Voting

[Beamer 420]

If I vote for Bernie do I get to use other peoples gold? I say stick it to the 1%, its not fair!

[Dipstik]

http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Bernie-Sanders-Lawn-Sign-Illinois-620x576.jpg

[I Love Money]

http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Bernie-Sanders-Lawn-Sign-Illinois-620x576.jpg

You just won the Internet.

[I Love Money]

If I vote for Bernie do I get to use other peoples gold? I say stick it to the 1%, its not fair!

If you vote for Bernie, you get a lobotomy.

[sister morphine]

If you vote for Bernie, you get a lobotomy.
As opposed to if you vote for Trump, you've already had one?

[Asymmetric]

If Bernie wins and they tax the rich out of existence to pay for everything, (because that's fair), we must be concerned with the free tuition college graduates that had to work at McDonald's because there weren't enough college level jobs available because of the glut of college graduates? What's going to happen to the college graduates that had jobs at the rich guy's businesses that went under? Will they be able to share jobs at McDonald's with the other free tuition college graduates?

[I Love Money]

As opposed to if you vote for Trump, you've already had one?

Nah, I voted for Cruz.

[Max Power]

If Bernie wins and they tax the rich out of existence to pay for everything, (because that's fair), we must be concerned with the free tuition college graduates that had to work at McDonald's because there weren't enough college level jobs available because of the glut of college graduates? What's going to happen to the college graduates that had jobs at the rich guy's businesses that went under? Will they be able to share jobs at McDonald's with the other free tuition college graduates?

A question not asked often enough. Although with the rate of tuition inflation, and the feds cutting funding to universities, one could argue that the value of a college level job in many cases makes your degree have a poor ROI.

Per usual, like health care, there is/was a real problem, but the solution is even worse.

The only way I vote 2 party this year is if Kasich gets in, which means I won't be voting either party this year. Since I usually have to vote absentee anyway. I might just not bother. I have to see what is on the undercard.

[sister morphine]

A question not asked often enough. Although with the rate of tuition inflation, and the feds cutting funding to universities, one could argue that the value of a college level job in many cases makes your degree have a poor ROI.

Per usual, like health care, there is/was a real problem, but the solution is even worse.

The only way I vote 2 party this year is if Kasich gets in, which means I won't be voting either party this year. Since I usually have to vote absentee anyway. I might just not bother. I have to see what is on the undercard.
If you're talking the kind of 'rich' who might play one of these games and spend more real money on it than the average guy makes in a year, I'd say they could well afford to be taxed a bit extra.

Back in the early 70s, the higher rate of tax on 'earned income' in the UK was an eye-watering 83%. On 'unearned income' (investments etc) as much as 98% (remember that line from the Beatles' Taxman - 1 for you, 19 for me). If tax on the rich in the U.S. ever approaches those levels, then you'd have a problem. I doubt if this Bernie guy would even consider it, and he'd never get it past Congress if he did. You guys know that really.

[Red BD]

Me, for what it's worth, I think y'all are delusional about Sanders' chance at nomination- I mean unless Hillary gets indicted... But then I think you're also mischaracterizing the idea of democratic socialism as well as Bernie's ability to enact your concept of it working within the American system.

I think America definitely needs a radical change in its leadership, but not its system. I found myself leaning toward Trump, whom I perhaps stupidly believed thought he would do so much for the economy folks would sorta forget the wall thing and the Muslim thing when they nose dived (which they will).

Now with the nuanced threat of riots if he is not nominated regardless of NOT having a majority of delegates... No thanks, Don.

Kasich seems the only answer unless Biden gets down from his high horse.

Just saying.....

[Dipstik]

Sanders is a delusional hope, but kasich is what now?

[Evan1000]

Thank God I can't vote.

It will be a race against Trump and Hillary, where of course Hillary will win, because, you know, we don't actually vote in our president.

Hillary lies through her teeth and will do whatever it takes to gain power, and she'd make a pretty bad president. She sort of reminds me of Claire Underwood. Although she's much better than the alternative.

But this election is a prime example as to why the electoral college was formed.

Yes dippy, I know I don't have a say in this, considering I don't know more than what my high school education has granted me, and have never voted or payed taxes etc. Although you have to admit; it is true.

[Red BD]

Sanders is a delusional hope, but kasich is what now?

*shrug* The governor of Ohio?
But it's more who he isn't: a power mad would be professional politician who I wouldn't trust dog sitting; an almost certifiably insane guy who may or may not Abuse his wife and whose own people despise or a really rich guy who at least pretends he doesn't have a clue as to the way in which this republic works.
*sigh*

[Max Power]

If you're talking the kind of 'rich' who might play one of these games and spend more real money on it than the average guy makes in a year, I'd say they could well afford to be taxed a bit extra.

Back in the early 70s, the higher rate of tax on 'earned income' in the UK was an eye-watering 83%. On 'unearned income' (investments etc) as much as 98% (remember that line from the Beatles' Taxman - 1 for you, 19 for me). If tax on the rich in the U.S. ever approaches those levels, then you'd have a problem. I doubt if this Bernie guy would even consider it, and he'd never get it past Congress if he did. You guys know that really.

Just because people choose to afford to spend stupid money on this game doesn't mean they should be taxed more. And when the UK and their financial policies lead the global economy, be sure to let us know. As it was, all you were doing was chasing business/commerce and the 1%ers to Monaco.

It's pretty simple, Bernie wants to take money from the people who earn it and give it to the people that don't. You can try and disguise it by calling it "democratic" socialism instead of socialism, but it is the perfect slippery slope. My health care is a perfect example. I went from a $100 deductible Cadillac plan to an $8000 annual deductible at a rate of $400 more a month all in a period of 18months, thanks to the ACA. Where is that money going? To pay for people who can't/won't afford health care. That's great, but you know where that $400 a month is not going to be going? A new car payment, home improvements, retirement investing, vacations, electronic consumer goods, etc. All the things that create jobs here in America. Remind me again how vibrant the UK economy was when you had those tax rates. No thanks.

Bernie has some valid points, banks shouldn't be too big to fail, the election process is a rigged money process, and college has become too expensive. But for all the 1%ers here and their reserves of money, they will barely be able to afford to fund Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in 5 years. That means more taxes for all to pay for all this free college and health care, and that is money pulled right out of consumer spending. Tell me a single case where money is pulled wholesale out of consumer spending and the economy has grown. It's the old Tax the Rich scheme that goes back to the beginning of time.

And if everyone has a college degree, the value of a college degree will have the same exact value as a high school degree now. After million/billions spent by the people still paying off their student loans. How is there any value in that?


Thank God I can't vote.



For once we agree on something....LOL!

[I Love Money]

Just because people choose to afford to spend stupid money on this game doesn't mean they should be taxed more. And when the UK and their financial policies lead the global economy, be sure to let us know. As it was, all you were doing was chasing business/commerce and the 1%ers to Monaco.

It's pretty simple, Bernie wants to take money from the people who earn it and give it to the people that don't. You can try and disguise it by calling it "democratic" socialism instead of socialism, but it is the perfect slippery slope. My health care is a perfect example. I went from a $100 deductible Cadillac plan to an $8000 annual deductible at a rate of $400 more a month all in a period of 18months, thanks to the ACA. Where is that money going? To pay for people who can't/won't afford health care. That's great, but you know where that $400 a month is not going to be going? A new car payment, home improvements, retirement investing, vacations, electronic consumer goods, etc. All the things that create jobs here in America. Remind me again how vibrant the UK economy was when you had those tax rates. No thanks.

Bernie has some valid points, banks shouldn't be too big to fail, the election process is a rigged money process, and college has become too expensive. But for all the 1%ers here and their reserves of money, they will barely be able to afford to fund Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in 5 years. That means more taxes for all to pay for all this free college and health care, and that is money pulled right out of consumer spending. Tell me a single case where money is pulled wholesale out of consumer spending and the economy has grown. It's the old Tax the Rich scheme that goes back to the beginning of time.

And if everyone has a college degree, the value of a college degree will have the same exact value as a high school degree now. After million/billions spent by the people still paying off their student loans. How is there any value in that?



For once we agree on something....LOL!

Post of the month right here.

[sister morphine]

Just because people choose to afford to spend stupid money on this game doesn't mean they should be taxed more. And when the UK and their financial policies lead the global economy, be sure to let us know. As it was, all you were doing was chasing business/commerce and the 1%ers to Monaco.

It's pretty simple, Bernie wants to take money from the people who earn it and give it to the people that don't. You can try and disguise it by calling it "democratic" socialism instead of socialism, but it is the perfect slippery slope. My health care is a perfect example. I went from a $100 deductible Cadillac plan to an $8000 annual deductible at a rate of $400 more a month all in a period of 18months, thanks to the ACA. Where is that money going? To pay for people who can't/won't afford health care. That's great, but you know where that $400 a month is not going to be going? A new car payment, home improvements, retirement investing, vacations, electronic consumer goods, etc. All the things that create jobs here in America. Remind me again how vibrant the UK economy was when you had those tax rates. No thanks.

Bernie has some valid points, banks shouldn't be too big to fail, the election process is a rigged money process, and college has become too expensive. But for all the 1%ers here and their reserves of money, they will barely be able to afford to fund Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in 5 years. That means more taxes for all to pay for all this free college and health care, and that is money pulled right out of consumer spending. Tell me a single case where money is pulled wholesale out of consumer spending and the economy has grown. It's the old Tax the Rich scheme that goes back to the beginning of time.

And if everyone has a college degree, the value of a college degree will have the same exact value as a high school degree now. After million/billions spent by the people still paying off their student loans. How is there any value in that?



For once we agree on something....LOL!
London is number one city worldwide for financial services. That do you? ;)

FWIW I do agree with much of the rest - especially the bit about degrees being worthless when everybody has one. When Blair expanded universities massively I always half suspected he did to massage youth unemployment figures as much as anything.

[Max Power]

London is number one city worldwide for financial services. That do you? ;)



LOL...well, it may be now, but I am guessing it sure wasn't when it had the tax rates you described, highlighting my point. Anyway, these things are hard to measure precisely, so I shall post a random link from one of your own:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/9605122/Top-10-cities-for-finance-of-the-world.html?frame=2367691

[Dipstik]

Forget 5 years... If they taxed the top 1% at 100%, it wouldn't balance the budget now.