Bernie Sanders releases 10 years of tax returns, showing how his 2016 presidential run vaulted him i

Surrealistik · Apr 22, 2019

mrdeltoid said:
He used to chide and belittle “ millionaires “, until he became one. His speeches now chide and belittle “billionaires”. I laughed.

Have you dissected his air time to determine this is indeed the case or are you basically talking out of your ass for a cheap stab? I suspect the latter is far more probable.

Aberration · Apr 22, 2019

Surrealistik said:
How so?

In capitalism, the actors seek to maximize profits; it turns out a great way to maximize profits is engaging in de facto bribery of lawmakers and dispensers of govt contracts and dollero; why on earth do you think hundreds of millions are spent on lobbyists and campaign finance?

Not at all.

First of all the difference is material; advocating for one, i.e. tax law that will work to your detriment to the benefit of those at lower income brackets, is not at all comparable to advocating for another, i.e. tax law that will work to your near-exclusive benefit at the expense of everyone else. The ethical implications for each are obviously very different; one features shared sacrifice and self-sacrifice for the benefit of others, while the other is unadulterated selfishness at the expense of others.

He thinks their tax rates should be higher, and he is willing to pay those higher tax rates.

Trump donates his salary as a token PR move because it's largely irrelevant to his income as anyone should be acutely aware.

Actors seeking profits is not exclusive to capitalism. That is just human nature. That type of activity exists in every thought of economic system.

Capitalism though is simply where trade is controlled by private owners for their own interests, versus State control. That’s usually profit. But that doesn’t mean all profit seeking is Capitalism. And by using law to benefit yourself that is bringing State control and contrary the definition of Capitalism.

As for Trump salary. You can call it a token move. It’s still action. Versus Bernie’s words. Nothing is stopping Bernie from paying the rates you say he says he is willing pay. His actions demonstrate he is not actually willing. [emoji2369]

Surrealistik · Apr 22, 2019

Aberration said:
Actors seeking profits is not exclusive to capitalism. That is just human nature. That type of activity exists in every thought of economic system.

Capitalism though is simply where trade is controlled by private owners for their own interests, versus State control. That’s usually profit. But that doesn’t mean all profit seeking is Capitalism. And by using law to benefit yourself that is bringing State control and contrary the definition of Capitalism.

Capitalism is an economic system where the means of production are privately controlled and operated as indeed they are in the developed world, with at best a couple of nationalized exceptions; in virtually every case globally and historically, that economic system exists in tandem with some kind of regulating governance. There is nothing about capitalism that innately forbids or disqualifies the use of State regulation or control to further one's interests; in fact the private character of ownership and control of production strongly incentivizes the manipulation of government to accrue further profit or personal interests, thus political corruption to that end can certainly be thought of as a natural outgrowth of the system of capitalism when married to governance with a considerable ability to impact privately owned industry and commerce.

As for Trump salary. You can call it a token move. It’s still action. Versus Bernie’s words. Nothing is stopping Bernie from paying the rates you say he says he is willing pay. His actions demonstrate he is not actually willing. [emoji2369]

Again, for what must be probably the third time (at least), Bernie said wealthier people should pay higher taxes, not voluntarily donate money above and beyond their tax liability. His actions don't demonstrate a lack of willingness to pay higher mandated rates so much as the perfectly rational decision not to donate more to the government than is obliged under the law as it stands (which incidentally, is not currently providing the services those tax increases are meant to fund). The man demonstrates his willingness daily in his considerable ongoing efforts to win the presidency, popularize the increase in taxes and pass bills to that effect; he takes action in that regard daily.

Aberration · Apr 23, 2019

Surrealistik said:
Capitalism is an economic system where the means of production are privately controlled and operated as indeed they are in the developed world, with at best a couple of nationalized exceptions; in virtually every case globally and historically, that economic system exists in tandem with some kind of regulating governance. There is nothing about capitalism that innately forbids or disqualifies the use of State regulation or control to further one's interests; in fact the private character of ownership and control of production strongly incentivizes the manipulation of government to accrue further profit or personal interests, thus political corruption to that end can certainly be thought of as a natural outgrowth of the system of capitalism when married to governance with a considerable ability to impact privately owned industry and commerce.

Just because governments insist upon regulating doesn’t change the definition of Capitalism. And just because people insist upon buying selling regulators also does not change the definition of Capitalism.

You say “in fact” private ownership incentivized. How? What is the “in fact” of it?

Surrealistik said:

Again, for what must be probably the third time (at least), Bernie said wealthier people should pay higher taxes, not voluntarily donate money above and beyond their tax liability. His actions don't demonstrate a lack of willingness to pay higher mandated rates so much as the perfectly rational decision not to donate more to the government than is obliged under the law as it stands (which incidentally, is not currently providing the services those tax increases are meant to fund). The man demonstrates his willingness daily in his considerable ongoing efforts to win the presidency, popularize the increase in taxes and pass bills to that effect; he takes action in that regard daily.

Click to expand...

I never questioned what Bernie said. Why do you feel the need to repeat what is not argued?

If he really believed wealthier people should pay higher taxes then he would pay it. He wouldn’t have to be forced to. He’s a hypocrite for not. Some people are Ok with that. I expect more than pandering.

Running for office demonstrates that? Cool story. That’s an absurdly low bar.

uptower · Apr 23, 2019

Renae said:
Bernie "Tax teh rich, but don't ask me to pay the tax I want rich people to pay" isn't a Hypocrite how again?

But he's more than happy to pay his taxes. The "don't ask me" part is pure baloney.

Surrealistik · Apr 23, 2019

Aberration said:
Just because governments insist upon regulating doesn’t change the definition of Capitalism. And just because people insist upon buying selling regulators also does not change the definition of Capitalism.

You say “in fact” private ownership incentivized. How? What is the “in fact” of it?

The definition of capitalism isn't being questioned or changed; what is being illustrated is how public corruption can indeed be a natural outgrowth of capitalism.

Private ownership of commercial and industrial interests results in a great deal of incentive to manipulate government due to the massive return on investment such manipulations can beget for those enterprises; if by paying a couple of million in campaign contributions and lobbying fees for example, you can achieve legislative and tax related changes that benefit those private interests to the tune of ten times that, there obviously exists a powerful incentive. Moreover, it provides the opportunity in terms of establishing the basis of prodigious wealth needed to engage in such manipulation of government.

That isn't to say corruption doesn't exist or never existed in command economies and the like, nor that human greed requires capitalism to exist or flourish. This is merely about recognizing that A: the structure of capitalism does in fact incentivize corruption in its own way, and B: how that corruption is incentivized through private ownership, such that political corruption is an organic, expected outgrowth of the system of capitalism.

I never questioned what Bernie said. Why do you feel the need to repeat what is not argued?

If he really believed wealthier people should pay higher taxes then he would pay it. He wouldn’t have to be forced to. He’s a hypocrite for not. Some people are Ok with that. I expect more than pandering.

Running for office demonstrates that? Cool story. That’s an absurdly low bar.

I repeat it because it apparently isn't clear to you, either per lack of comprehension or willful ignorance.

Bernie would indeed be a hypocrite for not donating additional funds to the federal government above his tax liabilities if he insisted the wealthy do this... except he never made such a ridiculous insistence. As stated previously, and repeatedly, he would be a hypocrite for not paying higher taxes after they're passed into law.

Further, spending pretty most of his waking moments in his final years (and many prior over the entirety of his career) advocating for tax reform directly or indirectly is indeed a substantial commitment that vastly exceeds any token gesture Trump has made concerning his salary.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

Obscurity said:
You're being willfully obtuse with this and you know it.

Sanders voted against a tax cut for himself.

Trump signed into law a tax cut for himself.

Night and day.

You do not understand the notion of what hypocrisy actually is.

And you're unwilling to learn. So go back to your echochamber, with the rest of the agitprop spewing demagogues.

Any person being a hypocrite has absolutely NOTHING to do with what any other person does or says.

Being a lying hypocrite is something that is intensely personal. Only Bernie can commit the series of lies and and actions that define him as a hypocrite. What Trump does or does not do cannot impact the hypocrisy of Bernie.

That is the exclusive and individual province of Bernie.

You really need to open a dictionary and read it.

Why are you even arguing this point? This word, like most words, has a particular meaning and an accepted definition. If you would prefer to use a different word, then use it.

Are you trying to create a personal language that only you understand? Kind of defeats the purpose of language.

Hypocrite | Definition of Hypocrite by Merriam-Webster
<snip>
hypocrite noun
hyp·o·crite | \ ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit \
Definition of hypocrite
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
<snip>

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
OK, you're still applying a principle of self sacrifice, foregoing government benefits, ONLY to liberals.

And if you can find Bernie saying, "the rich should pay more than the tax law requires - Charles Koch and Warren Buffett and others should voluntarily send in a few $million or a few $billion more than is required by law" or the equivalent, just do it.

I know you cannot, that's why the hypocrisy charge is such nonsense when you don't apply a similar standard to Republicans and others who want to cut spending, and yet rake in their own government benefits with both hands when given the opportunity. So for them, it's "spending cuts for thee but not for ME!" Republicans aren't required to lead by example like you're demanding of Bernie.

Yes, and you've not demonstrated "hypocrisy" except by inventing a standard, a principle, for Bernie and others and not applying it to anyone else. You certainly cannot take his actual words and demonstrate that he's a hypocrite.

Why does anyone think that being a hypocrite can or cannot be impacted by the words and/or actions of anyone else?

Being a hypocrite is something that is completely personal and can only be shown by the words and actions of a single individual saying one thing and doing something else.

This is what the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, has done.

What I do or do not do or what I say or do not say has no impact whatever on whether or not the lying hypocrite, Sanders, is a lying hypocrite.

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

CharisRose said:
Hmmmmm I find your response to my post "that shaming doesn't work on me" very interesting.

You have stated that you think... Shaming doesn't work on people who have no scruples and simply want revenge.

Do you also think... I'm the kind of person who has no scruples and simply wants revenge?

If, you actually think I'm that kind of person isn't this post to me a rather pointless attempt at shaming?

Perhaps, your shaming statement was not meant for me?

Perhaps, you are simply sending some obscure message for other posters to read with a hope they will see me as a person who has no scruples and simply wants revenge?

Perhaps, none of the above is true and you have posted this to me out of the kindness of your heart with the hope that shaming me will make me a better person?

A better person just like you who has scruples and never simply wants revenge?

Perhaps, you attempted to shame me because you have no scruples and simply want revenge?

Congratulations, You have lived up to the name you have chosen to represent yourself here...

"Obscurity"-the quality of being difficult to understand. Bye*Bye Mr. Scruples? :happy::2razz:

Roseann

I didn't vote for trump, so I didn't vote for revenge politics. If you voted for trump, then you have voted for revenge and thus have no scruples.

I don't care if you're ashamed for wanting revenge. I simply want to point out the truth about folks like you, and could not care less about how you feel about it.

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
Any person being a hypocrite has absolutely NOTHING to do with what any other person does or says.

Being a lying hypocrite is something that is intensely personal. Only Bernie can commit the series of lies and and actions that define him as a hypocrite. What Trump does or does not do cannot impact the hypocrisy of Bernie.

That is the exclusive and individual province of Bernie.

You really need to open a dictionary and read it.

Why are you even arguing this point? This word, like most words, has a particular meaning and an accepted definition. If you would prefer to use a different word, then use it.

Are you trying to create a personal language that only you understand? Kind of defeats the purpose of language.

Hypocrite | Definition of Hypocrite by Merriam-Webster
<snip>
hypocrite noun
hyp·o·crite | \ ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit \
Definition of hypocrite
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
<snip>

If sanders were a hypocrite he would have voted for the bill and said he was against it.

Thank you for proving my point.

His ACT, voting against the bill, displays his earnest belief in taxing the rich higher.

