

House Plan
You'd lose $834

Senate Plan
You'd lose $198

Well fuck. I guess that's not that much to lose, could be worse.

The following is assuming if I itemize the same way I did in 2016:

House Plan: Save $3,468
Senate Plan: Save $5,641

This is assuming I don't itemize:

House Plan: Save $5,974
Senate Plan: Save $8,147

Whatever I lost via the ending of SALT I gained much more with the increase in the standard deduction and the increased child tax credits. The current Senate bill doesn't eliminate AMT.

Yeah I initially picked itemized because my mortgage interest, but if I pick unitemized then I save.

Republicans are against paying for appetizers, drinks, or movie dates:

"“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies,” the Republican senator told the Des Moines Register."

Official stance on "Netflix and chill" remains unclear, but opposition to net neutrality and promotion of trade deals favoring the US indicate backseat bangs in your American made car are the favored method of seduction.

Quote: (12-03-2017 03:40 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

If one were to move to this area of the US, where would be best in terms of medium sized cities? (Basically, not living in some isolated small town without much nightlife etc).

NJ is quickly, quickly changing by the day. You might Like Hoboken or Jersey City since it's right next to NYC. Well to-do liberals are moving in from the NYC super sphere and buying up property. It's getting much less white. I have no problem with skin color since I am no racist, but the politics and values are changing rapidly. Along the way they vote straight democrat and drive up taxes. North NJ is about 65%-70% Left, especially based on what I saw in the last election. You might really like it here, but it's not the NJ I knew growing up.

You might actually like a place like Morristown NJ, but it's much further out from NYC. NYC is the dominant force of the region, it sucks all the nightlife energy out of NJ for the most part. People in Manhattan proper can get snobby about "Bridge and Tunnel" people....

Then there's south jersey. That's more like a suburb of Philly.

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:45 PM)Laska Wrote:  

The bill was amended five times today. Now that we passed the bill, can we find out what was in it?

I have to say this hits the nail on the head. People are waxing poetic about this tax plan, and their TEMPORARY tax cuts, while ignoring the fact that every effort has been made to conceal the bill. It’s no different than the shit Pelosi pulled in that pic above.

Quote: (12-04-2017 06:05 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2017 03:40 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

Quote: (12-02-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Northeastern states are the Whitest in the USA, rivaling European demographics.

If one were to move to this area of the US, where would be best in terms of medium sized cities? (Basically, not living in some isolated small town without much nightlife etc).

NJ is quickly, quickly changing by the day. You might Like Hoboken or Jersey City since it's right next to NYC. Well to-do liberals are moving in from the NYC super sphere and buying up property. It's getting much less white. I have no problem with skin color since I am no racist, but the politics and values are changing rapidly. Along the way they vote straight democrat and drive up taxes. North NJ is about 65%-70% Left, especially based on what I saw in the last election. You might really like it here, but it's not the NJ I knew growing up.

You might actually like a place like Morristown NJ, but it's much further out from NYC. NYC is the dominant force of the region, it sucks all the nightlife energy out of NJ for the most part. People in Manhattan proper can get snobby about "Bridge and Tunnel" people....

Then there's south jersey. That's more like a suburb of Philly.

In my opinion the Princeton area is the best place to live in NJ, should you have to live in that state.

Any good, short, bullet list summary of the new bill? And passing the house does this mean this bill is final?

Its honestly hard to find good analysis of this plan that's not left wing bias. You won't find breitbart in your google results.

Speaking of an NJ is one of the high income and property tax states. A lot of middle class people pay way more then 10 grand in property tax. It has a progressive income tax and no local income taxes(other then Newark). The nice thing used to be no gas tax. That changed very recently. Booze taxes are also pretty low which is also nice.

Some upper middle class people here might be hurt by the removal of deductions but well see

Overall though. A lot of science and engineering talent is there. I believe it still graduates the highest per capita scientists and engineers. All the pharma companes have a huge presence. However, because of taxes the rest of the corporate sector flees the area for other states or just locates in New york city. Its why there is such huge disparities of wealth despite it being one of the states with the highest levels of income.

I will say that New Jersey might have the best transportation in the whole country. Which Christie grratly improved during his tenure. (They spent tons of money on the turnpike and other major roads to clear congestion) The road and the train network can pretty much get you anywhere in the state if need be.

Quote: (11-02-2017 06:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

No one needs tens of millions of dollars or more when its not even your money in the first place.

That's not for you to decide, soycialist.

Quote: (11-02-2017 06:32 PM)TigOlBitties Wrote:  

The 401k limit will be $18,500 for 2018. The IRA limit will be $5500.

I wish they'd let people that don't use a 401k put that $18,500 in an IRA, in addition to the $5500.

Can you set up a SEP-IRA or Individual 401(k)? These may help you sock more money away.

Quote: (11-02-2017 06:17 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

Tbh in my opinion you're not entitled to any of it unless a court or government of the country of the deceased grants it to you.

This view of life is simply inhumane. You own your life and have the right to decide what happens to the assets you created both during or after your life. The government doesn't own you. You're not some cog in a machine slaving away solely for the government's benefit, ready to be fairly redistributed the moment you pass away.

The government is supposed to exist to serve the people, not the opposite -
otherwise it is merely a tyranny.

Quote: (12-05-2017 04:26 AM)lookslikeit Wrote:  

Any good, short, bullet list summary of the new bill? And passing the house does this mean this bill is final?

According to Congress.gov, they're still resolving differences. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-cong...%5D%7D&r=1

Anytime there's a complicated bill like this, there are two significantly different versions of the bill, one from the House, the other from the Senate. The final product will be a compromise of those two bills. There were also many amendments that entered the bill, some in the last several days, which is also normal for this type of thing, it is complicated after all. The bill is over 500 pages as well, and if you glance though it, you can see it edits vast amounts of the existing U.S. code, which takes a lot of time to go through. There will be rulings effecting it as well, especially from the IRS. Then, depending on what the corporate tax changes are, FASB may make decisions that effect resulting corporate taxes. All of these things are done for practical reasons, and aren't crooked, but there are still too many unknowns to have too strong an opinion on this topic.

It will still take the people who are really figuring this thing out (and I'm definitely not one of them) a while before they have a good idea of its implications.

Is it just me or do Americans have short time spans?

People tend to forget that George Bush and the Neo-Cons already cut taxes and jammed through a similar bill when he first got into office.

Guess what happened? He trashed the economy and we almost went into a great depression in 07 and 08.

Remember the Roaring twenties? Huge massive tax cuts to the rich and while they were living life during the roaring twenties, their greed and recklessness led to the Great Depression in the 30s.

Reagan did the same thing in the 80s, and by the time he left office, Bush Sr. had an economy in the tank, even referred to Reagan's plan as "Voodoo Economics".


This is nothing but a huge giveaway to the rich (the people who run this country), while the middle class is going to foot the bill down the road. Im tired of this bullshit crony capitalism. And these neo-con Republicans want us to believe that they are for the "little guy" my ass.

It seems to me that Donald Trump has gotten in bed with the neo-cons. He has dudes from Goldman Sachs crafting his Tax plan. When you have Neo Cons like Lindsey Graham all of a sudden defending you, that should be a big Red Flag to anyone.

Quote: (12-05-2017 05:47 AM)godzilla Wrote:  

Its honestly hard to find good analysis of this plan that's not left wing bias.

You know why its hard? Because nothing about this plan is actually good. There is a reason why they want to jam this through without any analysis, because it horrid. This will only benefit the 1%, the rest of us will foot the bill down the road.

Is there a deadline of some kind they need to submit this by?

I don't understand why the haste.