Speccing on cards that have the main drawing point that they are budget seems like a bad idea.
Driving up the price of a untested budget deck will either draw a lot of people to a tier 2 deck or kill the budget nature of a deck that was not all that good anyway. There really is going to be little in the new set to support goblin tribal.
But for Modern to self-regulate decks like Bloom Titan or some not-so-busted Eldrazi-deck of the future, we would need some form of maindeckable land hate.
This whole "lands are sacred, don't touch them"-mentality just leads to a Tron Ban ....
There are plenty of three mana land destruction spells in modern. What would be really good is an Encroaching Wastes that does not require five lands to use. If we could get that effect by tapping three lands then things would be better.
Watching the last pro tour I was constantly thinking how much less terrible this format would be if it had a proper strip mine effect.
I just found it really funny that these people take really take their identity politics seriously.
You have a political party actively trying to roll back the rights earned by gays, blacks, and the poor and you think it's funny they care?
I'm curious what rights are those>?
Voting, marriage, access to space.
Woow I did not know some Americans want apartheid. That is pretty terrible. I understand why you are unhappy.
Can I ask you the details on what party in the us wants gays, blacks (as you put it) and the poor not to have voting rights? I'm not aware of any such campaign but seeing as I come from a country that had such bad ideas I would be curious as to see how such a thing could be defended.
Please inform me of that maths. I want to see the equations that back up the claim that a tax break of 14 percent to the top 2 percent looses the government more money than the meaningful tax break trump supports for the working people.
As I say a tax break for half the country should be more impactful that the one for the top two percent regardless of the numbers. SO please I await the maths majors imput to this thread.
Yes but even if the tax break for the rich is higher the sheer amount of more poor people makes the point moot.
Is so hard to realise that a 1 percent tax break for 180 million Americans makes a lot more of a difference than a 14 percent tax break for two million people.
And a point that is rarely raised is that what a government does with these tax breaks for the rich is that they create an environment of risk taking. If this tax reform is to go trough then the government is saying the the Mark Zuckerburg's and the other venture capitalist in Silicon Valley. You know what guys and gals feel free to put your money in free enterprise because if you do you can reap the rewards much more than before.
You can bet you if Mark Zuckerburg can make nearly 15 percent more income from his business dealings he will be much more prone to risk his money in some new technology company. Making it much easier for the new Twitter or Facebook to get the funding that it needs to blow up.
These income brackets that he wants to give these big breaks to are the most fiscally active segment of society. You absolutely want to encourage these people to be active with there money. They don't just invest in a retirement annuities. They invest in the companies that change the world.
"But Trump is racist!!"
No. He's not politically correct and refuses to ever apologize for anything non-PC he might do or say, because he knows what happens when you start giving in. But that's all.
Trump is by the way officially endorsed by many minority figures, by the National Black Republican Association, and defended by the leader of Nation of Islam himself. And he polls quite well among minorities too.
Quote from "Neil Gaiman, a couple of years back »
I was reading a book (about interjections, oddly enough) yesterday which included the phrase “In these days of political correctness…” talking about no longer making jokes that denigrated people for their culture or for the colour of their skin. And I thought, “That’s not actually anything to do with ‘political correctness’. That’s just treating other people with respect.”
Which made me oddly happy. I started imagining a world in which we replaced the phrase “politically correct” wherever we could with “treating other people with respect”, and it made me smile.
He wants to lower taxes for the poor and end all loopholes for the rich and the multi-national corporations. He was the first to talk about corporate inversion, etc.
Per the Tax Policy Center, Trump's plan would cut taxes for middle-income households by 4.9% on average, but by almost 19% for the top 0.1%. Good job on those loopholes. By income quintile, from lowest to highest, the tax cuts would be: 1%, 3.1%, 4.9%, 5.8% and 9.7% (with the top 1% getting a 17.5% tax cut). Just to recap, that's a 1% cut for the poorest, and a 17.5% cut for the top 1%. While he's technically lowering taxes for the poor, he's not lowering them by very much compared to how much he's lowering them for the rich.
His plan would also add 11.2 trillion to the national debt by 2026.
I think you are being disingenuous with these claims. One to six percent tax breaks among the working classes is an absolutely HUGE tax break. You are basically giving 30 - 50 percent of the population something like 300 - 500 dollars a year in money they do not have to pay for tax.
Really if you want to do the math please come back to this thread but even just one percent less tax for the lower income tax brackets is still a MMAAUSIVE tax break.
I think that if he is elected his government is going to have to realise that they are going to have a lot less money to spend. All of this notwithstanding he still wants to give most Americans a tax break. Something which is probably not going to make his job if elected easier.
This does not strike me as something as big of an ******** as liberals make him out to be would do.
I totally want to play thing with a bunch of instant and sorceries that giver him / her shroud or hexproof. You can totally commit to flipping her because when the thing flips everything gets bouncced.
I'm just not paying 20 bucks to play a novel deck that may or may not work.
Driving up the price of a untested budget deck will either draw a lot of people to a tier 2 deck or kill the budget nature of a deck that was not all that good anyway. There really is going to be little in the new set to support goblin tribal.
There are plenty of three mana land destruction spells in modern. What would be really good is an Encroaching Wastes that does not require five lands to use. If we could get that effect by tapping three lands then things would be better.
Watching the last pro tour I was constantly thinking how much less terrible this format would be if it had a proper strip mine effect.
I can easily see two coloured decks running the following mana bases.
Allied.
4x tango lands
4x Tap lands
2x Evolving WIlds
7x basics
7x basics
Enemy
4x enemy man lands
4x tap lands
2x Evolving Wilds
7x basics
7x basics
All things considered it would still be better than the mana fixing we had in many older standard formats.
Because I have no clue.
Eerie Interlude at three bucks is pretty sweet value.
Woow I did not know some Americans want apartheid. That is pretty terrible. I understand why you are unhappy.
Can I ask you the details on what party in the us wants gays, blacks (as you put it) and the poor not to have voting rights? I'm not aware of any such campaign but seeing as I come from a country that had such bad ideas I would be curious as to see how such a thing could be defended.
As I say a tax break for half the country should be more impactful that the one for the top two percent regardless of the numbers. SO please I await the maths majors imput to this thread.
Is so hard to realise that a 1 percent tax break for 180 million Americans makes a lot more of a difference than a 14 percent tax break for two million people.
And a point that is rarely raised is that what a government does with these tax breaks for the rich is that they create an environment of risk taking. If this tax reform is to go trough then the government is saying the the Mark Zuckerburg's and the other venture capitalist in Silicon Valley. You know what guys and gals feel free to put your money in free enterprise because if you do you can reap the rewards much more than before.
You can bet you if Mark Zuckerburg can make nearly 15 percent more income from his business dealings he will be much more prone to risk his money in some new technology company. Making it much easier for the new Twitter or Facebook to get the funding that it needs to blow up.
These income brackets that he wants to give these big breaks to are the most fiscally active segment of society. You absolutely want to encourage these people to be active with there money. They don't just invest in a retirement annuities. They invest in the companies that change the world.
I think you are being disingenuous with these claims. One to six percent tax breaks among the working classes is an absolutely HUGE tax break. You are basically giving 30 - 50 percent of the population something like 300 - 500 dollars a year in money they do not have to pay for tax.
Really if you want to do the math please come back to this thread but even just one percent less tax for the lower income tax brackets is still a MMAAUSIVE tax break.
I think that if he is elected his government is going to have to realise that they are going to have a lot less money to spend. All of this notwithstanding he still wants to give most Americans a tax break. Something which is probably not going to make his job if elected easier.
This does not strike me as something as big of an ******** as liberals make him out to be would do.
I'm curious what rights are those>?
I'm just not paying 20 bucks to play a novel deck that may or may not work.