• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Liberal Vermont Senator Sanders may seek U.S. presidency in 2016

Anthony60 said:
Why is it that every solution this guy has is to increase taxes? Like the government doesn't take enough of out earnings already! No thanks.
Click to expand...

Income inequality is "immoral" according to Sanders. How else is he going to take from the rich and give to the poor? Wait until he comes out with his plans for raising taxes on individuals. I guarantee if you make more than $40,000 a year, he'll go after it. One of the many reasons I will never support him.
 
Anthony60 said:
Why is it that every solution this guy has is to increase taxes? Like the government doesn't take enough of out earnings already! No thanks.
Click to expand...

Because the GOP has shielded the rich from paying taxes for the last decade, and because taxing the rich is good for the economy?

In any case, the allegation was that Sanders didn't say what his tax plan was. He did. In detail. So that empty rightwing talking point is out the door.
 
tres borrachos said:
Income inequality is "immoral" according to Sanders. How else is he going to take from the rich and give to the poor? Wait until he comes out with his plans for raising taxes on individuals. I guarantee if you make more than $40,000 a year, he'll go after it. One of the many reasons I will never support him.
Click to expand...

Didn't really bother to read his detailed tax plan, even though I provided it.

As to your 'guarantee' I love it when conservatives pretend to care about working people. It's so wonderfully fulsome.
 
FaceofBachmann said:
Because the GOP has shielded the rich from paying taxes for the last decade, and because taxing the rich is good for the economy?

In any case, the allegation was that Sanders didn't say what his tax plan was. He did. In detail. So that empty rightwing talking point is out the door.
Click to expand...

I didn't need him to say a thing, I know his plan. Oh, and the rich already pay the lion's share of the taxes, let alone their "fair share."
 
Do we have a problem in the US with income distribution?

inequality-p25_averagehouseholdincom.png
 
poweRob said:
You playing thread police is hilarious. If you are so concerned about my participation in the thread then go back and read the thread.
Click to expand...
You seem to not have anything constructive to add to the topic.

poweRob said:
There you will find all sorts of posts of mine on this topic. Why don't you focus on those race baiters who try to derail the thread instead? Oh that's right... They are conservatives. Nvm.
Click to expand...
Because race baiting isn't the topic. Get it yet? I also note you don't have anything to add remotely akin to the topic. Thanks for proving my point.
 
Anthony60 said:
Well, I don't believe you on that. But, I'll say this, take a look at the chart, and Obama, who has increased the deficit by Trillions of dollars, more than anyone, has this little teenie weenie bar, while all the other Presidents show these huge increases. Maybe a bit misleading, or just outright untrue.
Click to expand...

i note that you are unable to disprove the graph's legitimacy
now we find that you simply do not like the data which was provided
data which shows you to be very wrong - about reagan's thriftiness - and about Obama's excessive spending
you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts

here is the graph once more for any other readers who are wondering what it is you are wrong about
graph obama big spender.jpg
 
tres borrachos said:
Income inequality is "immoral" according to Sanders. How else is he going to take from the rich and give to the poor? Wait until he comes out with his plans for raising taxes on individuals. I guarantee if you make more than $40,000 a year, he'll go after it. One of the many reasons I will never support him.
Click to expand...
we don't need your 'guarantees' to tell us what Bernie Sanders will propose. he is quite able - and willing - to tell us himself what he is for and what he is against
the modest income earner will have nothing to fear from his proposals
 
If anyone doesn't realize this is a plot to make her the "reasonable" Democrat I have a bridge to sell them.
 
justabubba said:
we don't need your 'guarantees' to tell us what Bernie Sanders will propose. he is quite able - and willing - to tell us himself what he is for and what he is against
the modest income earner will have nothing to fear from his proposals
Click to expand...


Are you tasked with deciding what people can post as their opinions (to other posters, I might add)?

Good - you, as a modest income earner, don't have to worry. I, as a far more than modest income earner, do have to worry.
 
justabubba said:
i note that you are unable to disprove the graph's legitimacy
now we find that you simply do not like the data which was provided
data which shows you to be very wrong - about reagan's thriftiness - and about Obama's excessive spending
you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts

here is the graph once more for any other readers who are wondering what it is you are wrong about
View attachment 67173042
Click to expand...
And still, I am waiting for you to make a point.
 
tres borrachos said:
Are you tasked with deciding what people can post as their opinions (to other posters, I might add)?

Good - you, as a modest income earner, don't have to worry. I, as a far more than modest income earner, do have to worry.
Click to expand...

It's funny how he post about everyone else's posts, but makes no points and adds absolutely nothing to the conversation.
 
Ockham said:
You seem to not have anything constructive to add to the topic.

Because race baiting isn't the topic. Get it yet? I also note you don't have anything to add remotely akin to the topic. Thanks for proving my point.
Click to expand...

Then you clearly haven't read the thread because I have quot e a few posts on Bernie sanders running. Meanwhile you are spending your time trolling me rather than being on topic. Oh the hypocrisy.

And your right in that race baiting isn't the topic so go bug your conservative friend who dropped in this thread to tell us all that Obama is black. Then you may have a smidgeon of credibility when you try to play thread police in here.
 
Last edited:
justabubba said:
no. point out the misleading inaccuracy
Click to expand...

FYI, I didn't say anything was factually inaccurate, so I won't be pointing anything like that out. You, however, are welcome to make some kind of argument, or even a point against my point that it is meant to mislead.
 
poweRob said:
Then you clearly haven't read the thread because I have quot e a few posts on Bernie sanders running. Meanwhile you are spending your time trolling me rather than being on topic. Oh the hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
I am clearly reading this thread - what happened before is irrelevant. You apparently don't know what trolling is, you didn't back in the PCF days either. Glad to see some things don't change.

poweRob said:
And your right in that race baiting isn't the topic so go bug your conservative friend who dropped in this thread to tell us all that Obama is black. Then you may have a smidgeon of credibility when you try to play thread police in here.
Click to expand...
You still not getting it - I continue to ask you to get back on topic and you don't. Reported.
 
tres borrachos said:
How much more money would you have if one of the top 1 percenters had less?
Click to expand...

One of the top 1%ers? Probably none.

If, however, the middle class had control of those billions, then a lot more would be spent on consumer goods, giving the businesses a larger market, which would make for more profits, which would again be pumped into the economy, and we'd all have more.

Instead of simply creating more of a market for luxury goods, as is happening now.

Despite expanding into new markets, the luxury-retail business has been relying on price increases to drive sales. Now, even the very wealthy are nearing the limits of what they are willing to spend.

In the past five years, the price of a Chanel quilted handbag has increased 70% to $4,900. Cartier's Trinity gold bracelet now sells for $16,300, 48% more than in 2009. And the price of Piaget's ultrathin Altiplano watch is now $19,000, up $6,000 from 2011.
Click to expand...
 
simonjames said:
If anyone doesn't realize this is a plot to make her the "reasonable" Democrat I have a bridge to sell them.
Click to expand...
That's what candidates and the teams that handle them do. It's not like informed voters don't know - if Sanders runs they'll do the same thing. Politicians rely on the uninformed to elect them primarily - and well placed money for the power brokers to influence groups like unions.

OnWisconsin said:
Is george soros backing candidates who want to give more freedom's to bankers and wallstreet?
Click to expand...
George will back anyone who shares his ideology and world view. Sanders may be on that list of future supporters.
 
Dittohead not! said:
One of the top 1%ers? Probably none.

If, however, the middle class had control of those billions, then a lot more would be spent on consumer goods, giving the businesses a larger market, which would make for more profits, which would again be pumped into the economy, and we'd all have more.

Instead of simply creating more of a market for luxury goods, as is happening now.
Click to expand...

Poor people and lower middle class people don't need to worry about Chanel handbags.

So how much would you like to take from the 1 percenters to give out to everyone else? And how exactly would we middle classers get the money - checks from the government?

I shop at Kohls and Macys. If the 1 percenters were taxed some more, or were forced to give up their billions, how much less would the cost of what I buy there be, and why?
 
tres borrachos said:
Are you tasked with deciding what people can post as their opinions (to other posters, I might add)?
Click to expand...
yes. it is my personal responsibility to correct ignorant posts on the internet
your post was my assignment at the time
you're welcome

Good - you, as a modest income earner, don't have to worry. I, as a far more than modest income earner, do have to worry.
Click to expand...
more ignorance
you have no idea of my income, thus you are without the means to discern how our incomes compare
but the good news is Bernie Sanders has indicated he seeks to tax the very rich. only if you are among that group should you be concerned about his platform. and if you are in that group, you should be more like Warren Buffett and welcome that shift of the tax burden to those who can most afford to pay
 
justabubba said:
yes. it is my personal responsibility to correct ignorant posts on the internet
your post was my assignment at the time
you're welcome


more ignorance
you have no idea of my income, thus you are without the means to discern how our incomes compare
but the good news is Bernie Sanders has indicated he seeks to tax the very rich. only if you are among that group should you be concerned about his platform. and if you are in that group, you should be more like Warren Buffett and welcome that shift of the tax burden to those who can most afford to pay
Click to expand...

Then if you're a more than moderate income earner, you're free to pay extra taxes whenever you want. I'll keep what I earn, thankyouverymuch.
 
tres borrachos said:
Then if you're a more than moderate income earner, you're free to pay extra taxes whenever you want. I'll keep what I earn, thankyouverymuch.
Click to expand...

and if Bernie Sanders is elected you will continue to do so
however, if another neocon is elected, either you will pay more taxes on your modest income, or the national deficit will continue to increase, or some of both will occur
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom