It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sanders' campaign manager: 'we're going to have a contested convention'

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: rollanotherone
a reply to: Aazadan

Yes, but in option 1, what exactly are you taxing? Money made off of American workers? Money made from American Corporatons? Money made from... See? Loop holes will be found and used. It's not an easy solution to an already trucked up problem. But what I don't want to see is a flippant "solution" that the American people decide is good for the country. That's how we ended up with Obamacare.


You tax what you're taxing now, and you remain content with their offshore accounts hiding money because while that money isn't being taxed it's also not accessible so it's just as much a punishment for avoiding the tax man as it is circumventing the system.

Note that if you tax high enough, they'll have fewer resources to put overseas if they want to maintain the lifestyle to which they are accustomed.
edit on 13-5-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

But then the argument made is, you're punishing success.

Look, I'm not rich. Never will be. And I'm fine with that. I also don't want to punish those that are. I would just like them to pay as much as I do in taxes. If they already are, bad on me for not knowing. But if they arent...



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

You wrote a lot, and I don't want to diminish what you said, but I'm usually brief.

You're right on many points. It's actually hard to argue.

But one point I do have issue with is our increasing lack of freedoms. We are a nation of laws, but it seems as though that's also our chief export and import, lately.

Our freedoms provide the foundation for everything that you brought up. Without our freedoms, everything is moot. Without freedoms, we can't really be who we want to be.

And isn't that what freedom ultimately is?



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: carewemust
My first choice is Trump. My second choice is Bernie. My Seventeen Thousandth choice is Hillary.

Before Hillary comes Mickey Mouse, Ronald McDonald, Joe Biden, Darth Vader, and a host of other more palatable characters. In short... ANYBODY But Clinton!


It appears you lack any solid grounding in ideology if Trump is your first choice, and Sanders is the second.

That seems more like a vote for the best "celebrity", rather than a vote on policy or agenda.


You are somewhat correct, Introvert. Before 2008, I voted for whatever candidate was against murdering unborn children.

But starting in 2008, I voted for Obama because he's Black. No other reason. This time around, my #1 desire is to blow up ObamaCare. It has decimated my health insurance career, and (literally) killed one of my friends in December 2014.

TRUMP or SANDERS will get rid of ObamaCare. Hillary likes ObamaScrew. So that makes her disqualified to be President in my mind. All politics is, as they say, "close to home".



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: rollanotherone
a reply to: Aazadan

But then the argument made is, you're punishing success.

Look, I'm not rich. Never will be. And I'm fine with that. I also don't want to punish those that are. I would just like them to pay as much as I do in taxes. If they already are, bad on me for not knowing. But if they arent...


Depending on your income they may be paying a higher or lower percent than you, but in either event they're paying more in actual dollars paid. It's the middle class that pays the highest rate, that's because they have just enough assets to be worth the effort of taking, but they don't have so many assets that they can start hiding money or taking significant advantage of capital gains rates.

As a point of reference, someone making a few million a year is paying 15% +/- 1%. Someone making 50k/year is paying $8271 in taxes before deductions or an effective rate of 16.54%. After deductions it's closer to around 13%.

The problem with arguing that you're punishing success is that you're really not. Are you suddenly going to turn down a raise from $250k to $300k because you're only going to see 35k of that money rather than 50k? The answer for the vast majority of people is no. The path to success remains for anyone who wants to take the deal.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

I admire your honesty.

No matter what we happen to believe, honesty is of the utmost importance and the majority of people on this site lack that.

My respect to you.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Sorry, I'm verbose, I really can't help it. Between never getting out of college paper mode (which is all about filling up length), I type really quickly so anything that pops into my head comes out rather than just a single concise thought.

I'm not happy with the way our freedoms are going, but I also don't think they'll continue to head in that direction. There's too much pushback from private companies for data security. Individuals are starting to become educated on the concept, and programs like Tor are being used more often (and even funded by the government for security against a surveillance state). Things on that front aren't very great right now, but there is a whole lot of potential in the works to transform it.

Once security and understanding catch up to the power of information things will even out.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

How many people here have ever even been polled? I've never been polled. I find the idea of referencing, relying on, & even mentioning polls to be ludicrous. I think what's most telling is the fact more & more Americans haven't voted every year.

What happens when over 75% of the electorate doesn't vote? Will this status quo never change? It pains me to think about it.
edit on 13-5-2016 by SmurfRider because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: rollanotherone

Success & excessive hoarding of personal wealth are two very different things. No one needs more than $1million dollars/Year to exist more than comfortably. End of story. Everyone who attacks me for this idea is a slave to money/society & I pity them.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: SmurfRider
That's a slippery slope though. I enjoy eating meat, but no one needs meat to survive. Who dictates what? I agree with you, but it opens up a Pandora's box of other issues.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


Actually Introvert, I think ATS (and forums in general) are where people are most honest. There's no need to lie, or brown-nose, or be who you're not, because no one really knows each other, or has any ties to each other, beyond forum membership.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: introvert


Actually Introvert, I think ATS (and forums in general) are where people are most honest. There's no need to lie, or brown-nose, or be who you're not, because no one really knows each other, or has any ties to each other, beyond forum membership.



It also makes things hard to verify, and some people like to tell stories.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 02:11 AM
link   
a reply to: 191stMIDET




we have is taxation without representation and THAT right there my friend and fellow Sanders supporter is EXACTLY why the United States of America was even formed in the first place! Holy Flaming Hand grenades , if the Founding Fathers could see this Disgrace they would VOMIT TO DEATH


Considering what Bernie wants to do...This whole paragraph hurts my brain



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: rollanotherone
a reply to: Agit8dChop
Also, I don't watch TV.


That doesn't mean anything if you've grown up in a society which has managed to sway millions with its propaganda. You may not watch TV anymore, but think back to the cold war days and how much the information fight against the likes of communism has altered the public psyche. The word 'socialism' carries a negative stigma in the states.


And if you're not here to vote or pay taxes in the US, then your opinion holds zero merit.


No, it doesn't. What happens in the US has the potential to affect the world. The US election is in everyone's interest. I sure as hell don't want a warmongering psychopath in charge, and i don't particularly think an inexperienced and inciteful individual is suitable for the top job either. Both the presumptive nominees are not preferable candidates, neither for the US or the world...


Also, I never once ever authorized the Iraq war. Never against abortion. Think gun control is fine the way it is. (Remembers, criminals don't care about laws). And you have zero evidence to show either way if companies/corporations/rich people will follow what you believe. But what I do know is that the US has already lost jobs by the hundreds of thousands.


There are plenty of other countries which have done what the US has not, and they're doing fine. No one's saying the US has to go full socialism, but countries like Australia, New Zealand and the UK have done pretty well with their 'socialist-like' policies.
edit on 13-5-2016 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

'Comrade' would have sufficed.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital

Talk about listening to the media. "Warmongering psychopath?" No. We're not electing Pol Pot here.
I wish people would practice what they preached.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: rollanotherone
a reply to: daaskapital

Talk about listening to the media. "Warmongering psychopath?" No. We're not electing Pol Pot here.
I wish people would practice what they preached.


Sorry, but when someone leads the call for the destruction of another country and then laughs at the fact that its head of state was murdered without trial, they are a warmonger with mental problems.

If i listened to the media, i would believe Clinton to be a suitable candidate for Presidency. She clearly is not.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
Could someone explain to me why Sanders idea's are so bad ?

Free College Education - seems pretty bloody good and a good step for the future
Women's Choices - leaving abortion up to women and the doctors.
Enforce background checks in gun purchases
Stop foreign wars and military adventures
Make the wealthy pay more tax

forgive me for being a foreigner, but whats wrong with that ?

1. There is no such thing as free...the money comes from other people and rarely the "rich".
2. Agreed!
3. Yes...and at the border and of the refugees.
4. Agreed! After we wipe out the terrorists.
5. Nope...fair and equal. And the only way to do that is force a percentage and enforce it. Everyone pays 10%-14% including the rich. Cause I know you believe in being fair.

Truth is...we aren't that far apart. I want to sit there with a beer and watch Clinton slowly burn to death...but Sanders is fine. Sure, his views are pie-in-the-sky and unrealistic (including the math), but I'm fine with him as the left's nominee.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: SmurfRider
a reply to: rollanotherone

Success & excessive hoarding of personal wealth are two very different things. No one needs more than $1million dollars/Year to exist more than comfortably. End of story. Everyone who attacks me for this idea is a slave to money/society & I pity them.

I just love this ignorant thought process. Lets explore this...logically. So today, the government takes everyone's money from their jobs, etc. including the rich. They then distribute it back to everyone in the country equally and they begin doing this every year. So Joe Trashman is making $1 mil a year and so is CEO of Walmart. Ain't life great when fair an equal reign?

So...Mr. CEO realizes that he can choose to scratch his ass and paint pictures that he sells at the local flea market and still get $1 mil a year. Why not? He likes painting, even though he sucks at it and will be paid $1 mil just like Joe Trashman. But you have a little problem now. Where did all those millions that the government stole from Mr. CEO now come from...cause without it...they can't pay everyone...right?

Maybe it comes from Walmart? Right...Walmart is rich and makes money...take it from them. But they aren't making as much money anymore since Mr. CEO left. In fact, they are scaling back and laying people off.

Just a simple, anyone-over-two-should-understand example. Fair is to take the same PERCENT from everyone. Only a percentage is ever, ever, ever fair. Yes...enforce it! Make sure the rich pay their fair percentage (which for the brain dead among us is a # load more than you pay).

But this stupid idea that tearing down the top helps the bottom is simply stupid. Here...for those brain dead. Lets say you work at a company that has 10 people and the lowest sweeps the floor for $1 per hour and the highest is the owner at $10 per hour. You fall right in the middle. The company changes gears and everyone gets $5 per hour. What happens? The floor sweeper stays and smiles...you stay cause nothing has changed...the owner closes the company. Screw that getting the same pay as the floor sweeper.

Simple and general...but you get the idea.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
But this stupid idea that tearing down the top helps the bottom is simply stupid. Here...for those brain dead. Lets say you work at a company that has 10 people and the lowest sweeps the floor for $1 per hour and the highest is the owner at $10 per hour. You fall right in the middle. The company changes gears and everyone gets $5 per hour. What happens? The floor sweeper stays and smiles...you stay cause nothing has changed...the owner closes the company. Screw that getting the same pay as the floor sweeper.


Actually, the floor sweeper is likely to stay (for awhile) because he got a raise. The owner is likely to stay because he's choosing what type of labor he does. The person in the middle who stayed the same is likely to leave because they can't look to anyone they're making more money than now. With an equal pay scale they have no place in a hierarchy and become discontent.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join