- Joined
- Apr 28, 2015
- Messages
- 85,688
- Reaction score
- 72,378
- Location
- Third Coast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Fair enough.Whatever, people come up with all kinds of goofy contradictory labels for themselves. Doesn't change reality.
On this board, "left libertarians" are indistinguishable from garden variety libs.
Do YOU have a business with employees?
Is there a point you'd like to make, without excessive drama?
Vance, It seems you're trying to make this personal about me, whereas if you had an arguable point to make you could've made it - I'm not going to be drawn down that path.Its a simple question. You are the only one injecting drama. I asked a simple question.
It isn't really "third party paying for it", it would simply be a mandated part of any compensation package for workers. Employers would be able to make up any cost from other parts of the compensation package. I am not saying it is a good idea, I am not sure but kinda unsold at this point. I would like to hear what the arguments against it are at the very least before I would make up my mind.
And while he calls it maternity leave, I think he intends for both parents from the way he words it.
A disaster in your opinion & from your point of view.
But, some others of us see three-decades of (supposed) 'trickle-down economics', and are still waiting to see the results we've been promised!
I would be inclined to agree with you, if you could cite examples from Sen. Sander's plan supporting the degree of intervention you describe above - I have not seen Sen. Sanders call for raising the federal income tax to 75%, for instance.
here is but the tax system needs a total overhaul, and nothing that democrats would support because it takes power away from government.But there are some fixes in the tax code & other areas that I think could do us good.
I would give them a 2 day tax free day to bring money into the US overseas as long as that money was invested in jobs and growth.I'd personally like to see some small tax or other incentive to bring overseas corporate money back to the States (and hopefully invested here, too)
I also see no problem putting infrastructure rebuilding jobs into the hands of working-class Americans, giving them money for their labor to stimulate our heretofore consumer-driven economy.
I also would like to see the capital gains tax rates move a little closer to the income tax rates for those that primarily dervive their income from capital gains.
There's a lot that can be done within the framework of Sen. Sander's plan that's sensible, not radical - and quite honestly, I think there's some populist momentum for some of these things.
Fair enough.
But, you're attempting to neatly pigeon hole the electorate.
For example, not everyone with progressive & liberal ideas wants to give-out endless hand-outs & entitlements, or allow individuals to abrogate social & financial responsibility - yet unabashed entitlements & the lack-of-responsibility are supposedly the hallmark of liberalism.
Here's something I wrote in the 'Cruz, JFK' thread last night, if you're interested:
Debate Politics
Im trying to have a dialogue with you. You are ALL FOR this. I am asking a simple and direct question. You respond with this 'drama'. The dialogue is based off a simple question. Do you have a business with employees? Yes or no?Vance, It seems you're trying to make this personal about me, whereas if you had an arguable point to make you could've made it - I'm not going to be drawn down that path.
My personal life & it's circumstance has nothing to bear on the merit (or lack thereof) of your argument.
yea tell all those people getting government checks how great they are doing on government assistance and that by taxing those evil rich people more they will get off
of government assistance. lol
almost 18 trillion dollars has been spent on the so called war on povery for only a 2% drop. so giving money to the poor is evidently not working.
redistribution doesn't work and plenty of countries have proven this.
there is nothing that will fully solve the problem either. there will always be wealthy and poor.
you want to close the wage gap then you have to get the economy working and get the economy demanding employee's.
that is where democrats and Obama have failed. their constant war on prosperity has lead to the stagnation of the US economy.
Thanks for the reply, and while there's far too many points than I'd care address categorically, I found you've had some (if even slight) agreement on one or two of mine, and I agree on a few of yours.you can't promise all these people things and not raise taxes by a huge amount. just on his healthcare plan alone most countries have a 40-60% tax on healthcare.
that doesn't include the income tax and VAT taxes on top of it. how do you expect someone to live when you are taking 70-75% of their check in taxes?
here is but the tax system needs a total overhaul, and nothing that democrats would support because it takes power away from government.
I would give them a 2 day tax free day to bring money into the US overseas as long as that money was invested in jobs and growth.
ugg all those shovel ready jobs just worked out really well didn't they. that was an utter failure.
yes lets kill investment completely. that will make the economy run better.
not really most of his ideas call for massive tax increases on working people. but it is easy to call for everything to be free when you are not the one footing the bill.
I would be inclined to agree with you, if you could cite examples from Sen. Sander's plan supporting the degree of intervention you describe above - I have not seen Sen. Sanders call for raising the federal income tax to 75%, for instance.
But there are some fixes in the tax code & other areas that I think could do us good.
I'd personally like to see some small tax or other incentive to bring overseas corporate money back to the States (and hopefully invested here, too)
I also see no problem putting infrastructure rebuilding jobs into the hands of working-class Americans, giving them money for their labor to stimulate our heretofore consumer-driven economy.
I also would like to see the capital gains tax rates move a little closer to the income tax rates for those that primarily dervive their income from capital gains.
There's a lot that can be done within the framework of Sen. Sander's plan that's sensible, not radical - and quite honestly, I think there's some populist momentum for some of these things.
But but he's a socialistic libertarian! Lol. :roll:
Uh, that would be you. Nice try though.
No comment on CPUSA and CPC being named as it's "allies in congress"? :roll:
I get it. I know people that are already "all in" for Hillary. Ive asked why in the past but I have stopped. "Deer in the headlights" is not a very becoming fashion statement on people.
I don't know why people seem to believe that they have to have an answer when asked. They really don't know and they should say so instead of pretending to be in the loop when they are not.
I havent watched the video yet so maybe it explains it better
but just on the thread title . . . .the GOP doesnt have family values and never did . . . ever :shrug:
now im not saying GOPers dont have family values . . .of course some do
Im simply pointing out the fact that family values belong to all of us and the GOP never owned them, were responsible for them, were good factual examples of them or the champion force of them . . . no party was . . . .
"I know you are but what am i" approach? Lol
What's to comment on? They like something he did isn't even remotely close to Bernie being allied with them. If that's how you view the world then I'll align the GOP with the American fascist movement. Your logic makes no sense.
Yeah, speaking of not even close. Just because Sanders doesn't openly ally himself with the CPUSA, doesn't mean they aren't on the same page on many issues. Referring to it's "allies in congress" is a little more than just simply agreeing on one issue. But you already knew that.
Yes. You like food. So did Hitler. You are playing a really obtuse game in attempts to not debate as much as sling feces. Thanks for playing.
You are the only one playing games. Your lame attempts at obfuscation don't hide the fact that Sanders is considered an ally of the Communist Party USA. Thank YOU for playing.
And Ron Paul is like by the American Fascist Movement. I would never say that Ron Paul is a Fascist or related to them. That would be very very stupid.
Now I invite you to debate issues more specifically or you can continue with the broad labeling that doesn't suit any conversation well.
The war on poverty has been an abject failure on every level. I'm not sure how to solve it (I've tossed out the idea of eliminating all entitlements, and providing a small guaranteed income for all, which (along with single-payer healthcare) would provide all the social safety I think I'd ever care to supply my fellow Americans while still providing incentive to better oneself (unlike means-tested benefits). I'd dump the whole current means-tested entitlement systems, ideally.
Barring the above, I see no reason entitlements such as welfare & disability couldn't be curtailed substantially; strictly from anecdotal experience, a huge number of the recipients I know are abusing the system - easily 1/2 of the one's I know, maybe more (I know this is not a statistical sample - but I'd cut them drastically).
If we were to cut the current entitlements, along with closing some of the tax loopholes I listed in my prior post, I'd like us to then zero-out the deficit and use the rest for sensible social programs that are not means tested, along with infrastructure improvement. I'd also toss a few obligatory bucks at the national debt, just to look good.
As to single-payer healthcare, I'm not sure where your figures of 40-60% "tax" come from, but we are already have 43% of our fellow Americans being provided single-payer healthcare in this country (Medicare, MedicAid, Disability) - I'd extend it (MediCare) for all in a sliding fashion over quite a few years so as to not shock the system. I'd keep our current private provider system, so most accurately we'd have a single-payer/private provider system. As to costs, they'd have to be curtailed absolutely - I believe this is the key. Other countries have done this, and quite a few have better healthcare outcomes than we currently do, and they have lower costs as well.
To be honest I'd probably prefer Sanders over Hillary even though Sanders is much more liberal.
Sanders in the White House and republicans in congress should work just fine.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?