tuscl

Ocasio-Cortez Gets $10 million deal from Netflix for documentary rights

Mate27
TUSCL’s #1 Soothsayer!
Monday, February 11, 2019 2:43 PM
[view link] So, do you think she’ll still push for the 70% tax bracket on her “New Green Deal”?

56 comments

  • Warrior15
    •
    5 years ago
    I just lost some respect for Netflix.
  • IceyLoco
    •
    5 years ago
    The 70% tax bracket was fake news reported by FOX.
  • Mate27
    •
    5 years ago
    Hmmm....that’s funny. It looks something like randumbmember would write^^^?
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    The income tax bracket is the minimum you are required to pay. If you do your taxes and want to pay more then the IRS will certainly allow that. So, if she truly practices what she preaches she will voluntarily pay 70% of that to the IRS, as will every other liberal supporter. They should fire their accountant take all their w2 and 1099 forms, add them up, multiply by 70%, then write a fucking check. If you are not only willing to do this but actually do it, then and only then will I listen to anything you have to say on taxation
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    When Carter left office in 1980 the top tax bracket was 70%.... you hit that at $108,000 in income lol
  • Mate27
    •
    5 years ago
    ^^ Amen! #Facts Or is Dadillac just being a right wing extremist since he deals with the average working class citizen who after hard work legally pays their taxes and invests(says the left wing extremists)?
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    lol I'm just saying that based on her history I have absolutely no respect for her..... If she wants to change that she will cut a check to the IRS for 7 million dollars and then I will listen to whatever she has to say, otherwise she is just another in a long line of hypocritical liberals
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    And that's exactly why Reagan changed from democrat to republican.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    70% is what we had before Reagan, going back to JFK. Before that it was 90%. Those were the years of our greatest growth and greatest advancement for the working man. 70% maybe a little too high, 55% to 60% would probably do the job. Progressive taxation and spending is what expands our economy, builds up our infrastructure, keeps us in black ink, and provides a social safety net. Our country cannot run on just Cops, Courts, and Corrections Depts. SJG Mexico City, has so many people and cars on the streets, that if one is interested in hookers, likely best to find a bar, or you would really have to know that area. [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] Richard Smoley, Inner Christianity [view link] Business Law Today, 10th and 11th Edition, Roger LeRoy Miller [view link] New, Used, purchase as ebook (pdf) and in libraries
  • TheeOSU
    •
    5 years ago
    "I just lost some respect for Netflix." I just lost much respect for netflix. Looking for an alternative to cable I was thinking of buying a netflix subscription this spring, now I will spend my money elsewhere.
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    SJG, according to the book, the first measured century, our greatest growth as a nation began in 1982 and ran until 2000. I'm unsure of where you get your stats....
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    [view link] I even chose an article from one of the liberal sources
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    ^^^^^^ Not so. Purchasing power for the working man peaked between 1969 and 1972, using inflation adjusted dollars. Tax cutting actually contracts the economy because wealth which had been transfered downward recirculates the fastest. But tax cutting does inflate the real estate and stock markets, pilling up of dead money which does no good for any one. Our economy is consumption limited, not venture capital, entrepreneur, or productive capacity limited. This is why things worked so well on Keynesianism. Good: [view link] SJG Mexico City, has so many people and cars on the streets, that if one is interested in hookers, likely best to find a bar, or you would really have to know that area. [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] Richard Smoley, Inner Christianity [view link] Business Law Today, 10th and 11th Edition, Roger LeRoy Miller [view link] New, Used, purchase as ebook (pdf) and in libraries
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    "Hmmm....that’s funny. It looks something like randumbmember would write^^^?" ___ You're sort of a well-known dumbfuck, @Meat, and I never said the 70% marginal tax rate was fake news. I hardly pay attention to AOC, but pretty sure it applies to income over $10M. I'm sure you make that kind of cash advising grandpa on how to withdraw money from his IRA.
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    According to Pew Research you are right SJG.... and you are wrong. The purchasing power grew until 1973 where it stagnated and has been since then. So it has actually kept up with inflation but not grown. What is being compared is the min. wage NOT the average wage. Also you are comparing min wage workers to those who have taken the time to educate themselves. A better comparison would be the min wage workers here in the USA with their purchasing power and standard of living compared against the workers in Mexico that you keep posting the links for. Or really any other country in the world. The US poor are better taken care of than they would be in any other country yet we still have the entitled wanting to dip their hand in my pocket
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    According to Pew Research you are right SJG.... and you are wrong. The purchasing power grew until 1973 where it stagnated and has been since then. So it has actually kept up with inflation but not grown. What is being compared is the min. wage NOT the average wage. Also you are comparing min wage workers to those who have taken the time to educate themselves. A better comparison would be the min wage workers here in the USA with their purchasing power and standard of living compared against the workers in Mexico that you keep posting the links for. Or really any other country in the world. The US poor are better taken care of than they would be in any other country yet we still have the entitled wanting to dip their hand in my pocket
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    I don't know that median wage has done that much better. Like Bill Clinton said in 1992, "Most of the people I know are working harder longer hours for less." But also, we cannot blame people for not "taking the time to educate themselves", because many are working multiple jobs, right were I live, and just to pay rent. And also, if you send people to school, no matter how long that schooling goes, and no matter what they are learning there, this does not mean that there will be any better job prospects for them. Most entrepreneurial ventures work by deskillling jobs, cutting wages, busting unions, and just overall cutting head count. Its like Buckminster Fuller said, because of industrial technology we already produce enough for every man woman and child to live better than kings had lived. But we ruin it because we still demand that everyone prove that they can earn a living. We need to go to Universal Basic Income. In 1992 the candidates debated over what the peace dividend for the end of the Cold War should be. Well it has to be that we go to Universal Basic Income. SJG Lee Atwater teaching us how we can still say "N.... N.... N...." in a post 1954 world [view link] Mexico City, has so many people and cars on the streets, that if one is interested in hookers, likely best to find a bar, or you would really have to know that area. [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] [view link] Richard Smoley, Inner Christianity [view link] Business Law Today, 10th and 11th Edition, Roger LeRoy Miller [view link] New, Used, purchase as ebook (pdf) and in libraries
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    Universal basic income..... so no matter what I do I will make the same as everyone else? I can assure you that I will not be working so hard. It is extremely insulting for people to complain about others making too much. I busted my ass working two jobs while going to college. When I graduated I went to work as a stock broker on 100 percent commission. I have never had a salary, always eating what I kill. I worked 80 hours a week for the first 15 years or so then cut back to 50 hours since then. Sure I make a decent amount of money but I worked for it.
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Well deserved. This just reminded me that Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize. White privilege.
  • skibum609
    •
    5 years ago
    SJG is a progressive so statistics is just their way of saying "I lied". Lazy people always whine about income disparity. Try working as much as you whine and you will have nothinbg to whine about. I prefer to cull non-workers from the population over universal basic income. Starving and living outside are amazing incentives to work; paying people to do nothing is an oincetive to do nothing.
  • Call.Me.Ishmael
    •
    5 years ago
    You guys do realize that Ocasio-Cortez didn't get paid anything by Netflix, right? [view link]
  • Warrenboy75
    •
    5 years ago
    @ Call Me Ishmael--I know she was so poor she couldn't afford to move to DC--so if any money did change hands it hadn't happened until this month. @ Flagooner--once Paul Krugman won a NPP as far as I was concerned it was worth the same thing Charmin is worth........and serves the same purpose. @ +1 Daddillac & Skibum--they both have it right. One of the comments I make when having the discussion about how far the liberal Democratic wing of the party had gone is to compare them to JFK --who cut taxes because he understood the benefit it would have on people and the economic growth of this nation. Government spending aka stimulus does not expand the economy--it only redistributes wealth. Obama didn't get that--and no matter what anyone tries to say or defend the porklus package he rammed through on fear failed miserably.
  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    This is a pattern with you @Warrenboy, getting your facts straight. Krugman did not win a Nobel Peace Prize. He won a Nobel Prize in Economics for work on international trade. He got his PhD from MIT; their grads are the most powerful and influential economists in the world.
  • Warrenboy75
    •
    5 years ago
    LOL-- and influence equals right? Have you read his masterpiece? ( I have) And did he or did he not win a nobel prize? Because it is for something different than making peace does it "supposedly" carry any less weight? This is a pattern with you RM----looking to pick nits when it the meat of your point doesn't stand on it's merit. Call me Sheldon Cooper then from the BigBang.....I'm about as impressed with where he got his PHD ( at MIT) as Sheldon is as his side bud Howard. Tell you what let's settle this....give me your credit card and I'll use it till I spend your way out of debt. --how is that for fair contest of what Krugman preaches.? As I recall from memory Krugman is now over in Europe preaching his political agenda masked as economics because he got destroyed in debate after debate in the USA----first running to Great Britain and not fairing so well there either. Krugman's beliefs beyond his prize winning fiction on international trade is only one of his theories that were at the center of Obama policy and because of his Nobel Prize touted as being factual and backed by "all economist" according to President Obama.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    The Nobel prize is awarded by a group named after a guy who made a fortune blowing shit up.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    That's not how a universal basic income model works. Some of y'all are so disingenuous with these debates you just make shit up to align with what makes you feel good.
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    A Basic Income, also called Universal Basic Income (UBI), Citizen's Income (CI), Citizen's Basic Income (CBI) (in the United Kingdom), Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) (in the United States and Canada), or Universal Demogrant, is a periodic cash payment delivered to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement.[2] The incomes would be: Unconditional: A Basic Income would vary with age, but there would be no other conditions: so everyone of the same age would receive the same Basic Income, whatever their gender, employment status, family structure, contribution to society, housing costs, or anything else. Automatic: Someone’s Basic Income would be paid weekly or monthly, automatically, into a bank account or similar. Nonwithdrawable: Basic Incomes would not be means-tested. Whether someone's earnings increase, decrease, or stay the same, their Basic Income will not change. Individual: Basic Incomes would be paid on an individual basis, and not on the basis of a couple or household. As a right: Everybody legally resident would receive a Basic Income, subject to a minimum period of legal residency, and continuing residency for most of the year.[3]
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Very good now based on that go next level thinking for the class w/o an emotional "those guys over there are getting paid to do nothing" whine fest
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    I'm not sure I like your condescending attitude..... you are dismissed
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Wouldn't it be great if we could all get awards. That would make everybody happy.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    I'm sure I don't give a fuck. No thanks I'll stick around
  • Warrenboy75
    •
    5 years ago
    @ Flagooner---especially for what someone thinks we "might accomplish" instead of actual results. Keep in mind he was nominated eleven days after he took office.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    @flagooner I got one would not turn down an award, would I be considered greedy if I asked if this award had a cash component included;)
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    Of course it would, the govt can just print more money to pay for it. And, no you aren't greedy. It makes sense to expect the taxpayer (er, govt) to give us things if we don't want to work for it.
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    Ok daddyfatass.... tell me why I should take my hard earned money and contribute to a free college for anybody, I worked for and paid for mine. Also why should we direct any money to a UBI..... I believe that free money will create inflation driving prices up for everyone. Surely someone as educated as you can answer these basic questions
  • flagooner
    •
    5 years ago
    @DFS, I'll handle this one. "tell me why I should take my hard earned money and contribute to a free college for anybody," Because they want it and you worked too hard and now have too much.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    LOLOL
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    LOL.... Im sure that is what the truth is
  • Warrenboy75
    •
    5 years ago
    Damn flagooner.........can you tell me how much is my fair share? Who gets to determine what is fair? And who do I share it with? ,,,,,,,,,,inquiring minds want to know. :--)
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ If y’all are gonna start sharing I’ll take some of that action, cash please ;)
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    In Georgia we have almost free college now with the state schools. You have to maintain a certain GPA and finish in a prescribed amount of time. It covers tuition and books. It is funded through the lottery, so we let the broke fuckers pay for our kids college with scratch offs lol. My kids had 529 plans before they came home from the hospital
  • IceyLoco
    •
    5 years ago
    Flagooner, you tell em!!!! Spend that hard earned money on Nazi political causes and hookers! It's yours to do as you please with!
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Oh we going to talk feelings and mix in economics. Great idea to do the mix but I'll play since I have a little time. Let's start with feelings: so under your mode of thinkin/feeling we all should have the same bitch and moan about all expenditures government makes? So I should say why should my hard earned money go to military? Oh got topic #supportthetroops so I better be careful right? We all agree as a nation a community an populace that military is important and should be taken care of. Hmm sounds like the same shit you ass wipes say about education but don't really mean since the crying about your hard earned money going to it. I know what you really mean and some of the other smart folks do too but you won't say it because feelings snowflake. Now on to the economics and theory because that's what econ is. You believe "free money" will drive up inflation. I'm curious as to how this free money will drive prices up. Let's look at one of the many instances where "free money" will be spent: housing. And let's make an assumption that the "free money" will be a basic living standard amount so not enough to afford million dollar homes or even 300k or even 1k per month rent. So in theory those with the drive and desire to afford more will continue to have that drive and desire to get more, staying in the jobs they have while working the American dream to achieve! Now at the same time we have those who are in need that can now live (housed) affordably and open a new market to smart business people who invest in and create affordable housing spaces #capitalism. Now that's one example out of an almost unlimited number of economic topics You certain you want this convo with me? Not sure your feelings can get out of the way and they end up telling on you.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Crap I forgot to add this before hitting post comment: Bitch
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    OK DaddyFatASS, Don't even start to think you are intelligent enough to know what I am thinking or feeling. No I do not think we should all feel the same way about the expenditures of the government, only a dumb fuck would even suggest that. I don't really give a shit if you don't want your money going to the troops be a fucking man and say that, no reason to hint around about it like a little pussy. So spit that dick out of your mouth and speak up. I have no idea what you are thinking I won't say but I can assure you I have no problem saying anything about how I feel. Economics.... this free money is often times referred to as M1 or money supply, you are advocating increasing the M1 by giving away some dollar amount of money to people who need housing. So now those capitalist who invest in and create affordable housing know exactly the floor of what they can charge, and that floor will be higher than it is today. You can look at section 8 housing as an example. Inflation happens when you have more money chasing goods.... inject "free" money into the equation and boom you have more money chasing the goods. economics 101 Now I really do not think you are qualified to have this discussion with me based on your juvenile answers.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    All in his feels! Told you feelings n econ is not a good mix but a bitch gonna bitch so what can we do about it? Bitch I see the googles are your friend but to really think a UBI comes from printing money: stupid. To think this "free money" comes from thin air and just inflates the economy: stupid. Next time you use wiki to answer basic econ think next level homie. Let me help the stupid bitch out by going less than elementary, pre-elementary? Post should've been aborted? Around the time your mother should've swallowed you or your dad popped you into a napkin? Idk, shit I went off on a tangent. Anyway, this thing is like a balance sheet. We don't create a UBI by printing money i.e currency in circulation. The UBI is by reallocation of funds already accounted for in the county's federal budget genius. For fucks sake you aren't this dumb.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Oh and one last breakdown for the genius. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Therefore resources set to be spent in one area go to a different area under a UBI. But you already knew that but your feelings got in the way because: bitch
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    OK dipshit.... explain Quantitative easing, without google Then reallocation of funds already in the what federal budget? We did not have a budget approved the entire time Obama was in office and now the Dems are sitting on their hands again. So tell me where you are going to get the money to reallocate, who are you going to steal it from unless you don't have the balls to say it here
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Now I'll dismiss myself and you go ahead not Google me some more terms about Federal reserve banking, QTM and the like. Bitch
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    And by the way, I'm not holding you in high regard so anything you say does not hurt my feelings.... what do I care what a broke socialist asshole thinks about me? Wow do you have an incredibly high opinion of yourself lol
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    I guess you knew when you were in over your head.... Dumbass
  • Mate27
    •
    5 years ago
    Way over his head!! He’s tunneling underneath some economics shit there.
  • daddyfatsack
    •
    5 years ago
    Oh I get it this is an endurance sport and I gotta keep going to get the last word on order to "win." See there you go with stupid again and got meat co signing it. You two should go somewhere and make two bitch pie. Wait I know what it is about you. We got into it before on a feminism topic? You told a story about a woman yelling at you for holding the door open and I called you a liar. Then you got all in your feels on some homo erotic shit. Dam that's funny! Takes arguing with a bitch to a new level. I'm over here cracking up. You have a shit day man and go ahead n get your last word in
  • Daddillac
    •
    5 years ago
    DaddyFatAss has got no points, no facts, no balls, LOL the poor broke bastard from
  • Mate27
    •
    5 years ago
    Fat asses usually are all mouth and no action, for the self admitted fat fuck daddysacks! Lol...
  • Mate27
    •
    5 years ago
    By the way, Orcasio just helped fuck the deal by encouraging Amazon to pull out of NY. She’s bound and determined to fuck her constituency away on Long Island, all for the sake of promoting her name through politics and capitalizing on that. From what I heard it was her and some local council members that balked at foregoing $3 billion in tax cuts to help capture billions in future revenues! I guess they don’t feel the need to diversify their economy outside of the financial sector. Not very tech friendly NY. I’m sure some lower cost of living places will be happy to have you. What is AOC going to do when all those job losses happen, which generally do when market cycles turn. Smh at any Cortasio supporters.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion