Sen. Bernie Sanders - The War Against Working Families

Page 1 of 10 [ 147 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10 Next

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

04 Dec 2010, 8:47 pm

It's nice to finally hear some truth in Washington. This is one of the best speeches I've heard in a long time. I just hope others will listen.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq1zpHF0J04[/youtube]

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

04 Dec 2010, 8:59 pm

Isn't he a self-avowed socialist?

Also isn't the top 1% paying the majority of taxes. Additionally there aren't as many rich people as there used to be.

I like what he did on some of the transparency stuff, but he's way off his rocker on this. This is blatent class warfare.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2010, 9:06 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Isn't he a self-avowed socialist?

Yes, although his notion of "socialism" is influenced by the skewed use of the term in American political discourse. He does not fit the historical definition of socialism.

Quote:

Also isn't the top 1% paying the majority of taxes.

The top 1% pays a large portion of taxes, but that is obviously because they control a large portion of the wealth. They actually pay considerably less than their fair share if you compare their share of the total national wealth to their share of the tax burden.

Quote:

Additionally there aren't as many rich people as there used to be.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The gap between rich and poor in America has grown dramatically in recent decades.

Quote:

I like what he did on some of the transparency stuff, but he's way off his rocker on this. This is blatent class warfare.

Is it not class warfare to systematically shift the tax burden from the rich to the middle class? Is it not class warfare to balance the budget off the backs of the poorest Americans while giving yet more tax breaks to the ultra-rich?

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

04 Dec 2010, 9:36 pm

Don't small business owners make over $250k a year gross? The problem with "taxing the rich" mentality is that the people we want to make jobs are the people we're hiking taxes on.

They can't hire anyone if they don't have the money to employ them.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2010, 9:48 pm

Learn how tax law works before you start complaining about it. The top marginal rate doesn't apply simply if a business has gross receipts over $250,000, or even if it nets $250,000. That tax rate is for personal income.

And right now, the rich pay a lower overall tax rate than the middle class. There is no amount of partisan rhetoric that can make a defense for that, so the right wing simply pretends that's not true.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Zara
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,877
Location: Deep Dungeon, VA

04 Dec 2010, 9:59 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

They've been using their extra money for personal investment and hiring cheap labor in China and abroad. Because that is the profitable thing to do.

That's what the Bush Tax Cuts have provided thus far.

If they want stimulate job creation here, they need a better plan than just giving them extra money they use to just enrich themselves even more.

Remember, the rich are not hurting in these times. They are still quite well off despite the economic downturn.

And I guarantee you they don't spend their money at Walmart or any other place you and me shop at so they aren't benefiting those workers through spending either.

We need a better plan than just tax cuts for the wealthy.

_________________
Current obsessions: Miatas, Investing
Currently playing: Amnesia: The Dark Descent
Currently watching: SRW OG2: The Inspectors

Come check out my photography!
http://dmausf.deviantart.com/

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

04 Dec 2010, 10:09 pm

@ Zara

That's large corporations not small businesses.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

04 Dec 2010, 10:13 pm

Orwell wrote:

so the right wing simply pretends that's not true.

What they do is talk in raw numbers and try to scare people who'll never see that much money into thinking it's a significant sum. "oh wow, $1million in taxes!" without realizing that the person has another 8 million after that or realizing that pretty much anyone can live a very, very comfortable life taking in $100,000/yr.

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2010, 10:27 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Orwell wrote:

so the right wing simply pretends that's not true.

Or that the marginal utility of additional personal income beyond about $60k/year is approximately 0 anyways, so the most rational tax policy (in terms of utility maximization) would be to have a 0% tax rate on income below $60,000, and fully fund the government by taxing people above that level at a steep rate.

(Not saying I'm in favor of such a radical and outrageous policy, but it is telling that I can make a much sounder economic argument for it than any right-winger could for their proposed policies)

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

04 Dec 2010, 10:47 pm

Orwell wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

Orwell wrote:

so the right wing simply pretends that's not true.

Is it 60k? I know it's not that high compared to the gluttonous incomes that some people make. I put it at $100k just because that seemed to be able to include a good bit of luxury, too.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2010, 11:03 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Is it 60k? I know it's not that high compared to the gluttonous incomes that some people make. I put it at $100k just because that seemed to be able to include a good bit of luxury, too.

Above a threshold of about 50-60k (the point at which you can live a comfortable middle-class lifestyle) there is no correlation between material wealth and self-reported life satisfaction. It's just as your grandmother always told you: money can't buy happiness.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

04 Dec 2010, 11:12 pm

There's a war against working families, all right, but the people waging it are the ones who want to tax the families that work to support families on welfare that don't work.

psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

04 Dec 2010, 11:22 pm

Orwell wrote:

Actually, most small businesses are incorporated under Subchapter S, so that tax rate is on both personal and corporate income for them. $250k a year is not that high for the top two employees of a business that employs, say, a couple of dozen employees.

Also, two doctors married to each other likely earn over $250k a year. It's just not that high an amount for a working family.

Quote:

And right now, the rich pay a lower overall tax rate than the middle class.

The billionaires that pay a lower rate than the middle class pay capital gains rather than income taxes, so they aren't affected by the top income tax rate.

Orwell wrote:

Above a threshold of about 50-60k (the point at which you can live a comfortable middle-class lifestyle) there is no correlation between material wealth and self-reported life satisfaction.

And for a family of 2 with 3 kids, $60k a year comes out to $300k a year family income. So what was your point again?

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Dec 2010, 11:30 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Isn't he a self-avowed socialist?

so am i. so what of it? you use that term as an epithet, a curse. better that than a randy randian.

Inuyasha wrote:

Also isn't the top 1% paying the majority of taxes. Additionally there aren't as many rich people as there used to be.

i doubt your first point. seriously. fox new propaganda notwithstanding. and you glossed-over the senator's point that there aren't as many rich people as there used to be precisely because those above merely rich have gotten enormously richer at the expense of everybody below them.

Inuyasha wrote:

This is blatant class warfare.

why is it that conservatives cry "CLASS WARFARE!" every time the lower classes pick themselves up off the ground after getting bashed by the rich rightist bullies, and defend themselves and their interests? when you pee on my leg then tell me it's raining, and then cry class warfare when i get angry at you, you are showing the same sort of chutzpah as a person who murders their parents and then cries "ORPHAN!" why do you hate your own class? do you seriously believe that you are going to be mr. moneybags one day yourself?

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2010, 11:30 pm

psychohist wrote:

But that doesn't come out of the business's revenue. It comes out of the top earners' take-home pay, assuming they are taking home in excess of $250,000.

Quote:

Also, two doctors married to each other likely earn over $250k a year.

Yeah. So? Physicians are wealthy. They should be paying a commensurate tax rate.

Quote:

It's just not that high an amount for a working family.

You're kidding? "Working families" do not earn $250k. And yes, it is a very high amount.

Quote:

The billionaires that pay a lower rate than the middle class pay capital gains rather than income taxes, so they aren't affected by the top income tax rate.

Which is why we need more fundamental reform in our tax policy.

Quote:

And for a family of 2 with 3 kids, $60k a year comes out to $300k a year family income. So what was your point again?

What the hell are you talking about? That's 50-60k household income, not per individual, and certainly not per child.

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

04 Dec 2010, 11:41 pm

Orwell wrote:

What the hell are you talking about? That's 50-60k household income, not per individual, and certainly not per child.

Waitwaitwait! So you're saying that 10 people sharing a 2 bedroom apartment each living on $6k a month will be just as happy as one person living on $60k in his own 2 bedroom apartment?

Clearly the welfare system should be revised to require recipients to live 10 people to a room! They'll all be so much happier!

Page 1 of 10 [ 147 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10 Next

Jump to:

Sen. Bernie Sanders - The War Against Working Families Post Reply New Topic

Sen. Bernie Sanders - The War Against Working Families