Only the initial $1000 is government sponsored, then it's like a savings account with individual contributions up to $5k per year.
One, Big Beautiful Bill (The Mega-Bill)
- Thread starter Brian4Liberty
- Start date
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,554
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
China is not a militaristic nation. The only reason why China builds is to DEFEND ITSELF against US. If we cut down, and pursued friendly relations with China, they would reciprocate. Moreover it was and is US who are responsible for China's massive production and industrialization, because WE voted for politicians who wanted money from donors instead of acting to protect our domestic businesses. Greed and power concentration have ruined America. It will reverse course but we're not going to like the way that happens because socialism is coming and it will preserve the ruinous oligarchy, they will be taxed higher once this bill is over with, but it doesn't matter because they don't work at all anyway. Their usury and asset inflation is automated by algorithms.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
DUH. If you have to pay tax on gambling proceeds you ARE a WINNER.
You just win less because of this deduction decrease. It is theft. Stop making excuses.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
"Sponsored"? Oh, so you apply different language when it makes DA STONKS go higher on the backs of American taxpayers?
It is WELFARE. No different than the Covid checks. And the $5000 tax-free is another STONK MARKET corporate welfare. Training the poor childs to chase STONKS all their lives and drive the machine that feeds the globalists. It is not fair to regular account holders who are discriminated against by paying capital gains tax, either. Stop Making Excuses. It is UNAMERICAN.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,396
China's biggest regional rival is India and Russia.
Those are the countries they are bordering with and those countries are doing historic military buildup.
Russia is the one country that China has gone to war with in recent years and living history.
The only reason why Russia didnt nuke China is because the USA intervened.
Not only is Russia a historically aggressive nation but India and China are beating each other with clubs on their borders with the risk of a real war happening.
Plus you have Europe who is doing a military buildup now too. Europe will be spending as much on military as the USA does.
So how is it only the USA causing this? Thats just not true. There were wars for 1000s of years before the USA existed.
China wont stop building up nuclear weapons because of us. The Russians have nuclear weapons pointed at them.
All it does if we stop having a military is we would get left behind in military and wouldn't be able to defend our country or our economic interests.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
nikcers: "China's biggest regional rival is India and Russia."
Snowball: Wrong. India is a rival, but Russia is not. Russia is a partner. Additionally, the traditional rivalry with India is already changing into cooperation.
nikcers: "Russia is the one country that China has gone to war with in recent years and living history."
Snowball: Wrong. China and the U.S.S.R. both backed Vietnam and North Korea. China was a U.S. ally against Japan in W.W. II.
nickers: "The only reason why Russia didnt nuke China is because the USA intervened."
Snowball: Sometimes it hurts to even try and get inside your head. Russia and China are full-blown allies. They cooperate militarily with joint drills and meetings. They are partners in finance and trade and in the development of Siberia. The only reason why you perceive China as a potential adversary to Russia is because that was the program of the U.S. decades ago. It failed miserably.
nikcers: "Not only is Russia a historically aggressive nation but India and China are beating each other with clubs on their borders with the risk of a real war happening."
Snowball: Russia was dragged into the Great War just like everyone else. The Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia and then were joined by the British and French in the Crimean War. The U.S.S.R. was NOT "Russian" in any way. None of its Marxist/Bolshevik expansionism was Russian. The Jewish and British bankers who overthrew and murdered the Romanovs were enemies of the Russian people. It has been 35 years since the Russians shook off the painful memories of Communism. Today's Russia more closely resembles the Romanovs than Lenin or Stalin.
nikcers: "China wont stop building up nuclear weapons because of us. The Russians have nuclear weapons pointed at them."
Snowball: Russia has no desire to ever use nuclear weapons against its neighbor or anyone else. Russia understands that a close, trusting relationship with China is integral to resisting the plots of the global hegemonists. Russia, China, and all their BRICS partners embrace the geopolitical philosophy of multi-polarism. Like I posted originally, China would love to reduce its military spending, but WE won't allow it. Just like WE have torn up nuclear disarmament treaties with Russia, and induced Russia itself to militarize, and this continues with greater acceleration every year because of OUR aggression against them.
nikcers: "All it does if we stop having a military is we would get left behind in military and wouldn't be able to defend our country or our economic interests."
Snowball: I did not say we should stop having a military. If you're responding to things people write, you should at least comprehend what you're responding to.
Snowball: Wrong. India is a rival, but Russia is not. Russia is a partner. Additionally, the traditional rivalry with India is already changing into cooperation.
nikcers: "Russia is the one country that China has gone to war with in recent years and living history."
Snowball: Wrong. China and the U.S.S.R. both backed Vietnam and North Korea. China was a U.S. ally against Japan in W.W. II.
nickers: "The only reason why Russia didnt nuke China is because the USA intervened."
Snowball: Sometimes it hurts to even try and get inside your head. Russia and China are full-blown allies. They cooperate militarily with joint drills and meetings. They are partners in finance and trade and in the development of Siberia. The only reason why you perceive China as a potential adversary to Russia is because that was the program of the U.S. decades ago. It failed miserably.
nikcers: "Not only is Russia a historically aggressive nation but India and China are beating each other with clubs on their borders with the risk of a real war happening."
Snowball: Russia was dragged into the Great War just like everyone else. The Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia and then were joined by the British and French in the Crimean War. The U.S.S.R. was NOT "Russian" in any way. None of its Marxist/Bolshevik expansionism was Russian. The Jewish and British bankers who overthrew and murdered the Romanovs were enemies of the Russian people. It has been 35 years since the Russians shook off the painful memories of Communism. Today's Russia more closely resembles the Romanovs than Lenin or Stalin.
nikcers: "China wont stop building up nuclear weapons because of us. The Russians have nuclear weapons pointed at them."
Snowball: Russia has no desire to ever use nuclear weapons against its neighbor or anyone else. Russia understands that a close, trusting relationship with China is integral to resisting the plots of the global hegemonists. Russia, China, and all their BRICS partners embrace the geopolitical philosophy of multi-polarism. Like I posted originally, China would love to reduce its military spending, but WE won't allow it. Just like WE have torn up nuclear disarmament treaties with Russia, and induced Russia itself to militarize, and this continues with greater acceleration every year because of OUR aggression against them.
nikcers: "All it does if we stop having a military is we would get left behind in military and wouldn't be able to defend our country or our economic interests."
Snowball: I did not say we should stop having a military. If you're responding to things people write, you should at least comprehend what you're responding to.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,396
I asked what spending you would find acceptable and you didnt answer.
That response looks like a chat bot.
China is more of a ally country to the USA than Russia is.
They both oppose US interests but the US is a strong trading partner with China and the USA'a foreign policy helps China obtain resources from Russia and Iran at a discount.
The USA saved China from being nuked when in the 70s under president Nixon Russia began to deploy nukes against China because they were losing a war against China.
To this day Russia has nukes pointed at China on their border.
Nixon intervention saved China from Soviet nuclear attack
Mao Zedong moves to Wuhan , Lin Biao to Suzhou and the general staff to a nuclear bombproof bunker in the western hills outside Beijing. The country's warplanes are scattered around northern China, runways at the main airports blocked and workers given weapons to shoot Soviet airmen when they...
www.scmp.com
Why Is Russia Aiming Missiles at China?
The placement of Iskander-M Brigades in Russia’s Eastern Military District reflects continued uneasiness about China.
Why Is Russia Aiming Missiles at China?
The placement of Iskander-M Brigades in Russia’s Eastern Military District reflects continued uneasiness about China.
thediplomat.com
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,958
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,958
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
Top GOP Congressmen were "clueless" about the inclusion of the previously-discussed gambling tax.
(where bettors could only deduct 90% of losses) - selected parts of the article pasted below:
“If you’re asking me how it got in there, no, I don’t know,” Sen. Chuck Grassley
“I don’t know anything about it. I’m not sure what it does,” Sen. John Cornyn
Both GOP senators serve on the Senate Finance Committee, which crafted the tax provisions of the bill. The panel, which is led by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho).
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), another member of the committee, called it “bad policy.”
Repealing the tax deduction limit on gambling losses would come at a cost, however. The Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’ nonpartisan scorekeeper, projected it would generate $1.1 billion in tax revenue over eight years.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) suggested the change had been made to comply with the Senate’s reconciliation rules. To pass a bill extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts with 51 votes instead of 60, Republicans needed every provision to have a budgetary impact or else risk it being struck by the Senate parliamentarian.
“In order to make current law permanent, you had to look at every provision and give it a score,” Johnson told HuffPost.
The Senate appears likely to reverse the provision.
www.yahoo.com
(where bettors could only deduct 90% of losses) - selected parts of the article pasted below:
“If you’re asking me how it got in there, no, I don’t know,” Sen. Chuck Grassley
“I don’t know anything about it. I’m not sure what it does,” Sen. John Cornyn
Both GOP senators serve on the Senate Finance Committee, which crafted the tax provisions of the bill. The panel, which is led by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho).
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), another member of the committee, called it “bad policy.”
Repealing the tax deduction limit on gambling losses would come at a cost, however. The Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’ nonpartisan scorekeeper, projected it would generate $1.1 billion in tax revenue over eight years.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) suggested the change had been made to comply with the Senate’s reconciliation rules. To pass a bill extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts with 51 votes instead of 60, Republicans needed every provision to have a budgetary impact or else risk it being struck by the Senate parliamentarian.
“In order to make current law permanent, you had to look at every provision and give it a score,” Johnson told HuffPost.
The Senate appears likely to reverse the provision.
GOP Senators Had No Idea They Voted For Controversial Gambling Tax
How the sausage is made in Washington: In the dark and behind closed doors.
nikcers
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 14,396
Top GOP Congressmen were "clueless" about the inclusion of the previously-discussed gambling tax.
(where bettors could only deduct 90% of losses) - selected parts of the article pasted below:
“If you’re asking me how it got in there, no, I don’t know,” Sen. Chuck Grassley
“I don’t know anything about it. I’m not sure what it does,” Sen. John Cornyn
Both GOP senators serve on the Senate Finance Committee, which crafted the tax provisions of the bill. The panel, which is led by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho).
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), another member of the committee, called it “bad policy.”
Repealing the tax deduction limit on gambling losses would come at a cost, however. The Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’ nonpartisan scorekeeper, projected it would generate $1.1 billion in tax revenue over eight years.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) suggested the change had been made to comply with the Senate’s reconciliation rules. To pass a bill extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts with 51 votes instead of 60, Republicans needed every provision to have a budgetary impact or else risk it being struck by the Senate parliamentarian.
“In order to make current law permanent, you had to look at every provision and give it a score,” Johnson told HuffPost.
The Senate appears likely to reverse the provision.
GOP Senators Had No Idea They Voted For Controversial Gambling Tax
How the sausage is made in Washington: In the dark and behind closed doors.
Maybe if Republicans win a bigger majority they can remove the new gambling tax.
You definitely can not rely on the democrat party to remove any taxes.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,237
Actually it was two Democrats especially the one in Las Vegas who were the first to speak out
and are sponsoring the removal of the tax.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,958
"We'll just blame Thomas Massie."
Remy: I Need a Boat (GOP Spending Version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g627wgcgEdI
{Reason TV | 22 July 2025}
You can't torpedo spending if you're torpedo spending.
Parody of Margan Wallen's "Need A Boat," written and performed by Remy. Music tracks mastered by Ben Karlstrom.
LYRICS
This draft bill don't look fine right now
And it ain't doing the trick (No…)
We're so dangerously indebted now
And this adds to the debt.
It adds one, two trillion, that's not great.
But what if we add something manufactured in your state?
Would a bridge change your mind? No, but if anything can
It'd be me on a dock pushing off of dry land.
I need a lake, a ship built in my state.
I'd even take a fleet.
Can one of them be named for me?
Sir, we're running out!
Yeah, what I need right now…
Are some real high ceilings
New-ship feeling
Me on the deck just-a sipping on Darjeeling
Don't need no sad song on my Spotify
Crying "he lost an election to a punk guy"
I need a boat.
I need a boat.
Can you talk some sense into him?
Don't care if it's a pontoon, brand-new, been used
Long as it's got bombs (Yes…)
Just wanna cast it out yonder, let that thing wander
To Iraq or to Iran.
I'm tired of running into all my friends'
Faces they put on a post office
A bit more inflation never hurt no one—
How's that make you feel? Nauseous.
I need a lake, a ship built in my state.
I'd even take a pond
Provided there are extra bombs.
Sir, we're running out!
Yeah, what I need right now…
Is a boat so brassy
Missiles classy
And if the bill doesn't pass? We'll just blame Thomas Massie.
Don't need no sad song on my Spotify
Crying "he lost an election to a punk guy"
I need a boat. I need a boat.
I need a boat. I need a boat.
Real, real bad.
Remy: I Need a Boat (GOP Spending Version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g627wgcgEdI
{Reason TV | 22 July 2025}
You can't torpedo spending if you're torpedo spending.
Parody of Margan Wallen's "Need A Boat," written and performed by Remy. Music tracks mastered by Ben Karlstrom.
LYRICS
This draft bill don't look fine right now
And it ain't doing the trick (No…)
We're so dangerously indebted now
And this adds to the debt.
It adds one, two trillion, that's not great.
But what if we add something manufactured in your state?
Would a bridge change your mind? No, but if anything can
It'd be me on a dock pushing off of dry land.
I need a lake, a ship built in my state.
I'd even take a fleet.
Can one of them be named for me?
Sir, we're running out!
Yeah, what I need right now…
Are some real high ceilings
New-ship feeling
Me on the deck just-a sipping on Darjeeling
Don't need no sad song on my Spotify
Crying "he lost an election to a punk guy"
I need a boat.
I need a boat.
Can you talk some sense into him?
Don't care if it's a pontoon, brand-new, been used
Long as it's got bombs (Yes…)
Just wanna cast it out yonder, let that thing wander
To Iraq or to Iran.
I'm tired of running into all my friends'
Faces they put on a post office
A bit more inflation never hurt no one—
How's that make you feel? Nauseous.
I need a lake, a ship built in my state.
I'd even take a pond
Provided there are extra bombs.
Sir, we're running out!
Yeah, what I need right now…
Is a boat so brassy
Missiles classy
And if the bill doesn't pass? We'll just blame Thomas Massie.
Don't need no sad song on my Spotify
Crying "he lost an election to a punk guy"
I need a boat. I need a boat.
I need a boat. I need a boat.
Real, real bad.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,470
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,470
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,958
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,470
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,470
Similar threads
