Bernie Sanders vs. Hillary Clinton-- senate voting history

[Harambe]

At least you're willing to admit it.

What can I say... admitting someone else's faults runs rampant around these parts.

 

[framer]

I hate the idea because changing two things at once only leads to fighting over which change made the biggest difference. Oddly enough, the only reason conservatives like this and/or a flat tax on everyone and everything is because they have the money. Under that concept, the poor's tax would go up $100-$400 a person the rich would each save a cool half a million in decreased taxes.

This is a large ship.. baby steps would serve us best. Cut the tax breaks... cut the loop holes.. crack down on tax evasion. THEN let's evaluate how we're doing on the increasing debt we have. Then let's make an action plan; increase or decrease as necessary.

The poor pay NOTHING in income tax. Everybody should have some skin in the game even if it is nominal enough to the point of mere symbolism. A flat tax would shift so much money from the financial services industry to areas that actually PRODUCE something. The problem is that Democrats are the party of special interests and a lot of that comes in the form of the tax code. Ever filed for a 501C? There are about 30 designations, more than half of them for Unions. You dump the current tax code those constituencies would scream bloody murder. It has nothing to do with sound fiscal policy. Ultimately YOU want to use the tax code to reward your friends and punish your enemies. A flat tax raises revenue and removes the opportunities for abuse and graft.

A great example is the new $15 an hour minimum wage in Los Angeles. Unions pushed for it, it passed, now they are demanding to be given an exception.

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-los-angeles-minimum-wage-unions-20150526-story.html

This is your new corporate progressivism. Get used to it. . .

 

[Harambe]

The poor pay NOTHING in income tax. Everybody should have some skin in the game even if it is nominal enough to the point of mere symbolism. A flat tax would shift so much money from the financial services industry to areas that actually PRODUCE something. The problem is that Democrats are the party of special interests and a lot of that comes in the form of the tax code. Ever filed for a 501C? There are about 30 designations, more than half of them for Unions. You dump the current tax code those constituencies would scream bloody murder. It has nothing to do with sound fiscal policy. Ultimately YOU want to use the tax code to reward your friends and punish your enemies. A flat tax raises revenue and removes the opportunities for abuse and graft.

A great example is the new $15 an hour minimum wage in Los Angeles. Unions pushed for it, it passed, now they are demanding to be given an exception.

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-los-angeles-minimum-wage-unions-20150526-story.html

This is your new corporate progressivism. Get used to it. . .

The poor CAN pay nothing in income tax. Look it up, it was 10% in 2014. They get out of it the same way rich people do; breaks, cuts, loop holes, etc. So before you spout off about the poor, know that they're just doing the same thing the rich are, and are just as guilty. I agree, they should have something down, too, especially considering they potentially use it more often(not to be confused with get the most benefit).

Since you haven't realized, The republicans are possibly more so special interest motivated, the groups they pander to are just more conservative than the democrats. Probably because you agree with those special interest groups, where people like me agree more with the special interest groups the democrats pander to. A brick is a brick, no matter the side of the aisle they're on.

The minimum wage thing has worked, and it's failed. You have historic examples from both sides, and economist backing on both sides. As franklin would say "Completely made up facts" on either side. Facts that don't tell the whole story on all sides.

BAM https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/04/economists-agree-raising-the-minimum-wage-reduces-poverty/ I CAN PRODUCE LINKS TOO! THIS IS MY PROGRESSIVE AMERICA WOOOOOOOO

Yeah, I totally don't feel any better. How about you?

 

[fishonjazz]

The poor pay NOTHING in income tax.

I'm poor
I pay lots o taxes. (When I work overtime, which is every week, I pay like 45% or something)

 

[framer]

The poor CAN pay nothing in income tax. Look it up, it was 10% in 2014. They get out of it the same way rich people do; breaks, cuts, loop holes, etc. So before you spout off about the poor, know that they're just doing the same thing the rich are, and are just as guilty. I agree, they should have something down, too, especially considering they potentially use it more often(not to be confused with get the most benefit).

Since you haven't realized, The republicans are possibly more so special interest motivated, the groups they pander to are just more conservative than the democrats. Probably because you agree with those special interest groups, where people like me agree more with the special interest groups the democrats pander to. A brick is a brick, no matter the side of the aisle they're on.

The minimum wage thing has worked, and it's failed. You have historic examples from both sides, and economist backing on both sides. As franklin would say "Completely made up facts" on either side. Facts that don't tell the whole story on all sides.

BAM https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/04/economists-agree-raising-the-minimum-wage-reduces-poverty/ I CAN PRODUCE LINKS TOO! THIS IS MY PROGRESSIVE AMERICA WOOOOOOOO

Yeah, I totally don't feel any better. How about you?

I don't spout off about the poor, oftentimes I am "the poor." And yes, you should do every legal thing you can do to pay less taxes. Also, you won't find me as a large defender of Republicans. Most Republicans, however, don't go on and on about "paying your fair share!" while simultaneously carving out exceptions for themselves or their buddies. I value consistency here. Republicans by and large at least talk about cutting taxes for Everyone and simplifying the tax code, thereby giving less power to the people who collect the taxes and those who spend the money which is a direction I like.

And if LA wants to have a $15 dollar minimum wage, go ahead. I don't live there or have business interests there, so knock yourselves out. Don't, however, campaign for it, then demand a carve out or exception for your group when it happens. You wanted the law, you live under it just like everyone else. This is my beef with tax law. Get rid of exceptions for EVERYONE. The FAIR tax probably does a better job of this than the Flat tax, but just about everything is better than the monstrosity we have now.

 

[Harambe]

I don't spout off about the poor, oftentimes I am "the poor." And yes, you should do every legal thing you can do to pay less taxes. Also, you won't find me as a large defender of Republicans. Most Republicans, however, don't go on and on about "paying your fair share!" while simultaneously carving out exceptions for themselves or their buddies. I value consistency here. Republicans by and large at least talk about cutting taxes for Everyone and simplifying the tax code, thereby giving less power to the people who collect the taxes and those who spend the money which is a direction I like.

So because one side actually says pay your fair share, you're upset with them? Are you serious? You actually think the republican blanket "Rich pay less taxes" is on a higher moral ground than "Pay your fair share... except these"? Did you think that through?

Less power here, more power there. That's a moot argument and we've just got to find a better platform to jump to. Whether it's the "oppressive government" that overreaches on your rights and create loop holes for buddies, or the "evil rich; rulers without a title" that create monopolies, honey pots and holes for the poor to live in(Hi Walmart!), you're still going to be giving power to a tyrant. In lieu of another option, I greatly prefer an oppressive government that has checks and balances to who has the biggest $peen.

We need another option. This balancing act has done nothing more than tear us apart.

And if LA wants to have a $15 dollar minimum wage, go ahead. I don't live there or have business interests there, so knock yourselves out. Don't, however, campaign for it, then demand a carve out or exception for your group when it happens. You wanted the law, you live under it just like everyone else. This is my beef with tax law. Get rid of exceptions for EVERYONE. The FAIR tax probably does a better job of this than the Flat tax, but just about everything is better than the monstrosity we have now.

I'm not convinced I disagree with this at all.

 

[franklin]

I'm poor
I pay lots o taxes. (When I work overtime, which is every week, I pay like 45% or something)

You might pay it up front but you get it all back. There's no amount of overtime you can work to bump yourself from poor to a 45% tax bracket.

 

[Stoked]

The poor CAN pay nothing in income tax. Look it up, it was 10% in 2014. They get out of it the same way rich people do; breaks, cuts, loop holes, etc. So before you spout off about the poor, know that they're just doing the same thing the rich are, and are just as guilty. I agree, they should have something down, too, especially considering they potentially use it more often(not to be confused with get the most benefit).

Since you haven't realized, The republicans are possibly more so special interest motivated, the groups they pander to are just more conservative than the democrats. Probably because you agree with those special interest groups, where people like me agree more with the special interest groups the democrats pander to. A brick is a brick, no matter the side of the aisle they're on.

The minimum wage thing has worked, and it's failed. You have historic examples from both sides, and economist backing on both sides. As franklin would say "Completely made up facts" on either side. Facts that don't tell the whole story on all sides.

BAM https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/04/economists-agree-raising-the-minimum-wage-reduces-poverty/ I CAN PRODUCE LINKS TOO! THIS IS MY PROGRESSIVE AMERICA WOOOOOOOO

Yeah, I totally don't feel any better. How about you?

