• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bernie Sanders: Tax hypocrite (1 Viewer)

Bucky

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
28,986
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
With all of his itemized deductions, Sanders’s taxable income was significantly lower than it would have been if he had taken the standard deduction. The deductions left Sanders and his wife paying $27,653 in federal income taxes in 2014, on a joint income of $205,271 — an effective federal tax rate of 13.5 percent. If that seems low to you, your instincts are right: According to the Tax Foundation, the average federal income-tax rate for a couple making $200,000 to $500,000 in 2014 was 15.2 percent. The “millionaires and billionaires” that Sanders is so fond of berating payed, on average, just more than twice as much of their income (27.4 percent) in federal taxes as he did.

What Sanders did, using every option and advantage available under a Byzantine tax code to minimize his tax payment, is a normal practice for many Americans. But it’s also exactly what the targets of his anger do. You can argue about whether or not that’s greed, but it’s impossible to argue that it isn’t hypocrisy. The paragon of liberal purity is not as pure as he’d like the world to believe.

Bernie Sanders's Tax Returns Reveal His Hypocrisy

Extremely rich. Bernie Sander's central message is that the super rich do not pay their share and get off easy while the poor and middle class suffer. I hate to break it to Sander's supporters but Sanders benefits as much as the millionaires for "tax breaks for the wealthy."

Many liberals talk about Republicans not following "conservative values." Bernie does not follow liberal values. He's just as bought, if not more, than Hillary and the rest.
 
Last edited:
Extremely rich. Bernie Sander's central message is that the super rich do not pay their share and get off easy while the poor and middle class suffer. I hate to break it to Sander's supporters but Sanders benefits as much as the millionaires for "tax breaks for the wealthy."

Many liberals talk about Republicans not following "conservative values." Bernie does not follow liberal values. He's just as bought, if not more, than Hillary and the rest.

Has Sanders advocated for people to pay more than they owe in taxes? If not, no hypocrisy.
 
Has Sanders advocated for people to pay more than they owe in taxes? If not, no hypocrisy.

He advocates getting rid of the loopholes that he is using himself.
 
He advocates getting rid of the loopholes that he is using himself.

But he is not advocating people not using the rules. He is advocating changing the rules. This is a large, unsubtle difference.
 
But he is not advocating people not using the rules. He is advocating changing the rules. This is a large, unsubtle difference.

If the rule is so unfair and hurting the little guy then why is Bernie taking advantage of it? He is directly making it worse for the lower classes. I certainly understand the difference between the two but it's still hypocritical. Well unless you are of the belief that people can only be good when forced to by the govt.
 
Extremely rich. Bernie Sander's central message is that the super rich do not pay their share and get off easy while the poor and middle class suffer. I hate to break it to Sander's supporters but Sanders benefits as much as the millionaires for "tax breaks for the wealthy."

Many liberals talk about Republicans not following "conservative values." Bernie does not follow liberal values. He's just as bought, if not more, than Hillary and the rest.

Bernie's tax deductions:


$22,946 on home mortgage interest
$14,843 on real estate taxes
$9,666 on state and local income taxes
$8,000 in gifts to charity
$350 in gifts to charity other than by cash or check
$4,473 in unreimbursed job expenses, which according to tax law can include fees such as union dues and travel


Man, I totally remember him railing against those exotic, super nuanced home mortgage interest, charity and real estate tax loopholes; what a complete hypocrite!

Nevermind that his condemnation is and has always primarily been reserved for the state of taxation law, and specifically the people who actively purchase influence to legislate for special tax loopholes beyond the reach of most laypeople, so even if these deductions were truly non-standard (they're not), he would not be anywhere close to true hypocrisy.

Obviously even the notion that any of this makes him nearly as bought as Hillary (nevermind being more so) who is literally awash in hundreds of millions cumulatively from private interests throughout her entire career is completely laughable.


If the rule is so unfair and hurting the little guy then why is Bernie taking advantage of it? He is directly making it worse for the lower classes. I certainly understand the difference between the two but it's still hypocritical. Well unless you are of the belief that people can only be good when forced to by the govt.

In general, yes. That's why we have laws and a taxation system; because people by default and on average are amoral, selfish little ****s who cannot be trusted to exist in a state of anarchy. The truly altruistic are exceedingly rare.
 
