Bernie Sanders Goes After Trump Supporters

a reply to: AlaskanDad

Understand your source first. The NY Post did a dishonest piece.

That data includes the massive recession from. Since recovery started they have gone back up.

Source, PEW's actual DATA

From 11.2 to 11.3 in 2014.

The population has remained essentially stable for five years, and currently makes up 3.5% of the nation’s population. The number of unauthorized immigrants peaked in 2007 at 12.2 million, when this group was 4% of the U.S. population.

So the decline was after the massive economic drop, then stayed steady since then. Your source, as well as you, are lying to yourselves

a reply to: AlaskanDad

That is the worst tax assessment I have ever seen. It doesn't even cover his entire tax plan, just the tax brackets. Are you seriously not understanding that?

This is a tax plan review:

Source

It also doesn't include where Trump plans to "cut the fat" as he has stated several times. All current plan reviews include current levels of spending.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

...

The whole reason the USA is so f*cked right now is because of jerkoffs like Mitt Romney buying company after company and offshoring every possible job he could in order to make them more profitable and then turn around and sell the companies he bought at bargain prices for BILLIONS in profits. Oh and he also tanked numerous companies by liquidating pension funds in order to fund new developments or equipment and make the company look good, sell for a tidy profit, and then boom a few months later the company fails and all the long-time employees are left with no pension.... Seriously, read about it!

...

To the defense of sharks like Mitt Romney, the only reason that those strategies are profitable is because of our current corporate tax rate being one of the highest on the planet and the laws regarding failing companies. I guess you could blame the politicians for creating the current economic environment. I don't agree with the sharking methods used by the likes of Mitt Romney but someone has to take out the garbage.

I will tell you this, if Bernie Sanders makes it to office and gets tax hikes where he wants them you will see more empty strip malls and downtown buildings because businesses will have a hard time competing here in America. I mean its bad enough as it is. Almost every strip mall I drive past has multiple empty units, its getting kind of scary. I guess its good for people that are looking for cheap rent for thier business but overall its bad for the economy.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Aazadan

That's not a source, that's a copy paste. Source your information.

Thank you!

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Aazadan

That's not a source, that's a copy paste. Source your information.

Population per country
en.wikipedia.org...

Budgets by country, in USD
en.wikipedia.org...

Take the budgets divided by the population for each country to get the amount per person (the amount will be in billions so you'll need to add a few zero's to it, or just multiply the budgets).

Note that the list of countries in the two lists don't match up 100%, you can only compare for the nations where both numbers are given. Do you need the spreadsheet I calculated this in too?

a reply to: Aazadan

You said:

The amount spent on citizens in the US is comparable to Mexico.

The methodology you used to come up with those numbers is not even close to an accurate depiction of what you stated.

Your numbers would be budget per capita, not how much the US spends on its citizens.

originally posted by: raymundoko
The methodology you used to come up with those numbers is not even close to an accurate depiction of what you stated.

Your numbers would be budget per capita, not how much the US spends on its citizens.

Sorry, poor phrasing on my part then, my fault for not being clear. Anyways, you can disagree with what I meant my point to be or agree with it which I'll restate here (and mentioned other times in this thread). For a developed country our expenses are actually quite low, and a large part of what we do spend is on defense. That's yet more proof that our current problems are that we're spending too much rather that we don't have the revenue to spend more.

Going by the above link
taxfoundation.org...

Trumps plan will cut revenues by $1 trillion per year. We're currently getting revenues of $3 trillion with $3.5 trillion in expenses. If we cut revenues that's $2 trillion we have to spend. Can you find $1.5 trillion in our budget to cut?

Bernie atleast is including a plan to fund each and everything he wants to propose, as well as eliminate the deficit while he's at it. It won't even take more money out of your pocket either because it's just moving what you would have spent at a private business to your tax bill.

a reply to: Aazadan

You mean Bernie's plan, which according to your links states:

No specific proposal.

Bernie has been very vague and has only released parts of his tax plan. How can you claim what you claim without him having even released his full tax plan?? Because he said so in a debate?

