American Politics

[xi0]

He never said he would ONLY tax the wealthy, he said he would increase how much the wealthy pay in taxes. And any tax increase on the middle-class would be less than what the average person pays in tuition. His plan for M4A includes small premiums paid by employees and employers that are also less than what the average is now.

Now whether there's enough nuts and bolts there or if it's feasible to do might be another topic. But we do know the distribution of wealth in this country keeps the poor poorer and not much else. Couple that with the rise of automation only leading to less jobs for those without a college education, this sort of status quo cannot be maintained much longer if you want to keep the majority of the citizens above the poverty line. Then the government ends up giving them money anyways through welfare programs. The idea is to bolster the middle class in such a way that they earn better wages and aren't driven bankrupt by college tuition and medical costs. Conservatives really don't understand that taxpayers end up footing the bill eventually anyways.

 

[hokageji]

He'll... tax speculation? I don't think that's conceptually possible.

That's what he says, and been saying since 2015..
2 trillion dollars or something of student debt fully paid for by putting a tax on wall street speculation for 10 years... that's been his main statement that's got all the young supporting him, but as far as i recall, no mention on how he'd do that or what the rate will be.
I have limited understanding on this so i cannot comment if speculation tax can pay, or that even if its doable, but a number would've been better.

would maintain that for bernie's policy proposals he doesn't need just taxes for the wealthy, rather he needs to tax people across the board (with higher income people simply being in a higher tax bracket). Honestly, bernie saying otherwise is pretty brazen lie...

He does break it a little more than just the wealthy... 250000$ or more pay more social security.... but something he calls extremely wealthy which is defined if your net worth is something like 30million or so, which will pay for housing, medicare, child care etc..... but no more details like tax rates, etc..

True. I think it should be either a fixed tax rate or some model depending on the income.

Taxing on income hasn't worked in this country.... a reason why Bezos and others get away without paying taxes is because they can show their incomes to be differed, but he's proposing estate taxation which may work to an extent.

I think you need a linear progression on tax, instead of a flat upper limit. That is something he'll bring that'll help...

--- Double Post Merged, Apr 7, 2020, Original Post Date: Apr 7, 2020 ---

but no more details like tax rates, etc..

alright, take it back... his website has penned more details:

Bernie Sanders Official Website

Change will never come without political participation. Join the political revolution today.

berniesanders.com

So i take back some things i said about him. I still think there's not enough info but i guess thats a part of politics to stay afloat and compete.

--- Double Post Merged, Apr 8, 2020 ---

He never said he would ONLY tax the wealthy, he said he would increase how much the wealthy pay in taxes. And any tax increase on the middle-class would be less than what the average person pays in tuition. His plan for M4A includes small premiums paid by employees and employers that are also less than what the average is now.

Now whether there's enough nuts and bolts there or if it's feasible to do might be another topic. But we do know the distribution of wealth in this country keeps the poor poorer and not much else. Couple that with the rise of automation only leading to less jobs for those without a college education, this sort of status quo cannot be maintained much longer if you want to keep the majority of the citizens above the poverty line. Then the government ends up giving them money anyways through welfare programs. The idea is to bolster the middle class in such a way that they earn better wages and aren't driven bankrupt by college tuition and medical costs. Conservatives really don't understand that taxpayers end up footing the bill eventually anyways.

I think more than feasibility, it all comes down to being able to get it passed.... There aren't enough progressives in the house or senate to assist with those, although the number keeps growing. For that reason alone, Biden is a better candidate...

Also, taxation doesn't always work. One thing Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown did in the california is through road tax(or seomthing else its callled) and increasing the toll you pay. Take San Francisco for example... One portion of the intended collection came from toll on goldengate, baybridge etc. The wealthy clearly stay in the city or close enough, so they barely saw the effect. However, it is the middle class who have to commute into the city, saw their expenses go up signficantly... It did help in the collection and the democrats claimed it as a success, but the effect was on the middle class...

I think estate tax and wealth tax is a better way to collect them, cos just basing it on income also allows ways to circumvent the issue.

 

[Aurelius]

Well, Bernie dropped out. Respect to the old man on his efforts.

 

[kkck]

Yay, now we get to see biden's senility get in the way of him noticing how trump humiliates him as much as he did hillary. Biden's VP pick better be amazing. I still think he will go for warren tbh. I honestly don't think he has a chance if he doesn't. I really hope it doesn't turn out he picks hillary as his running mate.

 

[Aurelius]

Biden's VP pick better be amazing. I still think he will go for warren tbh.

He already declared he would pick a minority female candidate. Kamala Harris maybe? Though wouldn't shock me if he just "forgets" and goes with someone else

 

[kkck]

He already declared he would pick a minority female candidate. Kamala Harris maybe? Though wouldn't shock me if he just "forgets" and goes with someone else

Ah, I didn't remember the minority part. That would rule out warren (heh). I'd think that warren is a superior pick to kamala harris though. She outperformed harris during the primaries (which is not much a feat in itself considering that harris was humiliated and got virtually no support) and is largely seen as part of the establishement. Warren messed up royally during the primaries but her progressive credentials should still be better than harris' at least.

 

[Aurelius]

Ah, I didn't remember the minority part. That would rule out warren (heh). I'd think that warren is a superior pick to kamala harris though. She outperformed harris during the primaries (which is not much a feat in itself considering that harris was humiliated and got virtually no support) and is largely seen as part of the establishement. Warren messed up royally during the primaries but her progressive credentials should still be better than harris' at least.

I started following this stuff later then most, so what I really saw from Warren was her hellbent on eliminating people like Bloomberg. Agree on the progressive credentials part and from what I've seen from Harris isn't impressive. But then who else is out there? He could renege, wouldn't be the first person or first time he did something like that

 

[Ramen]

I started following this stuff later then most, so what I really saw from Warren was her hellbent on eliminating people like Bloomberg. Agree on the progressive credentials part and from what I've seen from Harris isn't impressive. But then who else is out there? He could renege, wouldn't be the first person or first time he did something like that

This outlines the 11 most logical picks for Biden.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/04/08/11-most-logical-picks-joe-bidens-vice-president-ranked/

 

[kkck]

I started following this stuff later then most, so what I really saw from Warren was her hellbent on eliminating people like Bloomberg. Agree on the progressive credentials part and from what I've seen from Harris isn't impressive. But then who else is out there? He could renege, wouldn't be the first person or first time he did something like that

IIRC kamala is the only minority female that ran in the primary. At least the only one whose named popped up (though given her actual results she clearly didn't deserve to be in the spotlight that much). I suppose he could choose from outside the people who ran during the primaries though right now biden should avoid the mistake hillary made and pick someone popular whose policies are well liked within his party.

 

[Aurelius]

Clarification on previous post: Biden declared he would pick a women as vp, with heavy consideration towards a minority, and would appoint an African American women to supreme court. So with regards to VP pick, I'm thinking it could be between Harris and Klobuchar. I'd pick Warren but she hasn't endorsed Biden, so I doubt Biden running with her.

 

[Ramen]

Clarification on previous post: Biden declared he would pick a women as vp, with heavy consideration towards a minority, and would appoint an African American women to supreme court. So with regards to VP pick, I'm thinking it could be between Harris and Klobuchar. I'd pick Warren but she hasn't endorsed Biden, so I doubt Biden running with her.

Tbh between those two, Khlobuchar makes more sense for him than Harris does.

 

[xi0]

Wow, thank you so much for this endorsement after he dropped out... Remind me again why any progressive supports her still?

 

[Aurelius]

 

[Ramen]

Wow, thank you so much for this endorsement after he dropped out... Remind me again why any progressive supports her still?

Because she's a female.

--- Double Post Merged, Apr 8, 2020, Original Post Date: Apr 8, 2020 ---

That tweet triggers me.

 

[xi0]

Because she's a female.

I would prefer not going there, as I like(d) her prior to this campaign. But jesus christ, it kind of feels like this sometimes. Especially when her supporters label any form of criticism as misogyny.

 

[Ramen]

I would prefer not going there, as I like(d) her prior to this campaign. But jesus christ, it kind of feels like this sometimes. Especially when her supporters label any form of criticism as misogyny.

I didn't mean it like that though. What I meant is that because she's a female, she's going to get support anyway. I liked her too because she had a good rep and I liked her policies. Problem is, Bernie was just a better candidate. Warren didn't even win her home state.

I mean you're right in the sense that her supporters call misogyny or sexism every time someone questions her.

But if she truly cared about progressive values, she would've endorsed Bernie.

 

[kkck]

Clarification on previous post: Biden declared he would pick a women as vp, with heavy consideration towards a minority, and would appoint an African American women to supreme court. So with regards to VP pick, I'm thinking it could be between Harris and Klobuchar. I'd pick Warren but she hasn't endorsed Biden, so I doubt Biden running with her.

i think warren's lack of endorsement would actually be evidence that she might have gotten picked by biden. warren is perceived as being closer to bernie than biden in terms of policy... However when she quit she abstained from endorsing biden or sanders. To me that signals she either was fishing for a VP spot OR she was offered one (or two). I'd forgotten about klobuchar though I don't think that policy wise she is a very good match to biden. In the sense that she doesn't bring anything new to the table.

 

[xi0]

I didn't mean it like that though. What I meant is that because she's a female, she's going to get support anyway. I liked her too because she had a good rep and I liked her policies. Problem is, Bernie was just a better candidate. Warren didn't even win her home state.

I mean you're right in the sense that her supporters call misogyny or sexism every time someone questions her.

But if she truly cared about progressive values, she would've endorsed Bernie.

There are people who would support her because she's a woman, yeah. But there are just as much, if not more who wouldn't support her for the same reason. It's not even about who is a better candidate to me, she only finished third in her own home state. Her staying in the race and not endorsing Bernie cost him delegates, it's not even up for debate. If you're a progressively-minded voter who supported Warren and can't see that, then I don't know what to tell you. It leads me to question the motivation for supporting her at all if you were okay with her actions there.

Now, Bernie wasn't ENTITLED to her endorsement or anything, but she didn't endorse anyone at all. And of course, their platforms have more in common than her and Biden. The fact that she opted out of endorsing anyone is still pretty puzzling to me. Yet Sanders was crucified by mainstream Democrats for "taking too long" to endorse Clinton or "not doing enough" or some such nonsense. They preferred blaming everyone but Clinton herself for her defeat. And when Trump beats Biden, they'll somehow find a way to blame Sanders yet again.

 

[hokageji]

Even if Warren had endorsed Sanders, it wouldn't have mattered. I dont think she had enough supporters exclusive to her that would offset the gap between Biden and Sanders.

I dont think Kamala Harris would be the vice presidential candidate, considering the "shame on you" comment on Biden early in the debates. Amy Kloubacher would be a great VP pick and i think of the list for now..

This outlines the 11 most logical picks for Biden.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/04/08/11-most-logical-picks-joe-bidens-vice-president-ranked/

This didn't open for me, its asking me to subscribe, but i'll use a different IP later from my laptop and try looking at it... thanks for sharing..

 

[Ramen]

There are people who would support her because she's a woman, yeah. But there are just as much, if not more who wouldn't support her for the same reason. It's not even about who is a better candidate to me, she only finished third in her own home state. Her staying in the race and not endorsing Bernie cost him delegates, it's not even up for debate. If you're a progressively-minded voter who supported Warren and can't see that, then I don't know what to tell you. It leads me to question the motivation for supporting her at all if you were okay with her actions there.

Now, Bernie wasn't ENTITLED to her endorsement or anything, but she didn't endorse anyone at all. And of course, their platforms have more in common than her and Biden. The fact that she opted out of endorsing anyone is still pretty puzzling to me. Yet Sanders was crucified by mainstream Democrats for "taking too long" to endorse Clinton or "not doing enough" or some such nonsense. They preferred blaming everyone but Clinton herself for her defeat. And when Trump beats Biden, they'll somehow find a way to blame Sanders yet again.

The whole point was to make a progressive coalition. I don't see why she wouldn't endorse him.