hyperbole paul. a little bit of hyperbole. not a whole
lot of daylight between communism
and what the green new deal would
require.

she’s precious. but to you, she has no flaws worth discussing, your issue is with me for laughing at her. you don’t mind her writing laws and crafting budgets, but you object to me making fun of her for being a laughingstock. good for you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Minor character. If she and the woman from Minn? want to be treated seriously they need to tread lightly instead of throwing bombshells. she is naive and while I didn't read the green deal thing I would view it more as a target to aim for rather than something we need to do w/in 10 years. Needs to understand w/today's environment she needs to watch everything she says and does bf putting it out there.

Her 70% tax rate got some traction.

"Minor character"

On paper, in theory, she should be a minor character. But she wields a ton of influence, because her wing of the party (the progressive socialist wing) is where the national party is going. She drafted an absolute laughingstock of a green new deal, and I think every democrat presidential nominee endorsed it.

"If she and the woman from Minn? want to be treated seriously they need to tread lightly "

I view them very differently. Cortez is an energetic, young person who wants to serve, I respect that, I just think her ideas are a joke. But I think she's harmless. Omar in MN, looks to me like a Jew hater who absolutely despises the principles the country was founded upon. She is deranged and extremely dangerous, in my opinion. I get why someone like Cortez got elected, I can't fathom how anyone not in ISIS could elect Omar to anything. I don't know I've ever seen anyone more alarming in Congress. But thankfully, (to me) she doesn't have the influence that Cortez has.

"Needs to understand w/today's environment she needs to watch everything she says and does bf putting it out there. "

She would do well to have you advising her.

"Her 70% tax rate got some traction"

It did. I think our taxes can be more progressive at the upper levels. I wouldn't go as high as 70%, and I'd also go after capital gains and dividends, that's where the money is for the really wealthy, as opposed to ordinary income.

Go rent a place to live in Manhattan, park slope, Cambridge and see what gentrification has done. Just what do you think the problem in SF is, oh I know it’s liberals. The place should be like Oklahoma or someplace controlled by the right, no issues in those places they buy them tickets to SF
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fixed it for you.

"Just what do you think the problem in SF is, oh I know it’s liberals."

That's part of it, is it not? Gentrification can also go too far. That doesn't mean that poor communities would benefit from laws that prohibit rich people from moving in.

Most of life is about balance. KS went too far with consevative tax cuts, it failed. CT has been a 40 year experiment in pure liberalism, it has also failed. What are the places that are booming, where upper middle class people are flocking to in huge numbers? There's Boston, which is big and liberal but still a great, well-run city. Most other booming places seem to lean right - TX, TN, Carolinas, FL. Many cities in NH can't build $500,000 houses fast enough. CT, which SHOULD BE a place that people are competing to get into, is shrinking. There is a reason for that.

"The place should be like Oklahoma ".

Once again, responding to something no one ever said. But there ARE places out there, thriving suburbs (which need a nearby job center) where families are flocking to in huge numbers. The 2 that are probably the most hot lately right now, are the suburbs of Nashville and the suburbs of Charlotte. There are plenty of crappy places near those cities. But there are some well-run places near those cities, with very low taxes, and a very high quality of life. It can be done. I have first hand experience with Franklin TN and Fort Mill SC.

Pete, how many liberal places are there, which have a very high quality of life, and a very low cost of living? Are there any? The suburbs of Nashville and Charlotte are right-leaning. CT has exactly zero places to live, which are (1) beautiful family places, and (2) cheap. None. Zip. Zilch. How come?

We just had 8 years of a Dem. gov. (Malloy) and 8 years prior of Rep gov (Roland - who went to jail and Rell). During which period did spending go up the biggest %? Did the Rep. gov. leave a bigger rainy day fund or did the Dem?

Edit - You're big on complaining about pensions. What did the Rep gov. do about the benefits (pension/health care, etc) vs Malloy?

As usual anything that is bad is liberal.
I think what drives regional economies is not just left or right and to say so is simplistic, just look at your examples of Boston and Nashville.

What makes suburbs beautiful in your eyes is beyond me and I do know something about suburbs and growth. I grew up in the fastest growing place in the US in the 50s and 60s. Suburbia is not the greatest place in my eyes. I could blindfold you and take you to most any suburb in the US and you would feel right at home with Applybees, Olive Garden, the chain drugstore, supermarket, Walmart and Home Depot, the same crap in people's yards and they better be up to your standards of neatness. If that is your idea of utopia, it's pretty sad.
But all of life is simple in your eyes, just pass a law that says you can't: #^&#^&#^&#^& in the street, do drugs, be homeless, not make enough money and when they don't comply just lock them up and get them out of sight. Welcome to the Middle class dream of the 60s, that got us to where we are today.

Yes, we've had Republican governors, who didn't do ANYTHING fiscally conservative, either because they didn't believe it or because the liberal legislatures wouldn't let them. Either way, the state's economic landscape is purely liberal, and has ZERO conse3rvative footprint. We have massive taxes, and even more massive spending, thanks to labor unions. Is that a conservative tactic, or a liberal tactic?

"Did the Rep. gov. leave a bigger rainy day fund or did the Dem?"

Malloy rammed TWO massive income tax hikes down our throats, and the state's debt and deficits are higher. Our credit rating has been downgraded multiple times under Malloy. The rainy day fund is because of tax receipts related to the stock market, which means it's thanks to Obama and Trump and the feds. Nothing to do with state policies. We're looking at multi-billion dollar deficits for the next two years, as always, despite the fact that the national economy is booming. Our real estate prices haven't recovered from the recession at the national pace, nor has unemployment. We're dying. We are in a self-perpetuating cycle of higher expenses (thanks to union benefits locked in by contracts) and declining revenues (people are leaving to avoid the collapse. But we have a rainy day fund, so to you, all is well.

"What did the Rep gov. do about the benefits (pension/health care, etc) vs Malloy?"

All governors have made it worse in my lifetime. Malloy extended the state's debt term out for many years, so kids not born yet will be asked to pay for things they had no say in. Hooray!!

Roland and Rell were complete disasters. They also did NOTHING conservative. Nothing.

You're so bound to ideology, that you deny our state's economic situation? How big do you think that rainy day fund is? Because the long term debt is many tens of billions of dollars.

We are at an inflection point, where higher tax rates lead to less revenue collected, because people are leaving. The liberal response? Tolls! Hooray! Never mind we have an astronomical gas tax already, which was specifically implemented to replace tolls. But now we need both.

How do you Kool Aid drinkers suppose things get the way they are in the suburbs of Nashville or Charlotte, compared to here?

We know its possible to offer citizens a high quality of life with low taxes. There is no debating that. It's irrefutable fact. There are places like that. Exactly none of them, are in CT?

Good luck making that wrong.

70 miles away in NH, there is no income tax or sales tax. And those places look even better now, with the limitation on deducting SALT taxes. Which means more people will leave, which means less revenue, which means higher tax rates on the patsies who stay.

Why is it that the majority of press photos of her have that "I'm not crazy I tell you, I've been tested numerous times!" look?

She could be the new face of "Bat Sheet crazy anonymous"...

I'm so bound by ideology? :jump:

You're the one who started this and yet can't answer any of the questions w/o dodging but will going to continue to blame the Dems. w/o really researching anything.

You really need to move (and get your family to move since you are staying for them) bc you obviously hate it here. Move to NH or somewhere very conservative - like that conservative utopia KY. Enjoy

"yet you seem not to have any problem with Trump's deficits (and in a booming economy)"

Nope, I have serious concerns with his debts and deficits. But if we're going to add to debt, I'd rather do it by giving money to 8-% of middle class folks, than doing it in a way that doesn't help them. I don't know a single person who benefitted form Obama's 750 billion stimulus.

"I'm so bound by ideology?"

Yes. If you can't admit that liberalism has doomed the state of CT, you aren't being rational. I disagree with the GOP on some big issues like gay marriage the death penalty, gun control, and capital gains/dividend taxes. Fair enough? Try painting me as Sean Hannity, you'll look very silly.

"yet can't answer any of the questions w/o dodging "

What question didn't I answer directly?

"You really need to move (and get your family to move since you are staying for them) bc you obviously hate it here"

Parents won't move, and our special needs son is in a great place. So I'm stuck. Mock that all you want...the math doesn't care that you desperately want the liberals to be right. You can't have more than there is. No one can, not even liberals and unions.

Their official announcement specifically mentioned her by name called her a "never Amazoner" because of the hostility she showed them. Said the board unanimously decided they don't want to work in the type of environment she's creating.

You're implying that Amazon's board knows more than Spence, about why Amazon makes its decisions? But Spence watches MSNBC!! He can't be wrong! It has to be a right wing plot...

Just an fyi, I saw her get skewered over this on Morning Joe this morning, pretty much unanimously by the talking heads....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

saw that too.

25,000 jobs, at an average annual salary of 150k. it’s impossible to begin to quantify the benefits. but nope, she knows better. i’m sure the landlords and restaurant owners are thrilled, just thrilled.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence, you said Cortez was opposed to the 3B tax incentives. You're right, and she says that the city can now use that 3B to invest themselves.

Neither she, nor you, has a clue.

The city of NY wasn't going to give Amazon a check for 3B. Rather, Amazon would pay 3B less in taxes than they'd owe without the incentives. It's NOT like the city now has that 3B that would have otherwise gone to Amazon.

Clueless.

Funny, I never said such a thing. You're (again) just making things up to argue with yourself. It's odd.

yes you did. you said cortez opposed the deal because of the 3b tax subsidy. if that post is gone, it’s because you took it down.

getting 3b less than you thought you’d get ( but still getting something), is better than getting zilch. not to you or the mensa candidate Cortez.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So now I'm clandestinely deleting posts? That's rich.

Why are you so obsessed with this woman?

I think Paul mentioned the tax incentives 🤔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

uhhh, yup, my bad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Back off Jim. That’s MY sexy legislatorette..... just watched her dancing video. Giddayupp!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She is bangable
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

True
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Would
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ya if you put a double bag over her head. She does have a nice rack & I’ll bet she gives one hell of a BJ 👍

I think this woman was Put in office just as a distraction to spew crap so far to the radical left and being so stupid, she makes othe powers in the left like Pelosi look smart !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She is a huge, huge gift to the GOP. Leave her right where she is, and giver her a bullhorn.

I heard on Fox that she even hired her boyfriend
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For shame.
Glad the POTUS sets an example to only hire..... oh wait.... :whackin:

Is that true? I thought he just had a congressional email account, which liberals say is common, and conservatives are saying is treasonous. Depends on who you listen to.