But the chief sponsor of the legislation, Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.)... said: “The FairTax is the only progressive tax reform bill currently pending before Congress. Each household will receive a monthly prebate based on federal poverty levels and household size that will allow families to purchase necessary goods, such as food, shelter, and medicine, essentially tax-free. This is similar to our current individual exemption and refundable tax credit system.”
Does this mean you could decline to work entirely, accept the prebate, and live very frugally on just that? I'm saying "very frugally," because I think the "prebate" is the 30% above the cost of living at the poverty level. So, if I'm a young person choosing a minimalist existence, and the federal poverty level for one person living alone is $13,590, then the prebate is $4077. Can I live on $340 a month? Well, that will be the subject of my amusing TikTok videos. They'll probably be so popular that I'll supplement my income. But I'll still get my $4077, right?
See "Aspiring comedian goes viral on TikTok for living on just $100 a month in NYC."$340 is so much more than $100, and you don't have to live in NYC. This "FairTax" innovation would lure young people into what my generation called hippiedom. As Jesus said: "The hippies you will always have with you."
पोस्ट्स
७१ टिप्पण्या:
The FairTax idea has been around for a while. Sales taxes only apply to new goods, so if you thrift shop and with the prebate you could live quite comfortably without paying taxes. It's a difficult sell because it upends everything we know about taxes and the economy, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I would love to see the TikTok generation delve and report.
This ignorance on this is appalling. And it is so typical of both Democrats- who use partial facts to demonize and drive home their message of fear, and Republicans- who sit on their hands, no one actually communicating the approach, just assuming that it'll either fly or it'll die quietly. (This is why so many of us are so utterly disgusted with the GOP).
IF they are talking about a national sales tax, it would have to be in conjunction with the removal of the income tax. Oh...what's that you say? We can keep our money?
A step further. IF they are considering The Fair Tax then this is something everybody needs to understand. The Fair Tax eliminates the income tax for all. Everybody gets to keep their money- all of is. It is replaced by a national sales tax- a consumption tax. You pay tax- a higher sales tax- only when you spend. But again, you've got your entire paycheck now. It's like getting a raise.
In addition, for those below a certain income level, there would be a universal BASE income sent out monthly. That amount would be based on the average cost of living for very specific needs: housing/rent, groceries, medicine, transportation. An actuarial table would figured out for each year to come up with the base universal income.
So anyone working gets to keep all of their income. Those below a certain level get a base minimum wage monthly. And we all pay a 23%-30% national sales tax on goods and services at the point of purchase.
No loopholes. No getting around it. No 18,000 page IRS tax code each year. Just a simple method for paying to run this government and allowing businesses and people to prosper.
Of course, Democrats won't read it. Most Republicans won't read it. It would put them all out of business. Lobbyists would not be usefull any longer.
Buddy Carter and his crew need to loudly and publicly make their case why this is good for the country, in a 60 or 120 second format. Longer formats should be made readily available.
Think outside the box, IOW.
the chief sponsor of the legislation, Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.)
When you let a grown man named “Buddy” lead you into battle, you get what you deserve.
"House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has backed his fellow Republicans into a corner with one of the promises he made..."
How? It's legislation that will be considered. Not passed. Did Kevin make promises that legislation desired by some members of the caucus would pass? The 16th Amendment needs to be annulled, is what needs to happen, which it never will, for us to be truly free of the unconstitutional (declared so by SCOTUS in 1894) and originally illegally levied (by Abraham Lincoln) income tax.
Weak sauce.
I hate these "discussions" - the reality is that our ideas and problems are not openly shared, debated, and tested. Instead the media, who should be doing a good job setting the stage, just takes a side at the outset and gets unbalanced quotes to advocate.
Our current system is broken.
We've run a deficit for 22 years straight, and the last 2.5 years of deficits were greater than the last 15 years of deficit combined (including the 'great recession').
Our tax system often results in middle and upper middle class households being taxed at greater federal rates than the upper classes.
Our tax system is complex to the point that when tested, 50 tax professionals come up with 47 different ways of submitting taxes/deductions when presented with the same situation.
Audits are feared. Not because people make mistakes, but because it is so byzantine to navigate it.
...
And yet these articles start with the premise that a radical new way of taxing is outlandish. What's more outlandish? Something clearly different, or the fact that current executive leadership (which has been in power 10+ of the last 14 years) DEFENDS the current system as if it should be maintained.
Voting ... on bills ... RADICAL WHACKJOBS those wacky Republicans are.
I will note this: Should the Republicans be successful in replacing the income tax with a national sales tax, the VERY MINUTE Democrats get back into office they'll re-institute the income tax, and still have the sales tax, and we'll now have to pay both.
This is what freshmen Republicans don't get.
We don't have a tax problem in the US. The US spends however much it wants to irrespective of the amount of taxes collected.
..." I would love to see the TikTok generation delve and report." I would love to see anybody with a heartbeat delve and report, but there seem to be precious few that are inclined to do so, these days.
I'm looking out for rumors that the Russians are behind the Republican rules and are writing legislation for them. It's the only type of Democrat message that I pay attention to, anymore.
Temujin claimed (without evidence): "With Fair Tax ... Everybody gets to keep their money - all of it."
Hahaha ... uh no.
The Fair Tax only applies at the federal level. You won't keep all your money, just your federal income taxes. And no, this does not include the Medicaid taxes you pay, or your Social Security taxes. You'll still pay those. And any new taxes that Washington DC comes up with.
You will also pay state income tax, which will no longer be deductible on your federal taxes.
You will also pay state property taxes and now they won't be deductible. Neither will your home mortgage. Value of your property just plummeted for this reason. Impoverishing most people silently. They won't realize it until they try to sell their home.
You will continue to pay state and federal gas taxes. Federal death taxes, etc. etc., etc. All of the other hidden federal taxes. State and federal excise taxes.
Plus ALLLLLLLLL the new taxes in the future.
LOTS of your money will still be theirs for the stealing.
Flat tax would be good, get everybody on the same side on whether taxes should be raised. A fair tax instantly confiscates the savings of everybody who's saved. It's already been income-taxed and now it's going to be taxed again with a replacement income tax when spent.
Unless you use Richard Epstein's workaround - all income goes tax free into an IRA-like account and gets sales taxed when it's withdrawn. Existing savings are already outside that IRA and so not taxed again.
President Joe Biden said Thursday about the plan, saying it would slap a 30 percent national sales tax on 'every item from groceries, gasoline, clothing, supplies, [and] medicine.'"
Instead we'll just take 30% of all your earnings right up front, thank you, because we care.
That's one of the good things about introducing this legislation. It's extremely unlikely to go anywhere, but it calls attention to how much people are being taxed and it makes people think about how much the government is spending if they have to have a 30% sales tax to support that spending. It would be a tax that hurts, not one that is out-of-sight out-of-mind like withheld taxes.
Perhaps the best thing about it is that it takes away one of the most corrupting powers Congress has.
It would kinda pull the rug out from under the America's accountants though.
Carly Fiorina’s dad was a tax law prof before he was a federal judge. He told her - and he was absolutely right - that the federal income tax code is all about politics. When the Left wanted to enact the Green New Deal, they gave $380b in federal tax credits for wind and solar.
The pols will never abolish the income tax. All their power flows from it.
The political problem is that most pay no income tax.
Best to stick with Biden's tax rape.
Abolish the IRS and the FBI.
Again - Temujin brings the logic and reality.
Biden is against fair taxes. He's against 30% taxes on private yachts and airplanes, even if he wouldn't have to pay taxes on his Corvette.
Such a deep dive by Politico!
/sarc
This illustrates the problem with the GOP: the national sales tax idea has been floating around conservative circles for decades. Nothing in it is new, and certainly not crazy. In fact, the GOP has proclaimed for years that the tax system in this country is dysfunctional, so why is it controversial to discuss alternatives?
The reality is that large portions of the GOP establishment don't actually believe the party platform. They simply want to be in charge, and maybe tinker around at the edges. And their failures have led directly to the rise of Trump, as well as the increasingly strident GOP base.
The pols will never abolish the income tax. All their power flows from it.
-----
A national sales tax would quickly be corrupted in the same way. Want to funnel money to green new deal schemes? Give them an exemption to the sales tax.
Biden is a tax cheat. He has pocketed million in secret deals - and all of that - he has avoided proper taxation.
I like the idea as an antidote to the value-added tax. The VAT is all about hiding taxes so people don’t understand just how much of their money goes to the government. The sales tax is the opposite—this is how much your government is costing you. How do like them apples?