I know thinking is hard when you're bombarded by Ingraham-Hannity-Limbaugh-Carlson agitprop, but this is unbecoming of you.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
Learn simple math!

Revenues minus spending = surplus (deficit).

That's a simple equation and so both revenues and spending impact the deficit. If you don't believe me, explain.

It's always convenient for right wingers to focus ALL their attention on spending. It's because the GOP exists to cut taxes and if we all acknowledged that cuts in revenues have contributed $trillions and $trillions to the national debt, maybe it would be harder to cut taxes. Instead, the GOP cuts taxes, lies about the impact (reduces revenue! EVERY TIME!), then wants us all to pretend that the problem is entirely spending, and that tax cuts played no significant role in the deficits and debt.

Math tells me that spending is only a problem because we're not willing to raise taxes sufficiently to cover the spending.

"Arthur" was a pretty funny movie in its day starring Dudley Moore and Lisa Minnelli. Dudley Moore played the title role of an irresponsible, rich alcoholic who spent most of his time trying to avoid sobriety.

In this, he was a success.

He met Liz Minelli's father during the course of the story and her father informed Arthur that he did not drink.

Arthur mused upon hearing this news that he must never run out of ice. The father never "spent" the ice so he would never run out. Even this alcoholic, brainless twit, Arthur, understood this immediately.

The excess or shortfall of revenue over expense of any budget is the result of outlays subtracted from income.

Are you seriously arguing that the lying thieves striving to steal from us should be given even more to steal?

Has the level of service(s) provided by the Feds seemed to have doubled since 2001? Certainly not to me. Everything looks pretty much identical to what it was then.

It just costs twice as much for us to buy it from the lying, brainless twits spending our tax revenues. They seem to feel that they will never run out of ice.

Out of curiosity, you seem to be arguing in favor of these brainless twits irresponsibly spending additional money for no apparent additional benefits delivered to the people.

Why do you want to pay more to get less? Is there anything I might sell to you?

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
I'm impressed with your ability to read minds. So when Bernie votes against tax cuts, he really wants tax cuts but votes against them because politics.

And I understand politicians usually vote in a way that maximizes their chances at reelection. That does NOT mean that they have no beliefs and every vote is a cynical exercise in political expediency. You have legitimate opinions on issues, and it's unfair to assume politicians cannot legitimately believe in stances they take.

Or, maybe, he opposed tax cuts. :shrug:

I'm sure that he did oppose the tax cuts. At least, that is what he SAID.

However, when afforded the chance to demonstrate his opposition that he talked about, he chose to take his money and run. He said one thing and did something else.

That is what any other lying hypocrite would have done and what this particular lying hypocrite actually did.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

Obscurity said:
If sanders were a hypocrite he would have voted for the bill and said he was against it.

Thank you for proving my point.

His ACT, voting against the bill, displays his earnest belief in taxing the rich higher.

I know thinking is hard when you're bombarded by Ingraham-Hannity-Limbaugh-Carlson agitprop, but this is unbecoming of you.

You deny reality and the English language to support your delusion.

The lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, will still be a lying hypocrite whether you understand English or not.

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
You deny reality and the English language to support your delusion.

The lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, will still be a lying hypocrite whether you understand English or not.

You proved me right. Bernie's stance is consistent; he votes against cuts that would benefit him and wants to install tax policy that would tax people like him higher.

Unlike your bloated overlord, who lies, sleazes, and connives his way into benefiting from his office, and folks like you defend him.

The only reality here is that to you, what Bernie says overrides what he does, and with Trump, what he says is irrelevant, and what he does matters.

Definition of hypocrisy, sir, is pointed DIRECTLY at you.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

Obscurity said:
You proved me right. Bernie's stance is consistent; he votes against cuts that would benefit him and wants to install tax policy that would tax people like him higher.

Unlike your bloated overlord, who lies, sleazes, and connives his way into benefiting from his office, and folks like you defend him.

The only reality here is that to you, what Bernie says overrides what he does, and with Trump, what he says is irrelevant, and what he does matters.

