I hope for the days that Trump’s tweets are not publicized as comments from a Republican. 
I’ll call the former Democrat and former President not a Republican when Republicans stop supporting him and/or he stops running as a Republican. Despite rags like the NYP and Fox News beginning to sour on him, and being a 3x loser in running and endorsing, he’s still the frontrunner of the party.
2 Likes
They need to upgrade their deplorable half, since they can STILL sway the primaries.
Gas-guzzing cars good, riding bikes bad:
Wow. Short clip with lots to digest.
We don’t need the IRS trying to get people to pay their taxes.
The IRS agents are police.
We need to put the IRS police in the schools to protect kids.
People in Washington, presumably Democrats, just want you to ride your bike
Riding a bike makes you weak.
Warnock rides a bike
Biden rides a bike because he’s voted with Warnock 96% of the time
Apparently Biden votes with Warnock?
plus some other stuff that doesn’t make any sense
IFYP.
And I didn’t watch the clip, but surely you have a typo, maybe due to autocorrect. What did he really say, that you typed as “We need to put the IRS police in the schools to protect kids”?
I never know whether to laugh or cry.
Porque no Los dos?
1 Like
vjvj’s quote is not a transcript, but it conveys the same thoughts Walker conveyed.
Closer to a transcription but still not verbatim is “we need to get rid of those 87,000 IRS agents that’s gonna come after you. Maybe we need to put some of those police officers in our schools to protect our kids.”
A charitable interpretation (certainly not what he actually said) would be “instead of hiring 87,000 IRS agents we should instead put those resources towards hiring police officers to put in schools to keep our kids safe”. One hopes that’s what he meant as that would at least be a somewhat coherent and defensible position, even if you happen to disagree with it.
Risky to make assumptions though.
Yeah, tbh, I didn’t think that part was the least sensical. I would have gone with (the actual quote) “Joe Biden ride his bike because he’s voted with him (Warnock) 96% of the time”.
Well yeah, that part was very nonsensical. I was just narrowly addressing Steve’s question.
BTW, I disagree with it. There’s a Laffer Curve in setting the tax rates, but there’s also a Laffer Curve in enforcement. I believe that we are on the left side of the Laffer Curve in that increasing what we spend on enforcement will reduce the deficit. The additional funds raised (both directly and indirectly) will probably more than cover the expense of the additional agents. Maybe not all 87,000 but at least some of them.
1 Like
The 87,000 is the additional total staff in 2031. It comes from this https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/The-American-Families-Plan-Tax-Compliance-Agenda.pdf#page=17 (Table 3). Note that staffing levels grow slowly over the 10 year horizon.
This is from the “American Families Plan”, which wasn’t enacted. But, the assumption is that this represents the IRS position for the law we actually got.
The write up specifies that they want to improve customer service by hiring new cs reps and by improving technology, which presumably includes hiring IT people. Not all of those additional workers will be auditors.
They say they believe they get a 4:1 return on audits. And, they say that estimate does not include the deterrent effect of audits, or the fact that some of the additional taxes will be paid outside the 10 year window. They also claim that better customer service increases compliance. They have a couple paragraphs discussing those things.
It is astounding to me that our political system has fallen to such depths that half the members of congress will accept massive tax evasion in return for a few votes.
4 Likes
Why do you keep repeating the Republican Lying Point of “87,000 new IRS agents” when it is widely known that this is not true?
1 Like
To a conservative, massive tax evasion is a feature not a bug.
2 Likes
From HuffPost, in Yahoo news feed:
I think you answered your own question there.
1 Like
“Isn’t that sort of like double jeopardy?” he asked his supporters.
Supporter: “I don’t think you’re using that phrase prroperly.”
Trump. Oh. Sorry. What is, isn’t that sort of like double jeopardy?"
4 Likes
I’m sorry I didn’t fact check that figure, but my point was in no way dependent on the exact number. The point is that hiring more agents would pay for itself, at least up to a point.
Bullshit.
You don’t get to hide behind “didn’t fact check a figure” as an excuse after spewing a Republican Lie out of oneside of your mouth and keep trying to claim not to be pure rightwing bias.
You would only be regurgitating such lies unless you were consuming that type of trash as truth. This jas been known as a lie as soon as the Republicans started spreading it around to people like you.
Sorry, i just don’t have any patience for people that unapologetically spread obvious lies and hide behind fake apologies when called out.