Source

Edit: Holy moly, you are also greatly confused about the US's total income per year:

Source

Total Revenue $6.5 trillion

The total revenue of the USA is not limited to the 3T paid in federal income taxes.

One example is interested on outstanding debt (our loans to others) are about 500B a year. At this point so many countries have interest only loans between each other.

One example of where Trump plans on removing expenditures is interest payments to other nations, which we pay about 250b a year in interest towards. Trump has stated several times he will win his way out of that. I'm not sure what that means exactly, but it's a specific.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Aazadan

I wonder what happens when a company hires an illegal alien and that illegal worker causes a catastrophic accident that kills actual US citizens?

I would imagine the liability would be to high to put an illegal immigrant in a job that carries such responsibility, no? Couldn't an accident at the hands on an illegal immigrant spell financial ruin and lawsuits for the employer?

I mean, you're not going to put an illegal immigrant behind the stick of a 777...

Are you suggesting all illegal aliens are unemployed? If not, and you haven't seen such a lawsuit, you've answered your own question.

[snip]

[snip]

a reply to: raymundoko

If we have $6.5 trillion in revenue and our budget is $3.5 trillion, then why do we have a deficit?

a reply to: Aazadan

The US federal budget proposed for 2015 was 1.1 trillion

All I can gather from this is that Bernie is being forced to turn his sights away from Hillary, the one person he should be focusing on if he hopes to get the nomination.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Surveyor7
Why should I support Sanders? What does his tax plan look like? I've heard Sanders is for more government, more welfare programs and more spending. I've seen enough government spending in the last 7 years to last me the rest of my life.

I don't remember all of the details but this summarizes it.

He wants to socialize several programs such as health care in order to take advantage of an economy of scale and better negotiating power to reduce costs. Under Sanders you'll still be paying a tax for health care but it will be less than now as he wants single payer. He wants to do the same with some other programs.

The issue all of you keep missing is that when you socialize something, you NO LONGER HAVE an economy of scale. There is NO negotiating on price because there is no longer any other competition. When a company does that it is called a monopoly and is illegal under many laws, when a government does it it is called "social progress".

They will set prices not based on real metrics, but by a committee. The companies that make the product will be forced to take it or close down. Which many will do. Once that is done the only way to keep going is ration what you have left.

And don't point at Europe and say it works:
1. European health care is coming down around it ears. Look at Sweden and Norway and their problems over the pass 5 years.

2. Of the ones that are still working, their population density are no wear near the US.

3. Some of the others that are still working have a tax rate though the roof. Germany has 14-42% on the middle class. and 45% on any one over 250K. UK is 20-40% PLUS up to 24% for National Health.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Surveyor7
Why should I support Sanders? What does his tax plan look like? I've heard Sanders is for more government, more welfare programs and more spending. I've seen enough government spending in the last 7 years to last me the rest of my life.

I don't remember all of the details but this summarizes it.

He wants to socialize several programs such as health care in order to take advantage of an economy of scale and better negotiating power to reduce costs. Under Sanders you'll still be paying a tax for health care but it will be less than now as he wants single payer. He wants to do the same with some other programs.

The issue all of you keep missing is that when you socialize something, you NO LONGER HAVE an economy of scale. There is NO negotiating on price because there is no longer any other competition. When a company does that it is called a monopoly and is illegal under many laws, when a government does it it is called "social progress".

They will set prices not based on real metrics, but by a committee. The companies that make the product will be forced to take it or close down. Which many will do. Once that is done the only way to keep going is ration what you have left.

And don't point at Europe and say it works:
1. European health care is coming down around it ears. Look at Sweden and Norway and their problems over the pass 5 years.

2. Of the ones that are still working, their population density are no wear near the US.

3. Some of the others that are still working have a tax rate though the roof. Germany has 14-42% on the middle class. and 45% on any one over 250K. UK is 20-40% PLUS up to 24% for National Health.

a reply to: Aazadan

We should cut tax revenues. F$%$ taxes. Balance a budget. The OMNIBUS that just went through was ridiculous. It was passed by the same people who do not want someone like Trump in office because there will be no more lobbying for 1.2 million dollars for (insert bs research) or 4 million dollars for a park that will never be built. Do a little simple research and you will find all of those. There are plenty of places to cut our expenditures in the US.

cagw.org...

Right now the Federal budget associates about 11,000 per person in the US. Almost 25% of our GDP.

www.heritage.org...

62% also goes to entitlements and defense spending has been in decline since 2006...the only change we now have is the 3 cents in out pockets ...

a reply to: Aazadan

That's only the federal discretionary spending budget deficit, which is only based on federal income taxes. The majority of our national debt is credit to ourselves to cover that specific budget gap.

Edit: The US government as a whole spent 6.18t in the 2015 fiscal year. Source

That's one of the reasons your numbers were so off earlier, you aren't including everything.

You can't compare the USA to other countries based on just federal budget. Here is why:

Taxes in Mexico all go to the federal government and then from there are marked for where they need to end up. There are very few local level taxes in Mexico, the majority of them are only property taxes.

The USA however has local, state and federal income taxes. These taxes are all part of the federal government, but each state determines how they spend their taxes on their state. Local taxes (state/local sales tax, property tax) are determined by their respective owner (city or state) on how they need to be spent. Some cities, like NYC for example, have an additional "City Personal Income Tax" where they further tax you on top of your state and federal income taxes.

Then there is the Federal Discretionary Spending Budget, legally based solely on income taxes.

So you have to count all three forms of tax when you are talking about the US government and how much they spend.

Rand Paul's tax plan is the only one that gets us out of the hole! Not to mention, his solutions leave more money in people's paychecks. He also has a 94%-adherence-to-the-Constitution rating. He will be getting my vote. If we keep spending money we don't have, we will eventually go bankrupt. That will leave this country vulnerable. I don't want to see that happen.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
Sanders is going to show Trump supporters why they'd be better off with him in office, having seen the anylisis of Trumps tax plan I would say Sanders is right! Out of our three leading politicians, two are running for president because the feel they deserve it, the third candidate is Bernie Sanders, who is running because he knows Hilary nor the republicans are in support of American people, the working class.

In a ‘Face the Nation’ interview

Senator Bernie Sanders is going after Donald Trump’s fan base.

When the Democratic presidential candidate appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, he suggested that Trump’s supporters would be better off voting for him.

Sanders reiterated a point similar to one Obama stated last week when he accused the GOP frontrunner of exploiting working-class fears. As Sanders told “Face the Nation” host John Dickerson, “Many of Trump’s supporters are working-class people and they’re angry.” They work long hours and earn much less than their wealthy counterparts, he said, and many of their jobs are being shipped overseas to cheaper manufacturing countries.

We need policies that bring us together,” Sanders told Dickerson. Policies “that take on the greed of Wall Street, the greed of corporate America, and create a middle class that works for all of us rather than an economy that works just for a few.”

source

Now for a little more details on the Trumpsters tax plan:

Analysis of Donald Trump Tax Plan Sees a Boon for Wealthy and Trillions in Debt

Donald J. Trump’s tax plan would benefit the wealthiest Americans the most while saddling the economy with trillions of dollars in new debt, according to an analysis released on Tuesday by the Tax Policy Center.

The proposal would cut the top tax rate to 25 percent from 39.6 percent, and bring down the corporate tax rate to 15 percent from 35 percent. It would also end federal income taxes on individuals making less than $25,000 and married couples who file their taxes jointly earning less than $50,000.

Despite the populist tone of his campaign, Mr. Trump’s plan appears to open new loopholes that would allow the well-off to shave their tax bills and could debilitate the economy as lawmakers look for requisite spending cuts. According to analysts at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, the cuts would mean nearly $25 trillion in lost government revenue over the next 20 years, and swell the ratio of debt to gross domestic product from about 74 percent to 180 percent.

sour ce

But then we all know the rich need more free sh]i[t,

because they always go to bed hungry,

hungry for more money that is!

Meanwhile, link.

Ewe. It's scary he's running for president.