New Hampshire Primary today

[QUOTE=NumberSix]Lefty morons seem to really hate the idea of people having a lot of extra money in the bank. What these lefty morons don't seem to understand is, that's where investment comes from. If nobody has enough extra money that they can afford to risk investing, then where the hell are investment going to come from? Who the hell is going to put up the money to start new businesses, expand businesses or invest in new developments?

Have you never noticed that nothing is invented in these dumbass socialist countries? The only people who can succeed are giant multinational corporations who are already swimming in money.[/QUOTE]

The issue is though, that expansion is at the detriment of everyone not rich (aka 90% of the country). Since the 80s, most of the wealth has gone to the very top. That was massive wealth redistribution there that ALREADY took place! In that same time, there was also the massive Reagan tax cuts. Essentially a double whammy but it didn't strike in the 90s. Not until a major crisis with war in Iraq/Afghanistan, Bush raising tax cuts even further. It all went nuclear when the stock market went pop.

We cannot sustain those tax cuts to the very rich. There were still plenty of investments in 80s. America was at the top of its game back then. Government has gotten significantly larger since I admit. Time to reel that in slowly as well. I am hoping Bernie recognizes that you don't want a government too large to handle. Bernie is not a dummy.

So Bernie wants to take the money away from the rich and shift it towards the middle and lower class...what's not to like? :confusedshrug:

It's mind boggling that more than 80% of Americans have less than $1,000 in their bank account :eek:

That puts me in the top twenty percentile (incredibly) but that's because I sacrifice, I don't spend money on anything, I send it all to my wife. I drive around in a used car to get to work, I don't go out, I don't buy fast food nor buy new clothes, much less spend cash on the latest gadgets and only that way have I been able to save up money.

Fact of the matter is, the economy has been running on a rightwing, corporation friendly, laissez faire neoliberal economic policy (the ones you conservatives push) since Reagan and all that it has left America with is the largest economic disparity between the top and the rest of us since the founding of the republic, and each year it's getting worse. It's time the rich pay their fair share for the good of all of us, not just the rich.

Let's be honest, corporations are greedy, even if they wouldn't pay no taxes (which many of them hardly do), they would still pay low wages instead of raising wages for Americans because they give zero fvcks about their fellow Americans. They want to make as much money as they can, they couldn't care less if their workers need to get welfare to make ends meet (see Walmart). They have zero sense of patriotism towards their fellow Americans...they don't care about us, why should we feel anything about them finally paying their fair share of taxes?

The fact that you conservative dummies defend the rich at your own financial expense gives me cancer :facepalm

Feel the Bern :rockon:

Why should rich people be punished for being successful and smart with their money? They already pay more tax than the poor and middle class combined.

[QUOTE=bladefd]The issue is though, that expansion is at the detriment of everyone not rich (aka 90% of the country). Since the 80s, most of the wealth has gone to the very top. That was massive wealth redistribution there that ALREADY took place! In that same time, there was also the massive Reagan tax cuts. Essentially a double whammy but it didn't strike in the 90s. Not until a major crisis with war in Iraq/Afghanistan, Bush raising tax cuts even further. It all went nuclear when the stock market went pop.

We cannot sustain those tax cuts to the very rich. There were still plenty of investments in 80s. America was at the top of its game back then. Government has gotten significantly larger since I admit. Time to reel that in slowly as well. I am hoping Bernie recognizes that you don't want a government too large to handle. Bernie is not a dummy.[/QUOTE]
A tax cut isn't "redistribution" it's letting people keep their own money.

[QUOTE=TheMan]So Bernie wants to take the money away from the rich and shift it towards the middle and lower class...what's not to like? :confusedshrug:
[/QUOTE]
Why would you want to take anybody's money away?

[QUOTE=NumberSix]A tax cut isn't "redistribution" it's letting people keep their own money.[/QUOTE]

You misunderstood. The tax cuts were after most of the wealth redistribution was already done.

Tax cuts under Reagan were going to the rich after the rich wall Street firms were booming at historical levels throughout the 70s and even the 80s. I am guessing the belief was top-down economics with Reagan cabinet and they wanted even bigger economic booms in 80s (their donors were the rich so they probably called for it).

Reagan's 2nd round of the massive tax cuts were completely unnecessary in his 2nd term. In the 2000s, Bush further lowered the taxes. Obama continued those massive tax cuts on the very wealthy. I believe we need to return to what taxes were after Reagan's 1st round of tax cuts in his first term.

Haha, imagine Sanders vs Trump

Democratic socialist vs Democratic fascist

[QUOTE=bladefd]You misunderstood. The tax cuts were after most of the [B]wealth redistribution was already done.[/B]

Tax cuts under Reagan were going to the rich after the rich wall Street firms were booming at historical levels throughout the 70s and even the 80s. I am guessing the belief was top-down economics with Reagan cabinet and they wanted even bigger economic booms in 80s (their donors were the rich so they probably called for it).

Reagan's 2nd round of the massive tax cuts were completely unnecessary in his 2nd term. In the 2000s, Bush further lowered the taxes. Obama continued those massive tax cuts on the very wealthy. I believe we need to return to what taxes were after Reagan's 1st round of tax cuts in his first term.[/QUOTE]
Where exactly is the redistribution?

[QUOTE=BlakFrankWhite]Haha, imagine Sanders vs Trump

Democratic socialist vs [B]Nationalist[/B] fascist[/QUOTE]

Would be an epic match-up. Give the people what they want!

[QUOTE=ThePhantomCreep]There are two types of Republicans--millionaires and suckers. The rise of "Trump the Rebel" proves it.

Trump's anti-establishment cred = a projected $10 trillion in debt + a massive tax cut for the wealthy.

Same old GOP shit.[/QUOTE]



Trump to make America great again :applause:

[QUOTE=poido123]Trump to make America great again :applause:[/QUOTE]

No one ever accused Trumpettes of being big readers.

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Yup, Trump's plan is just trickle down economics/Dubya Bush's economic plan on steroids. [B]Nothing good would ever come from it[/B] (Unless you count the Donald and his buddies getting massive tax cuts as good). All the analysis of his proposals lead to the same outcome- another Great Depression.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]If you are single and earn less than $25,000, or married and jointly earn less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax. That removes nearly 75 million households

[QUOTE=UK2K]Tell that to 75 million households.[/QUOTE]

You realize what your quote is saying that Americans earning below those levels won't pay [I]additional[/I] income tax during their tax returns. Meaning during the year they have taxes deducted out of their weekly paycheck and they won't have to pay additional income taxes during their tax return. I'm not sure if you actually think people earning below that level pay zero taxes at all..


I don't care so much about taxing rich individuals. I get it, you earned it and you shouldn't be taxed heavily. What there needs to be major reform is in corporate tax. It's disgusting how some of the biggest corporations like Apple, Microsoft, GE, etc, are paying no taxes. It's reported that Apple actually pays 3% corporate tax, General Electric actually received multi million dollar refund from the government despite being a mega conglomerate. It's BS and it's because they abuse the loopholes in the law.

Then people will argue that it helps them remain competitive and without this they'd be force to cut jobs! Newsflash, many of these corporations are receiving record profits and most of them are outsourcing jobs to India and China to further drive up profits. It's ridiculous.

[QUOTE=UK2K]Tell that to 75 million households.[/QUOTE]
So people who make too little income to pay taxes are "winners" now? :oldlol:

You know what, I'd rather lose and pay tens of thousands of dollars in income tax because I'd be squaring away millions being in that Big Loser Club known as the top 1%.

I'd call it winning by subtraction.

These conservatives, only in their book does a wage earner making 30,000 a year is "winning" :yaohappy:

[QUOTE=UK2K]Tell that to 75 million households.[/QUOTE]


what's better, saving 1,000 a year in income taxes or saving 10,000 a year on health insurance costs?

Not realistic either proposal gets through.



Trickle down economics has been unequivocally shown not to work. The idea of voting for a direct benefit for a super small percentage of americans under the hope that they, with zero obligation to do so, use the savings they get to do something that benefits more of the general populace is the biggest farce in all of american society.