"Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

[cpwill]

Re: Billinaires shouldn't exist.

Things you've gotten wrong:

- 500 million is an imaginary number.
- 1 billion is an imaginary number

:shrug: replace with arbitrary if you like - the point remains the same

- being taxed millions is consensual, like sex

You aren't talking about taxing millions in income - you are taking billions. You are talking about the government seizing Amazon. You are talking about the government seizing Microsoft. You are talking about the government seizing Berkshire Hathaway. You are talking about the government seizing Facebook. That is what it means when you demand that the government seize all wealth over "X" Amount.

- not being able to accrue more than a billion dollars is like being raped

YOU stated that consensually giving something was like having it taken it from you against your consent. It's not my fault that's terrible logic that leads to conclusions you don't like.

I'm not crying about Zuckerberg or Buffet having less money.
You?

I could care less about Zuckerberg or Buffet's bottom line individually. Buffet seems like a great guy, Zuckerberg seems like a self-absorbed jerk, and both of them will be fine, whatever happens to their companies.

What I care about - very deeply - are our individual liberties, protecting those from the government, and - to only a slightly lesser extent - not having insanely idiotic rules that massively expand the power and scope of government and choke off economic freedom and growth. You are talking about leveraging majoritarian authoritarianism to effect the greatest theft of property in history, and with it will go some of our human freedoms.

I've seen civil war. I've seen the heads on gates, picked up pieces of human being, seen the refugees. So when I say that what you are talking about there is the kind of thing that is worth shooting down other Americans in the streets to prevent, understand that I mean that in a very, very direct and informed way. You are playing with fire in a room full of explosives over aesthetics.

 

[Surrealistik]

Re: "Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

I think what you mean is "I am not aware of it working that way in other countries". That is certainly how it worked here, which is why Hillary was able to sue Citizens United for their movie.

That's not how it works in those countries, and that's not how it should work here.

That is precisely what it is. Limiting one's ability to speak is limiting one's ability to speak.

Quite to the contrary - freedom of speech is critical to the American experiment. Greater Government control over what we are allowed to see and hear is not.

Even if we were to accept it is speech, even speech is limited in certain capacities; core and formative to the American experiment above all is representation, and when unfettered speech, if we are to assume political spending is as such, undermines representation as it clearly and demonstrably does, there should indeed be remedial limits such that the preservation of representative government is best served. Speech without representation and where all speech save that of a ruling elite are drowned out is infinitely less preferable than a representative government with broad freedom of speech that abides by reasonable limitations.

They are all equivalent - an Amendment is going to be required to take away the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, be it speech, religion, or defense.

Ridiculous, and a naked attempt to rob the argument of legitimacy by throwing out inapplicable, vilifying false parallels.

I see no evidence of such - instead it seems to be something proponents of limiting speech seem to express as a kind of just-so-argument.

You were given a link to the Gilens and Page study.

That is, fortunately, not the case. Open Secrets' Top Organizational Donors across all cycles lists several unions.

Laughable. Look up PAC and lobby funding/spending; even your own link doesn't really service your point particularly well.

Well, you tell me; who is best prepared to create a series of legally-lawful but dubious shell organizations to funnel large donations through into various "education" mechanisms: Bloomberg, or your local PTA membership?...

Can you point to any advanced, wealthy democracy where this has turned out to be a problem? Any supporting precedent where shadowy grey propaganda organizations have materially undermined representation?

Also your core thesis is fundamentally absurd given you can already pay for and promulgate said grey propaganda under the current system (and this is currently done per such things as the ever-ludicrous Prager U); the only difference is that you can spend unlimited amounts on lobbying and legal propaganda as is. Obviously that benefits those with the means to spend more a situation where only grey propaganda exists as an option outside of finite political spending.

Sure, - remember the old 527's and the "Soft Money" debate?

When you limit someone from directly making a profit by investing in government, but still leave it highly profitable to invest in government, that only means they will find ways to do so indirectly.

I'm not seeing a study here, comparative or otherwise.

Further, monied interests already employ indirect and subtle means in addition to overt and blatant ones; that may be forced to rely overwhelmingly on less effective and more subtle approaches doesn't mean such limits are in vain or are ineffective at helping substantively minimize the outsized influence; quite the contrary in fact.

Heartily agree on that latter - and, ironically, it feeds back into the same point I made to you earlier...

Well you may not agree with the former two, but they are likewise true.

And you seen to be confusing cause and effect; in many ways the US is less economically free due to monied interests having the outsized influence and power necessary to use government as a bludgeon against competitors.

No. Giving those already in power the ability to limit other's ability to break in by definition reduces the competition they face, and enhances the oligarchal nature of power in society...

Again, when you rob the oligarchs of their primary and most effective and direct tools to influence public opinion and politicos, their overall ability to influence said public and politicos must by definition decline.

What you say only holds true if you assume financing limits are both permitted to have and are ultimately fraught with partisan and surgical exceptions and targeting, which certainly would not and should not be allowed per any well constructed amendment. Are there any examples you can provide among other developed democracies where campaign finance law is weaponized in such a way?

 

[presluc]

Try doing a little reading and studying on the fabulously wealthy and what you will find is most of them busted their ass to earn that wealth. Just like you can...if it matters to you.

Yeah , yeah except the opportunities to get rich was a lot more plentiful when they were coming up, and many didn't do all that much, wait for Daddy to give them a million dollars to start a business or waited.

Not to mention the fact that no millionaire had to have a tax cut before Regen, why is that.
Not to mention there were no crying like a bitch to the government about bailouts cause you run into red ink before Regen
America wasn't trillions in debt until after 2000 when Bush started the trickle down theory again and Obama extended them or as the right wingers call tax cuts to help the rich keep what they earn and help America , yeah right into debt. The trickle down theory didn't work then it's not working now

Try doing a little research and studying on millionaires of the past .

What you will find these millionaires got no tax cuts paid their fair share of taxes , got no bailouts then it was sink or swim not this "too big to fail ****"
You know what they did made more money .
After the depression you know what they did started at the bottom and still made money.
This was without tax cuts , without bailouts, in many cases without subsidies or research grants.

So it seems like these fabulously wealthy of today are a bit on the week side of business?
I mean what did they do so strenuous that busted their ass?
Perhaps waited for the Will to be read or maybe all those signatures poor things.eace

 

[VanceMack]

Yeah , yeah except the opportunities to get rich was a lot more plentiful when they were coming up.

Not to mention the fact that no millionaire had to have a tax cut before Regen, why is that.
Not to mention there were no crying like a bitch to the government about bailouts cause you run into red ink before Regen
America wasn't trillions in debt until after 2000 when Bush started the trickle down theory again and Obama extended them or as the right wingers call tax cuts to help the rich keep what they earn and help America , yeah right into debt. The trickle down theory didn't work then it's not working now.eace

Who gives a ****. The conditions of today are TODAY. Bust your ass and succeed or find yet another excuse why others can where you cant.

 

[presluc]

Who gives a ****. The conditions of today are TODAY. Bust your ass and succeed or find yet another excuse why others can where you cant.

I say one thing if I lose on a business venture I won't go crying like a little bitch to the taxpayer to bail me out.

Bust your ass? ah! get a tax cut for paying taxes even though ya got millions of dollars . You get to use the cheapest labor in the world to sell your label. If you run into financial trouble why bother filing those chapter 7's or 11's when you can whine like a bitch and the good old taxpayers will fork over whatever ya need, after all what's n 740 million or so.
So we might have to cut welfare lazy people don't need that many food stamps anyway. after all some of these people are making as high as 600 a month
So we might have to cut teacher's salary don't need good teachers anymore anyway.
So we may have to cut education that's ok we don't have that many good teachers anymore anyway,
So the millionaires got the bailout money including a bonus for one CEO that drove the company to the verge of bankruptcy,
Well that's the important things got to keep the rich happy because..... Why the Hell do we have to keep the rich happy again??????eace

 

[VanceMack]

I say one thing if I lose on a business venture I won't go crying like a little bitch to the taxpayer to bail me out.

Bust your ass? ah! get a tax cut for paying taxes even though ya got millions of dollars . You get to use the cheapest labor in the world to sell your label. If you run into financial trouble why bother filing those chapter 7's or 11's when you can whine like a bitch and the good old taxpayers will fork over whatever ya need, after all what's n 740 million or so.
So we might have to cut welfare lazy people don't need that many food stamps anyway. after all some of these people are making as high as 600 a month
So we might have to cut teacher's salary don't need good teachers anymore anyway.
So we may have to cut education that's ok we don't have that many good teachers anymore anyway,
So the millionaires got the bailout money including a bonus for one CEO that drove the company to the verge of bankruptcy,
Well that's the important things got to keep the rich happy because..... Why the Hell do we have to keep the rich happy again??????eace

You say that...but you say that as someone that has precisely zero understanding of business and what it takes to build business that can not only provide wealth for you but also for others in the form of jobs. In short...you simply speak from ignorance.

And then you set out to truly reinforce my point.

None of this is about making the rich happy. It is about creating an environment where "the rich"...the people you despise so much...are creating businesses and private sector jobs to PAY for your ass through life. You should educate yourself on private sector jobs, who is creating them, and what kind of wealth they are generating NOT just for themselves but for others.

Or you know what? Dont. Just traipse your ass out there and start a business that employs 20,000 people with an average salary of over 100,000 and then show everyone how you did it will opening all your business decisions and the rewards of your hard work to all of your workers.

 

[jamesrage]

It's not "taking most of someone's money." You know how tax brackets work, right?

If the leech class IE socialist and communist ********ers in this country had it their way their then percentages would be way higher.

 

[Outlook]

I say "closer to the same wage" and you think that means "make the same"?

I sense a problem here... :lol:

Oh closer
CEO makes 5 million so closer would be $500,000, maybe that’s not close enough.

 

[Outlook]

Oh please lets not be stupid.

But if that CEO and the companies board knew anything they paid that CEO over.say 1 million dollars.a year would be taxed at a 70% rate they would reevaluate. Probably pay him in stock. Now that opens up a whole nother box of worms.

Carried interest, or carry, in finance, is a share of the profits of an investment paid to the investment manager in excess of the amount that the manager contributes to the partnership, specifically in alternative investments (private equity and hedge funds).

And our capital gains tax rates. Long term capital gains holding period should be changed from it's present 1 year to 5 years. Make real investors out of the gamblers on wall street.

Now is that a 70% tax on someone that lives in NYC, Boston or San Francisco or 70% tax on someone that lives in Montana or Wyoming.

 

[Bodi]

Oh closer
CEO makes 5 million so closer would be $500,000, maybe that’s not close enough.

Why can't a CEO who made 1 Billion at MacDonald's (for an example) and the janitor who made minimum wage instead be something like the CEO making $500,000 and all the janitors and burger flippers make an extra $20,000 a year?

 

[Gimmesometruth]

MacDonald's

uh...no.

 

[Bodi]

uh...no.

OK then... Burger King.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

OK then... Burger King.

woosh!

Maybe its from not being in the US for a long time. Did McDonald's change their name over there?

 

[Bodi]

woosh!

Maybe its from not being in the US for a long time. Did McDonald's change their name over there?

No. I never go there and I guess I just don't care enough about it to remember how to spell it.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

No. I never go there and I guess I just don't care enough about it to remember how to spell it.

LOL.....so how do you pronounce it.....you go around saying "mack donalds"? One wonders how you say "burger king".

 

[Bodi]

LOL.....so how do you pronounce it.....you go around saying "mack donalds"? One wonders how you say "burger king".

You say "mick donalds" You pronounce each syllable that distinctly?

I just run them together in a slurring slur like most people.

And I say "burjerkin" even though I spell it Burger King.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

You say "mick donalds" You pronounce each syllable that distinctly?

I sure as *&% do not say "mack donalds" like you do, apparently.

I just run them together in a slurring slur like most people.

And I say "burjerkin" even though I spell it Burger King.

Well, there you are.

 

[HIP56948]

Yes, here's a visual that can help you understand the scale of what a billion dollars actually is.

Visual Representation of a Million Vs a Billion Dollars w/ Rice

Good Post! I've always like this one also: One Million seconds is about 11 1/2 days...One Billion seconds is over 31 1/2 years.

 

[Bodi]

I sure as *&% do not say "mack donalds" like you do, apparently.

Well, there you are.

What does your pronunciation fetish have to do with Billionaires screwing over the working man?

 

[joko104]

Millionaire socialists like Sanders shouldn't exist because they are the ultimate lying hypocrite and con artist.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

What does your pronunciation fetish have to do with Billionaires screwing over the working man?

Can't spell McDonald's, expects to debate the massive rise in income inequality.

Good grief.

 

[Bodi]

Can't spell McDonald's, expects to debate the massive rise in income inequality.

Good grief.

I can spell McDonald's... I can also spell MacDonald's. You can not properly punctuate a sentence, yet here you sit lecturing me! :lol:

 

[narrowroad]

i think bernie is envious

 

[Outlook]

Why can't a CEO who made 1 Billion at MacDonald's (for an example) and the janitor who made minimum wage instead be something like the CEO making $500,000 and all the janitors and burger flippers make an extra $20,000 a year?

How about the janitor having high ambitions. I got tired of cleaning toilets and went to a trade school. No help from the government or my employer. I’m doing just fine thank you.
I work my 40 hours go home and relax unlike the suits that are working 70 hours and if you are the CEO of McDonalds (for example) have the headaches of running some 20k stores.

 

[Bodi]

How about the janitor having high ambitions. I got tired of cleaning toilets and went to a trade school. No help from the government or my employer. I’m doing just fine thank you.
I work my 40 hours go home and relax unlike the suits that are working 70 hours and if you are the CEO of McDonalds (for example) have the headaches of running some 20k stores.

All work that is supplied by all employees is necessary for the success of the company/job. Additionally, lots of people in low paying jobs are not as intelligent as those in higher paying jobs... but that does not make their contribution less important.