Friday Funnies: Trump's Tax Plan

Chip Bok - Creators Syndicate

Comments

[Fist of Etiquette]

They should probably both just switch to The Daily Mail. Find out what Caitlyn Jenner's penis is up to these days.

[Entropy Drehmaschine Void]

Rotting in some medical waste heap?

[Will4Freedom]

I'm sorry, what was the point? I got distracted by the woman with her hand in her crotch, licking her fingers.

[Ska]

I only visit pronhub for the tax articles.

[SIV]

Ban avocados for public health

[Alan Vanneman]

No, Republicans want to provide trillions in tax cuts for the rich and deny health insurance to millions of poor people. Try reading Avik Roy or Peter Suderman once in a while.

[sarcasmic]

Not taking is giving and not giving is taking.

[Will4Freedom]

It's way too early to make me think that hard.
if !(taking) {
giving = true;
}
else if !(giving)
{
taking = true;
}

Sorry... does not compute.

[sarcasmic]

When you don't give free stuff to poor people you're taking that stuff away from them.

When you don't take money from rich people you're giving money to them.

It's not that hard. All you have to do is understand that everything belongs to everyone. With the government being everyone. So when the government doesn't give stuff to poor people, it's actually taking stuff away from poor people and giving it to the rich. You see, poor people own that stuff that was never given to them in the first place. And as far as taxes go, all money belongs to the government. To us. The people. Because the government is the people. It says it right there when it says "We the people." Whereas the rich are "them." They're not the people. They're the enemy who robs the people. So whatever the rich are allowed to keep is actually a gift, being that they stole it from the poor. Never mind that the poor have nothing worth stealing, by definition. Anyway, that means that whatever is not taken from the rich in taxes is actually given to them by the poor.

Thus not giving (to the poor) is taking (from the poor and giving to the rich), and not taking (from the rich) is giving (the rich at the expense of the poor).

It makes total sense as long as you suspend the rational part of your mind that makes you a human being, and instead emote like an animal.

[MultiSlacker]

This is kinda brilliant. Helped me understand economic theory better than any college professor.

/no sarcasm

[DanO.]

Sarcasm overload. Never a pretty sight. Pitiful, even.

[sarcasmic]

Pitiful, even.

Yes. Yes, you are.

[DanO.]

Ooh, expert-level burn!

[Will4Freedom]

Thank you for the explanation. The suspend the rational part of my brain part explains it all. My job does not allow me to do that. I'll probably understand it better after I retire and my brain turns to mush.

[eyeroller]

Tax cuts may very well shift money from the future poor to the current rich. (Time will tell.)

[Alan Vanneman]

Have I written this comment before? Nick Gillespie frequently expresses the opinion that political cartoonists are terrible. Nick, I don't think all of them are as bad as Chip. In fact, I don't think any of them is as bad.

[DanO.]

Stop us before we post more political cartoons.

[Unemployed Armenian Tranny]

Even if the poor payed 100% tax rate, it even wouldn't break within several orders of magnitude or 1 trillion.

Try again, lefties.