I think where this "the poor pay nothing" is that there are certain segments of the society that do not even have to file tax returns. For example those on SSI usually do not have to even file.

I agree that every one should have some skin in the game even if it is symbolic.

Not sure what a good solution is as I am ignorant of tax law and code but there has to be a better system than this cluster ...

 

[franklin]

So because one side actually says pay your fair share, you're upset with them? Are you serious? You actually think the republican blanket "Rich pay less taxes" is on a higher moral ground than "Pay your fair share... except these"? Did you think that through?

Less power here, more power there. That's a moot argument and we've just got to find a better platform to jump to. Whether it's the "oppressive government" that overreaches on your rights and create loop holes for buddies, or the "evil rich; rulers without a title" that create monopolies, honey pots and holes for the poor to live in(Hi Walmart!), you're still going to be giving power to a tyrant. In lieu of another option, I greatly prefer an oppressive government that has checks and balances to who has the biggest $peen.

We need another option. This balancing act has done nothing more than tear us apart.



I'm not convinced I disagree with this at all.

The poor don't give their fare share of work. The rich by and large work much, much harder (and smarter) than the poor. Work harder, problem solved.

Studies have shown that under your Boogeyman Ronald Reagan Trickle Down Hell, the middle class and poor have progressively worked less hours per week while the rich have worked more. "Let's tax those guys more to make up for our own laziness and blame games" is not a practical solution to your perceived problems.

 

[fishonjazz]

You might pay it up front but you get it all back. There's no amount of overtime you can work to bump yourself from poor to a 45% tax bracket.

Good point. I do get a small amount back due to my interest payments on my house

 

[Harambe]

You might pay it up front but you get it all back. There's no amount of overtime you can work to bump yourself from poor to a 45% tax bracket.

Completely. Made. U--

Crap... this one's right.

 

[fishonjazz]

The poor don't give their fare share of work. The rich by and large work much, much harder (and smarter) than the poor. Work harder, problem solved.

Studies have shown that under your Boogeyman Ronald Reagan Trickle Down Hell, the middle class and poor have progressively worked less hours per week while the rich have worked more. "Let's tax those guys more to make up for our own laziness and blame games" is not a practical solution to your perceived problems.

This post upsets me..... Yet I have no rebuttal. It's mostly true

 

[Harambe]

The poor don't give their fare share of work. The rich by and large work much, much harder (and smarter) than the poor. Work harder, problem solved.

Studies have shown that under your Boogeyman Ronald Reagan Trickle Down Hell, the middle class and poor have progressively worked less hours per week while the rich have worked more. "Let's tax those guys more to make up for our own laziness and blame games" is not a practical solution to your perceived problems.

There are also studies showing that the rich have progressively paid the poor less to do jobs. So which one came first, Frankie, the chicken or the egg?



And studies that show your mom wears army boots

 

[framer]

So because one side actually says pay your fair share, you're upset with them? Are you serious? You actually think the republican blanket "Rich pay less taxes" is on a higher moral ground than "Pay your fair share... except these"? Did you think that through?

Except they really AREN"T interested in everyone paying their "fair share." If they were, they would support a tax code with much fewer exceptions. They are interested in everyone not under their protection paying more than their "fair share." They would never dream of making the people that are paying for their hookers and eventual K-Street millions sacrifice more. Hell Elizabeth Warren was flipping foreclosed houses a few years back. Just AT LEAST try to give the appearance of matching your rhetoric. . .

 

[Harambe]

Except they really AREN"T interested in everyone paying their "fair share." If they were, they would support a tax code with much fewer exceptions. They are interested in everyone not under their protection paying more than their "fair share." They would never dream of making the people that are paying for their hookers and eventual K-Street millions sacrifice more. Hell Elizabeth Warren was flipping foreclosed houses a few years back. Just AT LEAST try to give the appearance of matching your rhetoric. . .

The republicans are just as disinterested in paying their fair share, just as disinterested in the general health of America and it's people, and just as interested in helping them and their buddies. Given the chance, getting their flat tax nonsense passed, they'd do the exact same thing the Democrats do, just in a larger blanket; carve out a larger hole for them and theirs, and call it a day.

 

[fishonjazz]

There are also studies showing that the rich have progressively paid the poor less to do jobs. So which one came first, Frankie, the chicken or the egg?



And studies that show your mom wears army boots

Lol

 

[franklin]

I accept a lower wage for being lazy. I like it.

I also accept that the middle class hurts itself playing keep up with the joneses. I seriously don't get how people cry about inequality with the lavish lifestyles pretty much all of us enjoy, even the poorest. 30 grand/year in wages sounds like a big difference, but at the end of the day it buys you a slightly larger house, a nicer vehicle or two, some cable, cell, etc. upgrades, and upgrades your food allowance. That's it. It takes a loooooot of money to make a real difference in standard of living.

We aren't making less anyway, it's a myth. Quit bitching and be grateful for what you have. Richest country, richest time in the history of man. Bitch, bitch, bitch. Too many comforts have us taking things for granted.

 

[Stoked]

I accept a lower wage for being lazy. I like it.

I also accept that the middle class hurts itself playing keep up with the joneses. I seriously don't get how people cry about inequality with the lavish lifestyles pretty much all of us enjoy, even the poorest. 30 grand/year in wages sounds like a big difference, but at the end of the day it buys you a slightly larger house, a nicer vehicle or two, some cable, cell, etc. upgrades, and upgrades your food allowance. That's it. It takes a loooooot of money to make a real difference in standard of living.

We aren't making less anyway, it's a myth. Quit bitching and be grateful for what you have. Richest country, richest time in the history of man. Bitch, bitch, bitch. Too many comforts have us taking things for granted.

First world problems read by third world people keeps it in perspective. (youtube video)

I am middle class (on a good day) and a couple billion people would kill to have my lifestyle. Not because I am great but because I have running hot water, carpet, two cars, my own home, food in my fridge, a washing machine, paved roads, streets not litered with trash, cities not run by gangs...

 

[Harambe]

I accept a lower wage for being lazy. I like it.

I also accept that the middle class hurts itself playing keep up with the joneses. I seriously don't get how people cry about inequality with the lavish lifestyles pretty much all of us enjoy, even the poorest. 30 grand/year in wages sounds like a big difference, but at the end of the day it buys you a slightly larger house, a nicer vehicle or two, some cable, cell, etc. upgrades, and upgrades your food allowance. That's it. It takes a loooooot of money to make a real difference in standard of living.

We aren't making less anyway, it's a myth. Quit bitching and be grateful for what you have. Richest country, richest time in the history of man. Bitch, bitch, bitch. Too many comforts have us taking things for granted.

Yup. As soon as it gets real, play the get out of jail free card by spewing random obvious crap we already know to distract. I expect more from you mang... you're crushing my already blackened, marxist commie soviet russia norwegian socially democratic heart.

Really, we're light years ahead of other countries. I get it. Even amongst many that aren't considered third world countries. I recognize that, and I'm grateful I live here. I prove I'm grateful by paying an honest tax, and not taking breaks and loopholes. But resting on your coat tails puts you the way of packerd bell, blockbuster, polaroid, and myspace. We're in love with money and consumerism, and slowed making progress as a nation so we can build $peen empires. Because of it other countries are gaining on us. Some would argue, have surpassed us.

If you're suggesting it though, I'm ok idling for 100...150 years and shoveling our money out to other nations until they catch up to us. That's cool too.

 

[franklin]

Yup. As soon as it gets real, play the get out of jail free card by spewing random obvious crap we already know to distract. I expect more from you mang... you're crushing my already blackened, marxist commie soviet russia norwegian socially democratic heart.

Really, we're light years ahead of other countries. I get it. Even amongst many that aren't considered third world countries. I recognize that, and I'm grateful I live here. I prove I'm grateful by paying an honest tax, and not taking breaks and loopholes. But resting on your coat tails puts you the way of packerd bell, blockbuster, polaroid, and myspace. We're in love with money and consumerism, and slowed making progress as a nation so we can build $peen empires. Because of it other countries are gaining on us. Some would argue, have surpassed us.

If you're suggesting it though, I'm ok idling for 100...150 years and shoveling our money out to other nations until they catch up to us. That's cool too.

I have no clue what you're trying to get at here.

BTW my comment about you being a commie was in jest.