As an added bonus, I think at some point, we will have no choice but to implement a guaranteed minimum income. (If this annoys you, don’t waste my time with crap about how you hate social justice or reparations. My view that it’s inevitable is driven by technology—AI, robotics, and automation will eliminate so many job categories that the world will run by a million software engineers.) The rebate functions as a minimum guaranteed income—and the kids will love it.
What in God’s name is this all about?' President Joe Biden said Thursday
Note that this pertains to any issue on any Thursday.
Mr. Wibble:
True. Two Bills in the NE Unicam this year seeking sales tax exemptions for twine and diapers.
There’s an old saying, if a business engages in a behaviour that can’t be explained by economics, you can be sure they are doing it for tax reasons. How much money is drained from our economy each year by the tax system—complying with, avoiding, enforcing? How many hundreds of billions of pure waste?
How much dynamism would be released by nothing more than freeing the country from the burden of complying with the tax code (a code so complicated that literally not one single person anywhere actually understands it)?
How do you determine if someone is eligible for the prebate? Do they have to report their income? If so, you don’t get rid of the code or the necessity for IRS to determine if some are not reporting correctly.
This is a stupid waste of time and credibility by the Republicans in Congress. REGARDLESS of the merits of the positions, voters simply are unaware of the puts and takes of the proposal. The Congressman and other people interested in swapping out the fed income tax for a fed sales tax need to spend the time (years) and money in a campaign aimed at voters that explains, highlights, advocates, etc. while the proposal gets refined in response to voter and public feedback to get widespread support, all BEFORE introducing implementing legislation. All of this is necessary because to do this will require a constitutional amendment in order to eliminate the 16th amendment and replace it with a sales tax amendment. Without all that, you get what you're seeing now by the Democrats and media.
Also, if the sales tax proposal is tied to a universal basic income (UBI) proposal, I think it would be DOA and rightly so in light of our pandemic experience. Way better to have sales tax exemptions for food, rent, etc. Any UBI proposal should be tied to entitlement reform aka wholesale replacement (and even then, UBI would be the wrong answer).
"A step further. IF they are considering The Fair Tax then this is something everybody needs to understand. The Fair Tax eliminates the income tax for all."
That's the dream. The sad reality is that unless you repeal the 16th Amendment, I can guarantee you that within a few years. the government will declare an emergency of some sort and "temporarily" bring back the income tax. Everything is seen as an emergency when it suits their purposes, and few things are more permanent than a "temporary" tax. So, what are the odds on getting a supermajority of the House and Senate to approve of an amendment to repeal the 16th, and then getting 3/4ths of the state legislatures to vote to ratify it? I'd have better odds being able to levitate than the 16th being repealed.
So...are the Democrats pouncing in The Fair Tax?
"What? Abolish the U.S. tax code? But we've spent more than a century cramming in all the loopholes, exceptions, and favors for our contributors. Gentlemen! We gotta protect our phony-baloney jobs!"
"You will also pay state property taxes and now they won't be deductible. Neither will your home mortgage."
For how many people does that actually matter, given the level of the current standard deduction?
Of course, abolishing the IRS etc etc. is a great idea. Imposing a national consumption tax approximates the VAT approach of the superior Europeans. Everybody pays: solidarity! No more games via tax expenditures: transparency!
But in America, we can't have that. 1. Here, only about half the population pays federal income taxes; any change taxes "the poor" and will be politicked to death. 1'. Many people already get to keep all their money (in the federal system) and receive tens of thousands of dollars in benefits and services; the system works to their advantage, change brings risk. 2. Any sensible reform can and will be corrupted by progs at the first opportunity--e.g., as noted by others, with "exemptions" to any national tax. 3. Reformers are inept, the GOPe is tainted, and prog hegemony prevents serious debate, so fuhgeddaboudit.
Hey Earnest Prole: Buddy Carter holds an advanced degree, ran a successful business for decades, and is extremely intelligent and respected on both sides of the aisle. His service in the Georgia Legislature was the sort of number-crunching given to the brighter legislators like him by the more narcissistic and ideological ones.
Typical prejudiced leftist comment from you. Don't know how to use Wikipedia yet?
I worked with the Fair Tax board in the Georgia General Assembly, helping them arrange a meet and greet. They had the most educated board and membership of any nonprofit with which I have ever consulted -- and somewhat more politically diverse than most. Also less political, which is a plus, I'd say, not committed to either Party and laser-focused on the issue itself. I attribute these oddities to the fact that the plan and organization emerged from experts in several STEM fields, run by professors and emeritus from Georgia Tech and other universities who are or were scientists and economists and engineers, along with small businessmen, not corporate ones.
The Fair Tax plan is more complicated than described here, extremely credible, and, thanks to the safety-net built into it, actually less regressive in effect than our current income tax system. The primary beneficiaries would be the most beleaguered taxpayers today: blue collar and middle-class. It would also offer people far more leverage in making decisions about how to live, and the indigent and working poor would retain their social safety net.
It would raise the tax burden on rich people who don't dramatically change their lifestyles. Isn't that what earnest proles keep screaming for?
Bill Zhang: you are incorrect. Payroll taxes are also eliminated.
These goofy Republican/Losertarian types (usually from the Deep South or Texas) live in their own special fantasy world. People want inflation brought under control, crime reduced, the border secured, illegal immigration stopped, and more jobs. And the weird degenerate sex stuff and CRT in schools eliminated.
No one, except these oddballs Republican/Losertarians want a national sales tax. Let them have a vote, and it will be voted down, the adults can then regain control of the agenda.
Joe doesn’t want people to pay their fair share. That’s why democrats always block attempts to fix the rigged system democrats prefer. The rigging allows manipulation and favors, a flat tax on non-food consumption does not. Worse it would replace monstrosities like the national gas tax and other “targeted” democrat schemes to manipulate behavior through taxation.
There’s that far-right epithet again.
If you’re going to use far-right to mean people plowing down protesters with a car, can you use the same label on elected people to the United States House of Representatives.
I know it’s possible the writer/writers doesn’t agree with who the people picked to represent them. (Ask sentenced Jan6 protesters)
It doesn’t mean you get to defame them in such a spurious manner.
Yes. I’m going to bring it up every time I see it. I stopped reading right there and then.
Whatever. Democrats get propaganda points and their allies in the media run with it, but it's worth it. If you want backroom deals made out of sight, and members voting on bills thousands of pages long spending trillions of dollars with no time to read it, just vote Democrat already and get it over with.
BTW, didn't the home mortgage deduction disappear decades ago? And the state and local tax deductibility a few years ago? I see this nonsense point about their deductibility made in memes, and it makes me wonder how many people get their news from memes exclusively.
Also BTW, a national sales tax, regressive as it is, is how Canada pays for single-payer.
For how many people does that actually matter, given the level of the current standard deduction?
Wait, now we're back to the federal income tax system as it is now? And don't give state tax short shrift. I use all those Sch A deductions because they flow to state and wipe out any tax due there.
How do you determine if someone is eligible for the prebate? Do they have to report their income? If so, you don’t get rid of the code or the necessity for IRS to determine if some are not reporting correctly.
Even without the prebate issue, any tax on sales requires an agency to actually enforce collection of the tax and ensure that businesses aren't trying to keep transactions off the books.
How do you determine if someone is eligible for the prebate? Do they have to report their income? If so, you don’t get rid of the code or the necessity for IRS to determine if some are not reporting correctly.
Good point. I would rather it essentially be more universal. Everyone (which must also be defined in some way...) would be prebated for the essentials as described, regardless of income. Those who have more will likely spend more and therefore pay more in taxes, those who have less will spend less and pay less in taxes. Great in theory until actual legislation gets written and real money starts getting thrown around.
“I will note this: Should the Republicans be successful in replacing the income tax with a national sales tax, the VERY MINUTE Democrats get back into office they'll re-institute the income tax, and still have the sales tax, and we'll now have to pay both.”
This, absolutely. Laughably naive to think otherwise.
And, just to air my bleeding heart, the Fair Tax would make inflated prices that much more prohibitive. Why would Republicans want to join Biden’s War On The Poor?
It may be a terrific idea, but it is not in any way a serious proposal. No one in Washington is serious or sincere about anything other than their own well being. If this is the ruling class that we deserve, then that says an awful lot about us as a people. Hate is not too strong a word for how I feel about our rulers.
Clearly our present progressive tax scheme that is compensated/exacerbated through shared responsibility (e.g. redistributive change) is a burden and not viable. Abort. Cannibalize its profitable parts. Sequester its unproductive remains.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has backed his fellow Republicans into a corner with one of the promises he made to his far-right flank to land his job...
Stated as if allowing open debate of a tax reform proposal that the House Speaker himself opposes is a bad thing for Republicans?
If you think about it, being "backed into a corner" is simply another stale media metaphor applied to Republicans like "the walls are closing in," meant to project an image of desperation on thine enemy.
"By using stale metaphors, similes and idioms, you save much mental effort, at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself... People who write in this manner usually have a general emotional meaning – they dislike one thing and want to express solidarity with another – but they are not interested in the detail of what they are saying. A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus: What am I trying to say? What words will express it? What image or idiom will make it clearer? Is this image fresh enough to have an effect? And he will probably ask himself two more: Could I put it more shortly? Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly? But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble. You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in. They will construct your sentences for you – even think your thoughts for you, to a certain extent – and at need they will perform the important service of partially concealing your meaning even from yourself. It is at this point that the special connection between politics and the debasement of language becomes clear."
- George Orwell, Politics and the English Language
I wonder if states would just ratchet up their taxes?
If state tax stayed the same, we would save money.
My BIGGEST beef, and always unaddressed is this: Every cent I have saved or invested has already been taxed.
A Fair Tax would tax it again, so I'd end up getting taxed 70% or more in the end...
Regardless of the merits and demerits of the proposal, this is a prime example of how the media portrays a "Democrats pounce" scenario.
Currently there’s about fourteen states where a household can receive the equivalent of more than $100,000 in cash and benefits by signing up. The $340/mo would just be more money for weed…
I have worked my ass off for decades and lived frugally, paid a crapton of taxes on the part that is not in the 401k, and saved 1/3 for retirement.
Now you want to tax it at 30% again when I spend it.
That's ~60% tax on a good chunk of my income.
I understand there is a ~0% chance of it getting put into place, but when discussing it, please don't insult me by calling it Fair.
All that said, if it includes repealing the 16th Amendment, abolishing the IRS, and getting rid of the welfare state in exchange for the prebate, I'm all in, if only for the sake of my grandchildren.
"Fair tax" isn't fair. Or wise. Move on quickly Rs.
Politico=DNC Talking Points.
Our 100+ year experiment with income taxes has been a total failure.
It has given the government free reign to control our lives by rewarding some behavior, punishing other behavior - by providing or withholding incentives and services.
In general much of what we consider unfair, incompetent or downright evil about our federal government is a result of our current tax laws and the parasitic politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists it funds and corrupts. All enforced by an ever growing IRS police state.
Replacing a federal income tax with a sales tax would have to be an improvement.
BIII Zhang- wrong. You are wrong about The Fair Tax and how it would work. And, when you say "without evidence", I gave you a link to The Fair Tax. You could read up on it yourself. If you just blast it without reading it, you sound like a Democrat. And while that might get you votes, it's not attached to reality.
Social Security and Medicare would be paid out of the receipts from the national sales tax, NOT from your income. You labor is your time of life. The current system is taxing your time of life, your very livelihood. Fair Tax eliminates the tax on your time of life. You get to keep every cent you make- except...the income taxes that may be taken by the state you live in. Some of us choose to not live in those states that confiscate our income. You could as well, but even with that, eliminating the federal tax on social security, medicare, and income puts a helluva lot more money in your pocket to use as you need. As you earned with your time of life.
As for other taxes in your life, jeez, man. It can't cover your entire life and what you choose to do. Your county, state, city will still have to be dealt with. But honestly, the Fed chunk is the largest regular bite out of your earnings. And this eliminates the bullshit we all have to go through every year filing taxes. It's a nightmare and an industry all unto itself. It needs to be gone.
You pay tax only on what you spend. And that would bring in more taxpayers than our current system. Everyone buys things. Not everyone pays the current Federal income tax. Too many loopholes, too many deductions, too many good lawyers. The Fair Tax eliminates the need for all of that.
www.fairtax.org. Or just buy the book (it's short) through the Althouse portal.
Whatever the merits, it's hardly the end of civilization to put it up for debate and a vote. Are we to believe that no Democrat House members ever proposed wacky or impractical stuff? Did anybody care?
If the C of C Republicans don't like it, they can vote against it. I don't know how or why this puts anybody in a corner.
West Texas--I'm in the same boat. Since we're talking about something that will never happen anyway, in theory there could be a big age-weighted lump sum to those of us who have paid taxes for a long time.
Heh. Not bloody likely.
It's too bad that Trump used "Lying Ted" on Cruz (who is hardly even in the game as far as lying goes).
"Lying Joe" is the perfect descriptor for Biden, who lies without even thinking about it.
A flat tax would be much more saleable and simpler than this proposal. It also wouldn't screw all the retirees who have (as was pointed out above) already had their income taxed once and now would effectively face a 30% reduction in their standard of living (aside from whatever workarounds are included). No deductions (other than a standard one for everyone, then 25% (or whatever rate would work) on everything else. It's functionally equivalent to a sales tax without completely overhauling the entire tax system. This was outlined 40 years ago by Hall and Rabushka of the Hoover Institution.
If the government is going to spend 30% of our GDP they are going to have to collect 30% of our GDP whether they do it through payroll taxes, income taxes, corporate taxes, fees and tarriffs or a 30% VAT tax. If you don't think you are already paying for government spending in your grocery bill you are deluded.
I have a much simpler solution. Since government spending is completely disconnected from revenue, anymore, I suggest a prebate to all living citizens, and then the government simply prints the money it needs. inflation will be the (only) tax.
@ 12:12 PM, Wince struck gold 👆🏽
Now you want to tax it at 30% again when I spend it.
Easy enough to solve. Like in Texas, there are reasonable exemptions, such as educators not paying taxes on goods for education. Add exemptions for people born prior to a date. You can make it progressive, such as full exemption for those over 67 and 2/3 exemption for those over 57 and 1/3 exemption for those over 52. These exemptions will fade out with that population if set by a "born prior to such date".
I've been following the fairtax since 1996 or thereabouts. The main problem with the idea of the Fairtax (or any flat tax proposal) is that the 16th Amendment needs to be repealed *first* otherwise we'll get hammered on both a flat tax and an income tax. It's likely an insurmountable problem, unfortunately. The idea itself is sound, but the path to implementation is fraught.
Tina, thanks for being a part of it. Back when I paid close attention to FairTax, I remember Georgia representatives were a major force in that movement.
The key part of the Fair Tax was nothing moved forward till the 16th was removed.
These are discussions worth having. To merely dismiss them out of hand is what is irresponsible.
Earnest Prole said...
the chief sponsor of the legislation, Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.)
When you let a grown man named “Buddy” lead you into battle, you get what you deserve.
From my childhood:
Friends are Friends
Pals are Pals
But Buddies sleep together
"Friends are Friends
Pals are Pals
But Buddies sleep together"
I'm always amused by progressives who are quick to declare someone a homophobe but are equally quick to use gay inuendo to disparage anyone who disagrees with their viewpoints.
Hypocrisy much?
"Friends are Friends
Pals are Pals
But Buddies sleep together"
I'm always amused by progressives who are quick to declare someone a homophobe but are equally quick to use gay inuendo to disparage anyone who disagrees with their viewpoints.
Hypocrisy much?
The left is lying through their teeth on this. they are talking an additional 30%. Not enough opportunity for graft in a flat tax.
My worry is that it will be easy to make it 31, then 32.
It's the spending stupid
Instead. Let's try this. It's a novel idea because it's never been done before. Howsabout we cut spending across the board? 5% out of every department. We can afford it. Do it for AMERICA! Do it for the CHILDREN!
Instead. Let's try this. It's a novel idea because it's never been done before. Howsabout we cut spending across the board? 5% out of every department. We can afford it. Do it for AMERICA! Do it for the CHILDREN!
Tina Trent: "Hey Earnest Prole: Buddy Carter holds an advanced degree, ran a successful business for decades, and is extremely intelligent and respected on both sides of the aisle. His service in the Georgia Legislature was the sort of number-crunching given to the brighter legislators like him by the more narcissistic and ideological ones.
Typical prejudiced leftist comment from you. Don't know how to use Wikipedia yet?"
Now now. Earnest Prole can't be a leftist as he claims to be a principled independent in CA. Sort of like how gadfly is a principled "conservative".
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा