Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
If Sanders is even close in New York, this could remain interesting.
'A 25% cut would still leave the United States with more than double the defense budget of China.
$150 billion free to spend on Americans (theoretically).
'
China defense planning includes losing 30 per cent of their population as they ramp up eventually win the war. It's a good plan.
I had my first one (in my own FB post) last night! My Hilary supporting friend was civil and kept his cool. My Bernie supporting acquaintance was kind of a dick about it.
Like, way to keep that stereotype going.
as Sinead O'Conner once said: "fight the real enemy."
I would hazard a guess that the people in this thread who are worried about taxes are also probably not terribly insecure on the health insurance front.
I would also hazard a guess, for the upper middle class, a Bernie-like tax plan would be pretty unambiguously negative. That's not an argument that such a plan is necessarily bad, but it is an argument that a major segment of the American population that at least doesn't feel like it has a ton of extra disposable income would be hit in a noticeable way.
This. With the Republican Party imploding as it is right now, this is a great opportunity for the Democrats .
I thought his tax pal would tax high frequency/high risk trades on the stock market. and that'll fund shit tons of money for his plans.
No mention of his proposed tax on financial transactions of the Wall Street variety. At a fraction of the rate of existing sales taxes (which it would be analogous to), that alone would help significantly in funding such things as university tuition. In the hypothetical future world where such things became law.
There is absolutely nothing about this plan that is a good idea. It's strictly pandering to anti-Wall Street anxiety. At the very least, the tax on trades is strictly more harmful than an increase on tax rates for all income at a certain level.
I do think the education needs to be better-funded in this country, though, and I'm not against raising taxes to do it. BUT, I think that making public universities free is a ridiculous place to allocate increased education dollars. First of all, most public universities aren't really what's contributions to massive debt problems, being relatively affordable. (I'm looking at you, small liberal arts schools and for-profit degree mills.) Second of all, this would be a fairly regressive way to spend money. Where it really should be spent is on K-12 education in low-income communities, not buying the votes of white college-age Bernie Bros from relatively well-off families (okay, sorry, stereotyping a bit off of what I see at UT).
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Really? A tax of maybe max. 1% (or less) or so on certain financial transactions is that harmful?
I wonder if at this point the useful parts of university education (ie. not mere credentialism, diploma-for-the-wall stuff) should properly be considered an essential along with the grade 1-12 primary and secondary education. My own experience, many years gone now and in a different country, is that at least the first year of a typical undergraduate course would have been better off treated as a sort of high school 'grade 13' and made available to everyone on the same basis as high school already is. I'm drifting a little here, off the topic.
China defense planning includes losing 30 per cent of their population as they ramp up eventually win the war. It's a good plan.
you can stop right there and add, and a decent chance to pick up? the senate (that will advise and consent)
a tax pal? is this a socialist concept?
Census won't matter that much Dems are too stupid to get the govnorships and legislators to control the gerrymandering.I don't even think about the Democrats picking up the Senate because I view it as an absolute given. The Republicans have to defend so many damn seats that they won in 2010 when nobody voted...the only real struggle for Dems is that they gave up too many damn seats in the 2014 elections that they now need to win a lot more to win it all back...but I think it's totally doable, and with a shitty Republican nominee hurting everyone down-ballot, it might even be a cake walk.
But the House? I mean, holy hell, even the out-of-touch Clinton campaign gave up on that pipe dream forever ago. We're stuck with Republican obstructionism until at least after the next census.