Democratic debates
 

Issues that matter being discussed? Income and racial inequality, climate change, gun control, what's going on here?

Re: Democratic debates
 

Is Hillary mildly retarded? Not a word comes out of her mouth that isn't Bullshit, tired-ass rhetoric and nonsense designed to film flam a....stupid America
Hell, Comrade Bernie actually has some original thought......
This "reality tv" format of promoting drama, clash and infighting among the candidates should not be tolerated....

Re: Democratic debates
 

So who won the debate? I'm a bit of a homer, but I've always like Jim web, thought he was good because he always brought facts of what he has done...he has a history. But you know, people hate to talk truth and actual work on the issues. Empty promises work better with folks. Webb was too weak with some issues...particularly the black lives questions. I cringed with his answer because all lives matter is incorrect.

Hilary had a strong night. Bernie is selling a welfare dream...he has zero clue how to pay for anything..its laughable. Everything free.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk;1125404]Issues that matter being discussed? Income and racial inequality, climate change, gun control, what's going on here?[/QUOTE]
Issues that matter to those with a liberal bent being discussed at a democratic primary. Shocking.

Sent from my S6 Edge

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1125412]Issues that matter to those with a liberal bent being discussed at a democratic primary. Shocking.

Sent from my S6 Edge[/quote]

How do those issues not matter to... everyone?

You'd rather hear about planned parenthood or Benghazi perhaps?

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Chico23231;1125411]So who won the debate? I'm a bit of a homer, but I've always like Jim web, thought he was good because he always brought facts of what he has done...[B]he has a history[/B]. But you know, people hate to talk truth and actual work on the issues. [B]Empty promises work better with folks[/B]. Webb was too weak with some issues...particularly the black lives questions. I cringed with his answer because all lives matter is incorrect.

Hilary had a strong night. Bernie is selling a welfare dream...he has zero clue how to pay for anything..its laughable. Everything free.[/quote]

I like his history as well...not a good speaker, but maybe he was just nervy...
DON'T bring facts and truth to the table
Just...please Supersize that McDeath meal for me......

Re: Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk;1125425]How do those issues not matter to... everyone?

You'd rather hear about planned parenthood or Benghazi perhaps?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Mattyk;1125404]Issues that matter being discussed? Income and racial inequality, climate change, gun control, what's going on here?[/QUOTE]
Sorry to disappoint you but I have no love of a benghazi discussion. As for planned parenthood, that's a conservative equivalent of gun control.

I would rather presidential candidates talking about fiscal sanity and how to avoid putting our next generations into massive debt cycles then discussing climate change.

I would rather they discuss the effects of failed drug policies on a generation of inner city youths then creating and continuing a faux class warfare of social inequality.

But my initial point was that the topics appeal primarily to a liberal mindset or one that relies on government solutions. They are nonetheless soundbite and media fodder topics just like planned parenthood or benghazi, compared to the problems that directly face our nation in my opinion.



Sent from my S6 Edge

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Hog1;1125427]I like his history as well...not a good speaker, but maybe he was just nervy...
DON'T bring facts and truth to the table
Just...please Supersize that McDeath meal for me......[/quote]

Webb isnt a great speaker, but he has alot of common sense substance to what he says. Webb also is all about getting stuff done, not gridlock or taking stance just to defy the "other side". He rather work across the aisle.

He is in the mold of past Virginia politicians..Mark Warner, John Warner, Doug Wilder, even Chuck Robb to an extent...where they tend to be Conservative Democrats or Independent Republicans. They dont always go with the party line, they think for themselves..dont let the party define them. Usually strong with the Military, common sense spending and weary with any type of tax increase. Social issues usually take back seats.

Re: Democratic debates
 

I would say that those issues are interrelated and shouldn't be separated CR. How can we discuss fiscal sanity when we let people exploit common resources such as our atmosphere and degrade our life sustaining processes for future generations. Surely improved environmental quality and improved environmental services leads to fiscal conservatism as we reduce using federal funds to bail out corporations that have degraded the life sustaining processes and attempt to restore it for our citizens. Climate change is very significant from that stand point.

The failed drug policies have also targeted our lower income families at a much higher rate than other members of our society it is a class warfare that has been raged. I agree that the relevancy of the issues could've been more appropriate and less rhetorical.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Mattyk;1125404]Issues that matter being discussed? Income and racial inequality, climate change, gun control, what's going on here?[/quote]

climate change and gun control...2 issues you run on and lose on.

But income inequality will get people's attention and is a strong issue. This is fueling bernie's side. There is some room within the issue that both sides are willing to listen on and negotiate.

While I do believe the minimum wage needs to be raised a little, I think we need to look at where and it should be tied to cost of living. Maybe a 2 tiered system. In Va the cost of living is higher in Northern Virginia than the rest of the commonwealth...so it would make sense to raise the minimum wage a little higher there than the rest of the state. In NY, obvious the city and surrounding burroughs are a much higher cost of living than the rest of the state...so same common sense approach.

I think some sort of light profit sharing should be tied in with earning reports with corporations...but we should also look into lowering the business taxes of I believe 35%.

I think one of the biggest issue of this election is the cost of an education...it needs to be addressed. Its funny, these universites are more about making money than giving an education. I would advise many folks to look at who your top paid State employees are....you will find outside of state controllers and state lawyers, University Professors make an exoberant salary.

So when we really talk about income inequality we need to talk about how to educate folks at a cheaper, affordable rate. This way you get people working at a higher salary...and I think you can tie in cost of education with the income inequality arguement and somehow work out a national plan where business, colleges, and students benefit. Dont ask me how, but they are all tied together.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=BaltimoreSkins;1125436]I would say that those issues are interrelated and shouldn't be separated CR. How can we discuss fiscal sanity when we let people exploit common resources such as our atmosphere and degrade our life sustaining processes for future generations. Surely improved environmental quality and improved environmental services leads to fiscal conservatism as we reduce using federal funds to bail out corporations that have degraded the life sustaining processes and attempt to restore it for our citizens. Climate change is very significant from that stand point.



The failed drug policies have also targeted our lower income families at a much higher rate than other members of our society it is a class warfare that has been raged. I agree that the relevancy of the issues could've been more appropriate and less rhetorical.[/QUOTE]


Agreed, I was going to say the same thing about those issues all being related.

Overall I just thought the dems were so much stronger, better prepared, and talked real issues.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Mattyk;1125446]Agreed, I was going to say the same thing about those issues all being related.

Overall [B]I just thought the dems were so much stronger, better prepared[/B], and talked real issues.[/quote]

I am Shocked and Awed............

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Hog1;1125459]I am Shocked and Awed............[/quote]

Tell me there wasn't a huge difference...

[url=http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a38837/democrats-party-of-sanity/]The Democrats Proved They're the Party of Sanity. But That's Not Enough.[/url]

Re: Democratic debates
 

I was not privy to the debates past the first hour, but until that time I heard no "meat". Mostly just posturing and No fixes for the ill's we have. This country has some serious problems such as Budget....Immigration.....foreign policy...unemployment....welfare.....
I did hear that later in the debate that much free stuff was promised to the masses( I wonder why that is done?). If that is true how will it be paid for? Are we .still on that rob from the rich to give to the poor nonsense?
Obama has done much serious damage and I heard no one ballsy enough to take any of that on. Or for that matter, even comment...
3 of the dudes on stage were incompetent. They probably are not in reality, but nobody can get past their stage presence.

Red Bernie isn't getting elected. so that leaves Hillary. If she could somehow get elected....we're done.
So much smoke has surrounded her and Bill for the last 30 years, they both should spontaneously combust.
AND much of the same can be said for many of the Repubs that have taken up the gauntlet...but not all
Hillary is certainly smart enough, but she is a consummate liar, thief and a charlatan, just like Bill
I personally hope for more in our CIC. God knows the last 8 years have been a disaster and I really hope we can get a leader that will be a departure from the "Politico's" we have had.
You know...someone who can actually do some of that truth, justice and the American way?

Re: Democratic debates
 

BTW, that Webb guy does not have a great presence, but I was interested in him.
Don't think he is left enough to get the nomination........

Re: Democratic debates
 

Interesting that Pres. Obama announced his decision to leave thousands of US troops in Afghanistan after the debate

Why do we care about political promises(from both parties) anyways.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1125507]Interesting that Pres. Obama announced his decision to leave thousands of US troops in Afghanistan after the debate

Why do we care about political promises(from both parties) anyways.[/quote]

the problem is that we generally use past performance as a measure for future results, and it's been proven to be a terrible way to try and predict things.

candidates do keep the majority of their promises (something like 85-90% i believe), but we always remember the ones they fail on.

not trying to absolve obama or anything, i don't think he's done a very good job overall, but i do understand the need to keep afghanistan from collapsing. I mean, we never left germany or japan, england or australia after WWII.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/02/politics/new-hampshire-primary-2016/index.html]New Hampshire primary: Did Hillary Clinton really win the Iowa caucuses? - CNNPolitics.com[/url]

Cant believe Hillary effed this up. No way Bernie should be challenging in Iowa. Here comes the clown show, Bernie is fighting the results...

Re: Democratic debates
 

She has a lot of......shit on her plate

Re: Democratic debates
 

Bernie is for real, that's what this is all about.

Re: Democratic debates
 

How in the hell can you have everything for free? Free college, free health care, free-paid leave....folks this is certifiably insane.

Re: Democratic debates
 

I am a big fan of Bernie. Of all the candidates in either of the major parties I like his message the best. Socialism has such a negative connotation that he labelled as such but in reality he is far from it.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Chico23231;1138704]How in the hell can you have everything for free? Free college, free health care, free-paid leave....folks this is certifiably insane.[/quote]

STOP IT!!!
You'll ruin the allure.......
Obama has been putting it over for years.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Chico23231;1138704]How in the hell can you have everything for free? Free college, free health care, free-paid leave....folks this is certifiably insane.[/quote]

Tax the wealth at the top of the mountain.

In the end I think "everything" for free is a lofty goal, a good start would be to drastically bring down the costs of education and health care.

What's truly insane is what we have now, students with massive debt and people paying crazy health care costs.

Re: Democratic debates
 

But again...who will pay for the $1000.00 health care family bill that they will not be paying for?
What is the [B]how[/B] in "bring down" the cost of education?
Or is it just empty BS?

Re: Democratic debates
 

[url]https://berniesanders.com/issues/income-and-wealth-inequality/[/url]

Re: Democratic debates
 

Apparently you do not know either?
As I glossed over that tired ass shit "Rich Bad"....Poor Good BS, I did not actually see where he will pay for any of this.
Every statement he makes. Every plan he endorses appears to be...tremendously costly?
Min wage to double? $15 p/hour. Yow!
Corps bad as they move their operations to more favorable labor markets and Tax codes. I am confident doubling the min wage will do wonders to bring back American manufacturing.
The BS seems fitting for Comrade Bernie....
What am I missing?

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=Hog1;1138710]But again...[B]who will pay for the $1000.00 health care family bill that they will not be paying for?[/B]What is the [B]how[/B] in "bring down" the cost of education?
Or is it just empty BS?[/quote]

We are already doing a lot of this and it gets hidden in our insurance, taxes etc. Let's have some transparency. This is anecdotal but it is my personal experience, I have an aunt and uncle that have lived below the poverty line their entire life. They go to the doctor knowing they cannot pay when the bill comes they tell the doctor they can't and the doctor ends up billing someone's insurance for the service they provided. Generally they go the emergency room where they end up tying up an emergency physician or nurse from real emergencies. Before you start calling them liberal cheats they are fundamental baptists and basically tell you they are to the right of Genghis Khan.

Re: Democratic debates
 

Comrade BS apparently is on the table to spend...many trillions in Neo rob the rich and give to poor rhetoric. Don't have any meat....nuts and bolts that I see for payment.
He literally has dozens of.....schemes that all require huge sums of money to a country that Barry O has already raped monetarily.
But no..explicit info as to how to pay for it?
If that is true...not acceptable
...loved your story Bskins!

Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;1138712]Apparently you do not know either?

As I glossed over that tired ass shit "Rich Bad"....Poor Good BS, I did not actually see where he will pay for any of this.

Every statement he makes. Every plan he endorses appears to be...tremendously costly?

Min wage to double? $15 p/hour. Yow!

Corps bad as they move their operations to more favorable labor markets and Tax codes. I am confident doubling the min wage will do wonders to bring back American manufacturing.

The BS seems fitting for Comrade Bernie....

What am I missing?[/QUOTE]


Not sure what's so hard to understand about shifting wealth, taxing the super wealthy and creating jobs by focusing on infrastructure. Maybe try reading up some more rather than glossing over? There's plenty of info out there, surely you don't need to be spoon fed.

Re: Democratic debates
 

Translation....you don't know as it is obviously not on BS's site?
Just more giveaway promise Bull Shit?

Re: Democratic debates
 

Read through BS's site at your link. He has two revenue generating points: Tax the wealthy and corporations so that they "pay their fair share" and removal of the $250,000 cap.

All the rest of his points require either vast expenditures by the state (free tuition, health care, childcare and pre-k) or increased expenditures by employers (requirements for sick leave, doubling the minimum wage, mandatory salary increases).

In addition, he would reinstitute protectionism through the revoking the various free trade agreements.

In response:

(1) As to his "tax the wealthy so they pay a fair share:" While the estimates and breakdowns vary depending on where you are getting your stats and how different forms of wealth transfers are accounted for (tax breaks, direct payments, etc.), it is undisputed that the top 1% of earners pay approximately 30 - 35% of federal income tax while earning approximately 15-20% of the income. Further, the top 25% of earners pay a greater percentage of the federal taxes (~85%) than the percentage of income they earn (65%) (To be in the top 25%, your adjusted gross income (that which you pay taxes on after deductions) has to be ~ 95K or more).

[quote]Whatever the measure, the numbers show just how dependent the U.S. has become on the earnings of the wealthy.[B][I] The U.S. is more dependent on the income tax than other countries, with 37 percent of total government revenue coming from the income tax, compared with 24 percent in other countries.[/I][/B] Those countries depend more on consumption taxes and other sources of revenue. [/quote]

[url]http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/13/[/url]

The bolded part is important to me. As we become dependent on the top earners to pay more, it is important that we recognize that fact. Destruction of the wealth of top earners is destruction of much of our federal income.

Income inequality is a real thing, however, as every study shows that since the late 70's/early 80's the real income of CEO's has risen at a geometrically greater rate than that of workers:

[quote]The CEO-to-worker compensation ratio was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 29.9-to-1 in 1978, grew to 122.6-to-1 in 1995, peaked at 383.4-to-1 in 2000, and was 295.9-to-1 in 2013, far higher than it was in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s.[/quote]

[url=http://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-continues-to-rise/]CEO Pay Continues to Rise as Typical Workers Are Paid Less | Economic Policy Institute[/url]

I don't know the appropriate solution to the ensuring corporations fairly distribute their wages and cap CEO pay or tie a set worker income. I have no doubt to enact such legislation would be pretty damn difficult AND likely have some very unintended negative consequences. However, to me, this is the real problem with wealth distribution in the US.

Sanders policies do not touch this issue. The concept "tax the rich" is the welcome rallying cry of those disadvantaged in society. Robin Hood has always had his iconic appeal. However, the wealth of the US has been built by allowing people to be rich - even obscenely so. In doing so, the US has now built a particular and unique economy among western democracies. Bernie's plan does not account for this and seeks to kill the golden goose without creating a real restructuring of the manner in which income is earned.

(2) As to his various government spending programs: Bernie's transfers are simply pie-in-the-sky rehashed socialism in its most traditional form (wealth redistribution through government funded transfers). Such policies promise huge debts as the transferees vote larger and larger checks for programs they want while the wealth holders spend their wealth to shield it from transfer - or simply leave. Additionally, governmental wealth redistribution will always come with strings, increased dependence, and reduced economic and political freedom.

IMHO, and to preserve both our individual and our corporate (as in the entire society's) freedom, the country needs an effective way to restructure earnings in the corporate setting while preserving the ability to differentiate wages in a meaningful way and to permit (and encourage) entrepreneurship. Then, and only then, can we preserve real freedom of choice. Bernie's revenue generation and wealth transfer plan does none of this, and, in the long run, is antithetical to it.

(3) As to the employer mandates, decreeing that employers must pay their employees more either through direct payments (minimum wage, mandated salaries) or through mandated benefits (enhanced leave) means that fewer employees will be working or the same amount may be working but for lower salaries. It's simple math - if employer expenses go up without commensurate raises in income levels, cuts will come or the business will fold. This will increase government expenditures either through expanded income relief payments (welfare, Medicaid, etc.) or increased governmental employment ("We need to find work for these unemployed folks - let's pay them to fix roads"), etc. If the mandates become universal as Bernie desires, start ups will die and the only employers who will be able to afford to do business will be the large corporations and the government.

(4) Finally, by revoking the various free-trade agreements, all those lovely things we buy will suddenly become very very expensive.

[quote]corporate America wants us to buy their products they need to manufacture those products in this country, not in China or other low-wage countries[/quote]

<sigh> Fine, get ready for prices to increases and reduction in your real income as those products manufactured by "corporate America" become three or four times as expensive to produce. (I am sure in Bernie's world, none of these increased production costs will be passed on to us - unfortunately, in my world, my computer and TV's just tripled in price).

Further, price increases on manufactured consumer goods is only one problem with protectionism. While import much more than we export, 13% of our GDP is made up of exports. Count on that shrinking as foreign countries enact similar protectionist measures targeted against us and simply buy their exports from someone else (BTW - shrinking exports = increased unemployment).

Bernie's entire plan is not just tired, blatant pandering to class warfare, it is structurally unsound and self-defeating. Ultimately, his vision for America is a nation of government employees working for an increasingly indebted employer as real economic freedom is reduced further and further.

Re: Democratic debates
 

I certainly think Sanders is right about income inequality, but his means are wrong. The middle class is shrinking. But the idea to tax the rich and corporate institutions are short sighted. His plans of infrastructure repair and such is very low value when its comes to income inequality.

Ive stated before, education reform and corporate wealth should be tied together. The cost of an education is ridiculous. These state supported colleges cost is bullshit. We should focus on high education standards to raise people up and at the same time private companies who have a stake in a stronger work force need to be invested more in this cost. I would look at shortening colleges years to more intensive course work within viable industry jobs. Private companies large and small could offer more permanent placement options tied college recruiting. YET NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT EDUCATION IN THIS ELECTION.


An example of a simple problem with one of Bernies plan:
He's already stated in the free paid leave he would raise a .02% payroll tax. That is absurd. I should not pay for folks to sit on their ass to have kids. Paid leave is granted to folks who work hard and have good jobs. Hell, folks where I work with positions in the mail room get paid leave.

Bernie doesn't really know how is gonna pay for any of this...tax hikes will not pass in congress. he should know this.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=MTK;1138715]Not sure what's so hard to understand about shifting wealth, taxing the super wealthy and creating jobs by focusing on infrastructure. Maybe try reading up some more rather than glossing over? There's plenty of info out there, surely you don't need to be spoon fed.[/QUOTE]
There is an inherent problem in shifting wealth. It is called human nature. For it to be successful it has to defy human nature at both ends of the wealth points. At the low end there has to be a cut off, let's say $30k(but it could be any number). If a person gets assistance at 29k but less at 31k human nature will have a lot of people stop trying to get to 31k. At the top end a lot of people will shift their wealth so that it is not punitively taken. So ultimately the burden falls on those who are making over the low point and under the high point. Further as more people at the ends follow the natural path the government is forced to raise the low end and lower the high end. This becomes a dangerous spiral and the end result is what we saw in Greece or more pronouncedly in the former Soviet Union.

Sent from my S6 Edge

Re: Democratic debates
 

first, if you want you can have free health care, go to the ER, get treated, give them an invalid SSN and let the taxpayers pay for it. that's been one of the hidden costs of illegal immigration.

second, you realize that in the 50s the US had a marginal tax rate exceeding 90%, and it was 70% in the 70s. so acting like having a higher maximum tax rate is some weird/alien or anti-american thing is, well... history extends beyond 1980.

now, if you want to actually enact tax hikes, good luck. it's a tough sell, and the republicans have convinced a LOT of people to vote against their own interests as far as tax and services are involved.

you could close the corporate loopholes though. no more dutch sandwiches and whatever other crazy tax evasion schemes we've got going on. david letterman shouldn't be getting farm subsidies. just saying.

Re: Democratic debates
 

as far as free college - the studies on the original GI bill showed that every $1 spent on getting GIs degrees resulted in adding $7 back into the economy. if done right, free college can actually be a net gain.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=That Guy;1138731]as far as free college - the studies on the original GI bill showed that every $1 spent on getting GIs degrees resulted in adding $7 back into the economy. if done right, free college can actually be a net gain.[/quote]

so why not have the folks who want "free" tie it too military service? I heard this argument from my far right friends.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1138732]so why not have the folks who want "free" tie it too military service? I heard this argument from my far right friends.[/QUOTE]


They could tie it to a lot of programs, work study, community service, etc.

Re: Democratic debates
 

Bernie Sanders crying foul over coin toss. As that really that is how you decide a primary or caucus? First I heard of that.

Re: Democratic debates
 

[quote=JPPT1974;1138737]Bernie Sanders crying foul over coin toss. As that really that is how you decide a primary or caucus? First I heard of that.[/quote]

Pathetic. I don't know why the dems go thru that crap. Just do a paper secret ballot