• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Democrats: Fighting HARD for the 1% - No Vote For Infrastructure Unless they Repeal SALT Cap

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
s0me0nesmind1 said:
SHHHHHHHHHHH

Let them keep living in blissful ignorance.


i mean - YES MY fellow Democrats. PLEASE keep continuously raising taxation in all forms. It DEFINITELY doesn't have negative implications 😉
Click to expand...
Just look at all the taxes they've raised so far. LOOK AT IT ALL!
 
weblooker2021 said:
Come November of 2022 you will see that the way they were sliced up resulted in Republican winning control of the House.
Click to expand...
They will most likely win the house, yes. It looks like to have a 1 seat majority democrats will need to win the house vote by around 6 points.

This is another reason why the democrats should abolish the filibuster and then outlaw gerrymandering. The house is supposed to represent the will of the people and as it stands it definitely doesn’t.
 
fskimospy said:
They will most likely win the house, yes. It looks like to have a 1 seat majority democrats will need to win the house vote by around 6 points.

This is another reason why the democrats should abolish the filibuster and then outlaw gerrymandering. The house is supposed to represent the will of the people and as it stands it definitely doesn’t.
Click to expand...

Float the cap on House size also. We should have many more districts. Average number of constituents per member has more than tripled since 1912.
 
K1052 said:
Float the cap on House size also. We should have many more districts. Average number of constituents per member has more than tripled since 1912.
Click to expand...
For sure. I love how as far as I can tell the primary argument against more reps is they would need to remodel the capitol, as if that’s a meaningful complaint.

As I’ve said before I think it’s the same thing with states. I would bet every dollar I own that if we had 49 states instead of 50 people would be way more supportive of admitting more.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
SHHHHHHHHHHH

Let them keep living in blissful ignorance.


i mean - YES MY fellow Democrats. PLEASE keep continuously raising taxation in all forms. It DEFINITELY doesn't have negative implications 😉
Click to expand...

Just an FYI: this thread you started here is about how much you support a tax increase that was already passed, and already did have significant negative implications for the political party that passed it.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
It isn't just state income tax - SALT includes Sales tax, property tax, and income tax.

It effects rich people in every state - regardless of what you want to keep telling yourself.

See the tax foundation link I provided.
Click to expand...
www.elc.edu

Grammar Lesson - Affect vs. Effect - ELC

English can be difficult. Sometimes, two words that sound the same can have slightly different meanings. This is the case with the words affect and effect. A lot of people do not know how to use these words correctly. Even native English speakers still mix up affect and effect from time to time...
www.elc.edu www.elc.edu
 
fskimospy said:
They will most likely win the house, yes. It looks like to have a 1 seat majority democrats will need to win the house vote by around 6 points.

This is another reason why the democrats should abolish the filibuster and then outlaw gerrymandering. The house is supposed to represent the will of the people and as it stands it definitely doesn’t.
Click to expand...
Assign districts by zip code. Require representatives to have resided in that zip code for three years prior to the election. Forbid any election contributions from outside that zip code. Remove the congressional exemption. Forbid omnibus bills. Figure out a way to force representatives to actually read the bills they're voting on. I have no idea how that would work, but it sounds good.
 
Greenman said:
Assign districts by zip code. Require representatives to have resided in that zip code for three years prior to the election. Forbid any election contributions from outside that zip code. Remove the congressional exemption.
Click to expand...

I think it would be better to eliminate districts for electoral purposes and just do proportional representation by state. States could then assign areas of responsibility based on actual common needs instead of trying to win elections.

Forbid omnibus bills.
Click to expand...
Bad idea and unconstitutional. If you want Congress to get stuff done then the best way is to give them more ways to tie competing priorities together, not fewer. This is why the ban on earmarks was dumb.

Figure out a way to force representatives to actually read the bills they're voting on. I have no idea how that would work, but it sounds good.
Click to expand...
Also a bad idea. That's what they have legislative aides for, and those aides are going to be far more adept at understanding the language of the bill than the representative. Their job is to be decision makers, not lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top