Definition of hypocrisy, sir, is pointed DIRECTLY at you.

You need to examine the meaning of "hypocrite".

You will discover that Trump's words or actions have no impact on the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, being a lying hypocrite.

The only thing that makes the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, into a lying hypocrite is the variance between his own words and his own actions.

NOBODY else can have any impact on this lying hypocrite's status as a lying hypocrite.

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
You need to examine the meaning of "hypocrite".

You will discover that Trump's words or actions have no impact on the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, being a lying hypocrite.

The only thing that makes the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, into a lying hypocrite is the variance between his own words and his own actions.

NOBODY else can have any impact on this lying hypocrite's status as a lying hypocrite.

Look at the spin you're putting on this.

Bernie's words are consistent with his beliefs and policy stance. You can keep bleating endlessly like a sheep, it doesn't matter. The only lying hypocrite here is the one misrepresenting views and applying two different standards based on political bias.

You are weak.

JasperL · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
Why does anyone think that being a hypocrite can or cannot be impacted by the words and/or actions of anyone else?

Being a hypocrite is something that is completely personal and can only be shown by the words and actions of a single individual saying one thing and doing something else.

This is what the lying hypocrite, Bernie Sanders, has done.

What I do or do not do or what I say or do not say has no impact whatever on whether or not the lying hypocrite, Sanders, is a lying hypocrite.

"And if you can find Bernie saying, "the rich should pay more than the tax law requires - Charles Koch and Warren Buffett and others should voluntarily send in a few $million or a few $billion more than is required by law" or the equivalent, just do it.

I know you cannot,

JasperL · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
"Arthur" was a pretty funny movie in its day starring Dudley Moore and Lisa Minnelli. Dudley Moore played the title role of an irresponsible, rich alcoholic who spent most of his time trying to avoid sobriety.

In this, he was a success.

He met Liz Minelli's father during the course of the story and her father informed Arthur that he did not drink.

Arthur mused upon hearing this news that he must never run out of ice. The father never "spent" the ice so he would never run out. Even this alcoholic, brainless twit, Arthur, understood this immediately.

The excess or shortfall of revenue over expense of any budget is the result of outlays subtracted from income.

Are you seriously arguing that the lying thieves striving to steal from us should be given even more to steal?

Has the level of service(s) provided by the Feds seemed to have doubled since 2001? Certainly not to me. Everything looks pretty much identical to what it was then.

It just costs twice as much for us to buy it from the lying, brainless twits spending our tax revenues. They seem to feel that they will never run out of ice.

Out of curiosity, you seem to be arguing in favor of these brainless twits irresponsibly spending additional money for no apparent additional benefits delivered to the people.

Why do you want to pay more to get less? Is there anything I might sell to you?

If we didn't cut taxes while we increased spending, which is what the GOP does every f'ing time, and instead raised taxes to cover spending, maybe the public would care more about spending levels.......:doh

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

Obscurity said:
Look at the spin you're putting on this.

Bernie's words are consistent with his beliefs and policy stance. You can keep bleating endlessly like a sheep, it doesn't matter. The only lying hypocrite here is the one misrepresenting views and applying two different standards based on political bias.

You are weak.

His words are directly contradicted by his actions which makes him the dictionary defined example of being a lying hypocrite.

He says one thing and does the exact opposite.

He is a lying hypocrite.

This does not make him unique. In truth, this makes him very common. Especially in Washington DC.

You point out that he lied about the problem, the prescription and the cure. You then seem to think that since he lies continuously and that the lies are consistent, this proves he is not a hypocrite.

ALL of the lies, which are pretty consistently in agreement, are contradicted by all of his actions, which are also pretty consistently in agreement, but just opposite of what he promises. This is what makes him a hypocrite.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. He always lies that people should pursue the course he determined to be correct and then always excuses himself from pursuing the correct course that he defined.

He says one thing and does something else.

He's a lying hypocrite. By definition.

One thing that's good about him though: He is absolutely consistent. He is ALWAYS a lying hypocrite. With Sanders, we all know exactly what to expect. He always delivers.

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
His words are directly contradicted by his actions which makes him the dictionary defined example of being a lying hypocrite.

He says one thing and does the exact opposite.

He is a lying hypocrite.

This does not make him unique. In truth, this makes him very common. Especially in Washington DC.

You point out that he lied about the problem, the prescription and the cure. You then seem to think that since he lies continuously that the lies have no weight.

ALL of the lies, which are pretty consistently in agreement, are contradicted by his actions, which are also pretty consistently in agreement, but just opposite of what he promises. Thisis what makes him a hypocrite.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. He always lies that people should pursue the course he determined to be correct and then always excuses himself from pursuing the corect course.

He says one thing and does something else.

He's a lying hypocrite.

One thing that's good about him though: He is absolutely consistent. He is ALWAYS a lying hypocrite. With Sanders, we all know exactly what to expect. He always delivers.

lol. You're truly despicably desperate.

His voting record and policy proposals completely dismiss your misrepresentative smears.

You ignore facts and reality.

You are a fool who supports a hypocrite and willingly pushes hypocritical standards based on your partisan slant.

You're not smart enough to know what hypocrisy is.

I will no longer grace you with the value of my conversation. You bore me.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
"And if you can find Bernie saying, "the rich should pay more than the tax law requires - Charles Koch and Warren Buffett and others should voluntarily send in a few $million or a few $billion more than is required by law" or the equivalent, just do it.

I know you cannot,

Wow! That was HARD! Took about three keystrokes.

Bernie Sanders on Twitter: "We have a rigged tax code that has essentially legalized tax-dodging for large corporations and the world's wealthiest individuals. It is time to end these egregious loopholes and make the wealthy pay their fair share.… https://t.co/zHsSWmP5PL"

<snip>

[FONT=&quot]

Bernie Sanders‏Verified account @SenSandersFollowFollow

@SenSanders

More

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We have a rigged tax code that has essentially legalized tax-dodging for large corporations and the world's wealthiest individuals. It is time to end these egregious loopholes and make the wealthy pay their fair share.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][COLOR=rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.85)][FONT=&quot]

1:39

236K views

[/FONT]

[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=&quot]12:18 PM - 29 Jan 2019

<snip>
[/FONT]

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
If we didn't cut taxes while we increased spending, which is what the GOP does every f'ing time, and instead raised taxes to cover spending, maybe the public would care more about spending levels.......:doh

After the tax cut was implemented, Federal Tax Revenue increased year over year.

Deficit increased despite increased revenue. This might make thinking individuals assume that spending has little or no connection to collected revenue.

However, when the detested Sequester was restraining the spending of the Feds, the deficit actually decreased in 2014 and again in 2015.

These deficit reductions occurred during years of pretty conservative revenue increases.

Spending is the problem. Try this in your own home: Spend less and keep your income stable and see what happens to your checking balance.

Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary | Tax Policy Center

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

JasperL said:
If we didn't cut taxes while we increased spending, which is what the GOP does every f'ing time, and instead raised taxes to cover spending, maybe the public would care more about spending levels.......:doh

The guy you reply to doesn't even understand how hypocritical he is while leveraging that charge at sanders. He has exposed himself for a rabid ideologue and ignorant of facts.

Don't waste your breath.

code1211 · Apr 23, 2019

Obscurity said:
lol. You're truly despicably desperate.

His voting record and policy proposals completely dismiss your misrepresentative smears.

You ignore facts and reality.

You are a fool who supports a hypocrite and willingly pushes hypocritical standards based on your partisan slant.

You're not smart enough to know what hypocrisy is.

I will no longer grace you with the value of my conversation. You bore me.

If you take the time to look up the definition of hypocrite, while you're there, you may want to check the definition of "value".

Obscurity · Apr 23, 2019

code1211 said:
If you take the time to look up the definition of hypocrite, while you're there, you may want to check the definition of "value".

Your replies are completely worthless. What's your point in spewing diversionary BS?