“By your logic, a household living entirely on government benefits could claim they have no absolutely no income.”
I understand your point; but, is that really the way we should look at income? Your argument is based on accounting principles and the individual’s cash flow. I’m not an accountant. I don’t have that much personality. My view is based on the source of the income and it’s effect on that individual, both personally and in society, as well as the effect on the financial health of the country as a whole. Do all the subsidies not add to the national debt? Do we not pay additional interest on that debt? I’m sure you have the knowledge to correct me if my questions are wrongly based? Perhaps the reporting should should always include both earned and unearned income. Would this not give a truer picture of the health of the nation?
 July 29, 2016 at 11:18am
Cooper is a light weight. The real devil is Matt Damon ;)
 July 28, 2016 at 3:17pm
James, This quote is most interesting to me. ‘”is “based solely on money income” and does “not include the value of noncash benefits,” such as “food stamps, health benefits, subsidized housing,”’
I think it’s a pitiful statement that real income is being replaced by government subsidies and those subsidies should be included as legitimate income. To take it to the extreme, we should count the housing, food, and clothes received by black slaves in the 19th century America as income. There is no place on earth where being subsidized by the government should be considered progress. If you use this as a basis for stating that income has increased, you should put a giant asterisk next to your statement.
I agree that being subsidized by the government is not a good thing, but that does not mean subsidies are not income. By your logic, a household living entirely on government benefits could claim they have no absolutely no income. This is the kind of insane logic that the left uses to claim that the poor pay massive tax rates: http://www.justfactsdaily.com/widely-touted-study-on-state-and-local-taxes-is-a-sham/
Your argument is also hypocritical, because the data cited by Trump and the media also includes unemployment, cash welfare, and other government entitlements. The dividing line between Trump’s statistic and CBO’s data is not government subsidies. As explained in the article, it includes a host of items that the Census data does not capture.
 July 22, 2016 at 10:54pm
Yeah, we kinda do….You don’t get to abandon all those and still claim them.
 July 22, 2016 at 1:28pm
Yeah, a real Oxymoron. Somebody needs to fact check the fact checker.
July 22, 2016 at 1:26pm
So…your voting the Hillary ticket, four more progressive years is fine by you. “Good Faith” demands you make your vote count toward what’s best, not throw it away.
 July 22, 2016 at 1:03pm
Laymen, a lot of us didn’t want to be “Trump Guys”. But, Hillary would be a total disaster. Not voting would be a vote for Hillary just like four years ago it was a vote for Obama. If there’s never a wall built, if there’s no job improvement, or any other big change, just stopping the progressive direction, reversing Obama’s executive orders, and putting a conservative on the Supreme Court would be better.
I also am not a "Trump guy". However, if all he does is slow down the progessive movement and put a conservative or two on the Supreme court I will be satisfied. My ideal couple of candidates didn't make it, but Trump is way better than Hillary.
Amen to that gaittec; remember Romney in 2012. About 3M Republicans stayed at home rather than vote for a Morman; result - 4 more years of Obama!!
JRook - Spot on! There is a reasons there are far more people on food stamps and you nailed a big one!
Also I wish you Glenn Beck would stop helping the Clinton campaign by attacking Trump every chance you get; what the hell is wrong with you!!!
Question: why Glenn Beck and Cruz supporters still attack Trump & help Hillary?
Trump will deliver “ahead of schedule & under budget.”
Trump does not need a job.
He is sick of seeing flunkies screw up the country.
We have every race at Trump rallies.
Everybody wants Trump to succeed because if he does all Americans will prosper.
Blacks, Whites Jews, Asians, Latino’s all are on the Trump train.
We can’t be divided.
What is wrong with Americans pulling together to win again?
32,000 employees of the Trump Organization will testify that Donald Trump is color blind & gender neutral and has always been.
That has always been corporate policy before it was law.
The race baiters can go home and look for honest work.
 July 21, 2016 at 5:13pm
I’m glad she didn’t have to shoot a gun. It would have given her PTSD for life.
 July 20, 2016 at 5:49pm
Because he was hoping to see a chance for a contested convention.
July 20, 2016 at 5:47pm
I’d have to hear it from a reliable source to even consider that it might be true. So far, The Times and an unnamed source in Kasich’s camp doesn’t meet that test. The story sounds made up on it’s face. More sour grapes likely.
Kind of like Trump going after Cruz for those affairs?
 July 20, 2016 at 5:41pm
Sarge–I think she was being sarcastic if you read Saran Wrap’s post above.
 July 11, 2016 at 4:41pm
The reason he can be sued if he votes against it is that it is a state law. He would be voting to violate the law and could very well be sued.
 June 8, 2016 at 5:43pm
Not the first time. See the dog wagging in anticipation, then watching him leave.
 June 2, 2016 at 2:51pm
Murders are up overall in Australia
 May 31, 2016 at 5:36pm
When scientist, actors, and other experts in their field, are cited in areas where they are not expert, it’s called “An appeal to a false authority”. Basically, in politics, Hawking’s opinion should carry no more weight than anyone else.
 May 27, 2016 at 5:51pm
All those taxes and fees that you refer to have increased exponentially in Democratic controlled cities and states primarily. And you may wish to rewrite history; but, you will get called on it. Government revenue increased dramatically after the reduction in income taxes by both Kennedy and Reagan.
“They merely invest in companies to meet that consumption / demand.”
I guess you want them to invest in companies where no demand and no increase in job opportunities exist. A true liberal reaction. The result is not important , only the fact that you would like to control the money.
May 27, 2016 at 12:04pm
“Start a family devalues any couple who doesn’t happen to have kids, for whatever reason.”
And who would that be primarily?
 May 27, 2016 at 12:03pm
So… what do we ask them? When are you two going to quit necking and get it on?
Wonder how many dead super delegates Hillary has arranged to vote for her.
 May 19, 2016 at 6:32pm
I really enjoyed that! My first Jiu-jitsu class, I got schooled by a 140 pound woman when I was 230.
That was over 10 years ago and I’ve loved it ever since. Jocko is a great representative of jiu-jitsu and of the US Military.
I understand. My 9 year old has done martial arts since she was three. To be exact, a mix of Shotokon, Muay Thai and Jiu-Jitsu. She is quiet and shy and only 55 pounds, but she takes care of herself against the bigger boys. Since she is small, she is able to bend around like a rubber band. That is her advantage. Boys have strength, she has flexibility and nimbleness. Now, she loves her role as teacher assistant and takes her martial arts seriously. She trains 4-5 days a week.
My daughter can't advance belts in Jiu-Jitsu (you have to be 16 in order to get belts), but it has really helped her overcome her shyness and focus. She is currently focused on getting her black belt in Muay Thai within the next year.
I really hope you continued to take Jiu-Jitsu classes. It is beneficial in so many ways.