Last edited:
If the rule is so unfair and hurting the little guy then why is Bernie taking advantage of it? He is directly making it worse for the lower classes. I certainly understand the difference between the two but it's still hypocritical. Well unless you are of the belief that people can only be good when forced to by the govt.

Well, no it is not hypocritical to do as you expect others to do. I am not a Sanders fan, but at least I can do more than call him names...
 
Well, no it is not hypocritical to do as you expect others to do. I am not a Sanders fan, but at least I can do more than call him names...

So if it were a conservative that regularly engaged in homosexual intercourse and advocated for the criminalizing of homosexual intercourse you could find no way in which that would be hypocritical?
 
He's going to have to work with congress. Obama poisoned the well as soon as he could so he wouldn't have to.
 
He's going to have to work with congress. Obama poisoned the well as soon as he could so he wouldn't have to.
Sure he will.......As the Senator from Vermont and not the president.
 
So if it were a conservative that regularly engaged in homosexual intercourse and advocated for the criminalizing of homosexual intercourse you could find no way in which that would be hypocritical?

Been there, done that...or close any way. Gay republican politicians advocating for "gay unfriendly" laws is not hypocrite, and I took flack for pointing that out.
 
Has Sanders advocated for people to pay more than they owe in taxes? If not, no hypocrisy.
No, it is hypocrisy. In a recent speech, Sanders stated the following:
Here are the top ten corporate freeloaders in America today:

1) Exxon Mobil. In 2009, Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits. Not only did Exxon avoid paying any federal income taxes that year, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

2) Bank of America. Last year, Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS, even though it made $4.4 billion in profits and just a couple of years ago received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.

3) General Electric. Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

Etc. If you notice, he called them freeloaders without any talk about any violation of laws in doing what they did. He accuses them of being greedy, not lawbreakers. It sure sounds to me that he expects others to be more charitable, regardless of laws on taxation.

Full text of Bernie Sanders' Senate speech: A litany of greed
 
No, it is hypocrisy. In a recent speech, Sanders stated the following:


Etc. If you notice, he called them freeloaders without any talk about any violation of laws in doing what they did. He accuses them of being greedy, not lawbreakers. It sure sounds to me that he expects others to be more charitable, regardless of laws on taxation.

Full text of Bernie Sanders' Senate speech: A litany of greed

Did you know that people and corporations are not the same thing, nor are the rules for the two the same? It's true, it's true.
 
Been there, done that...or close any way. Gay republican politicians advocating for "gay unfriendly" laws is not hypocrite, and I took flack for pointing that out.

Fair enough that you don't think it's hypocritical. However most would disagree.
 
Fair enough that you don't think it's hypocritical. However most would disagree.

If I worried about how popular my opinions where going to be, I would never post. Most of my opinions are unpopular, and frequently with democrats, republicans and libertarians all at one time.
 
If I worried about how popular my opinions where going to be, I would never post. Most of my opinions are unpopular, and frequently with democrats, republicans and libertarians all at one time.

I'm not sure how an opinion on how to view conflicting actions has anything to do with political affiliation.
 
Did you know that people and corporations are not the same thing, nor are the rules for the two the same? It's true, it's true.
Did you know that people comprise corporations and that they have CEO and other people who get slandered when reckless, unsubstantiated charges are made? Did you know that laws cover both organizations and people? It's true, it's true.

Are you seriously implying that laws that regulate organizations are irrelevant or at some lower(???) status than laws that regulate people?
 
Has Sanders advocated for people to pay more than they owe in taxes? If not, no hypocrisy.

He says it in nearly every speech. Anyone that is successful or makes a decent income needs to pay more in order to help the "poor."

Translation: Penalize those that work hard, give handouts to those that don't. We have seen Robin Hood economics in countries like Sweden...
 
What a piece of garbage article. Pointing out that loopholes are bad while utilizing those loopholes does not make a person a hypocrite. If you don't like something fix it. Bernie doesn't like a lot of the loopholes so he plans on fixing them. But to cap it off, Bernie's tax deductions are not even all that exotic.
 
What Sander's has stated in speeches is not much different that Pelosi or Hilary have stated. I have stated in other threads if they really believe the "rich" should pay more, then there is nothing stopping them from writing a check to the US Treasury and pay what they believe is a fair share. Of course they won't. They use the tax code to their benefit.

Unless an IRS audit shows they messed up in the filings, they have done nothing wrong.
 
What Sander's has stated in speeches is not much different that Pelosi or Hilary have stated. I have stated in other threads if they really believe the "rich" should pay more, then there is nothing stopping them from writing a check to the US Treasury and pay what they believe is a fair share. Of course they won't. They use the tax code to their benefit.

Unless an IRS audit shows they messed up in the filings, they have done nothing wrong.

Relying on good will and charity obviously doesn't work because people default to being inherently selfish, and the truly altruistic are rare. If we didn't require the power of statutory compulsion to get people to do things that are societally necessary or beneficial we wouldn't need laws, and we could live in anarchy without devolving to a state akin to Somalia. Consequently, if you believe the rich collectively should pay more because the balance is skewed too much in their favour, you have to legislate that belief; writing in a tax donation and expecting others to do the same does not achieve that goal.
 
Extremely rich. Bernie Sander's central message is that the super rich do not pay their share and get off easy while the poor and middle class suffer. I hate to break it to Sander's supporters but Sanders benefits as much as the millionaires for "tax breaks for the wealthy."

Many liberals talk about Republicans not following "conservative values." Bernie does not follow liberal values. He's just as bought, if not more, than Hillary and the rest.

While I am no fan of Sanders, 200K is no where near being super rich, in fact in some northeastern states that might be considered a living wage.
 
Relying on good will and charity obviously doesn't work because people default to being inherently selfish, and the truly altruistic are rare. If we didn't require the power of statutory compulsion to get people to do things that are societally necessary or beneficial we wouldn't need laws, and we could live in anarchy without devolving to a state akin to Somalia. Consequently, if you believe the rich collectively should pay more because the balance is skewed too much in their favour, you have to legislate that belief; writing in a tax donation and expecting others to do the same does not achieve that goal.

I don't believe the "rich" should pay more. I agree that if people want change , then get Congress to change the tax code.

You do realize the "rich" pay the majority of taxes now. I could see reform in corporate tax.

In the end, what you posted is a pass for the likes of Pelosi, Sanders and Hilary. They talk a great deal of the "rich" paying more. Yet they don't have the courage to lead my example.:mrgreen:

If we reform the tax code, I hope we also reform the entitlement programs.
 
I don't believe the "rich" should pay more. I agree that if people want change , then get Congress to change the tax code.

You do realize the "rich" pay the majority of taxes now. I could see reform in corporate tax.

In the end, what you posted is a pass for the likes of Pelosi, Sanders and Hilary. They talk a great deal of the "rich" paying more. Yet they don't have the courage to lead my example.:mrgreen:

If we reform the tax code, I hope we also reform the entitlement programs.

I realize the rich pay the majority of taxes.

I also realize that the rich extract a disproportionate amount of benefit from the economy vs the typical person.

Beyond that, real wage stagnation and declines for the poor and middle class, combined with a lack of compelled monetary circulation from the rich who spend much less of their money as a % of income/wealth is generally unsustainable in the long run. Maintaining velocity of money/circulation is vital to an economy. That said, this is a different argument for a different thread.


The point is that 'leading by example' in this case accomplishes nothing and is personally injurious, i.e. it's entirely futile, so it's unreasonable to expect any politician, rich or otherwise, to submit large voluntary tax donations in the name of increasing tax rates on the wealthy. Bernie's commitment to his principles is well demonstrated in his systemic refusal to take corporate money; it is something that advances his goals while being personally injurious.
 
I realize the rich pay the majority of taxes.

I also realize that the rich extract a disproportionate amount of benefit from the economy vs the typical person.

Beyond that, real wage stagnation and declines for the poor and middle class, combined with a lack of compelled monetary circulation from the rich who spend much less of their money as a % of income/wealth is generally unsustainable in the long run. Maintaining velocity of money/circulation is vital to an economy. That said, this is a different argument for a different thread.


The point is that 'leading by example' in this case accomplishes nothing and is personally injurious, i.e. it's entirely futile, so it's unreasonable to expect any politician, rich or otherwise, to submit large voluntary tax donations in the name of increasing tax rates on the wealthy. Bernie's commitment to his principles is well demonstrated in his systemic refusal to take corporate money; it is something that advances his goals while being personally injurious.

That is all fine. One reason I don't think Sanders is a hypocrite. He has his views as other politicians have theirs.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom