Current Events > AOC to Endorse Bernie Sanders for POTUS

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
pls 10/16/19 12:29:35 AM #51:	Broseph_Stalin posted... you know this is wrong Notice also how that's the only bit he latched on to. Didn't even pretend the rest was wrong. --- Do good. <cite>pls posted [p:928825188] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Broseph_Stalin posted... </cite> <quote>you know this is wrong</quote> Notice also how that's the only bit he latched on to. Didn't even pretend the rest was wrong. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#52	Post #52 was unavailable or deleted.
#53	Post #53 was unavailable or deleted.
#54	Post #54 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 12:35:44 AM #55:	Godnorgosh posted... Broseph_Stalin posted... Godnorgosh posted... The US has a regressive tax system as of 2018 you know this is wrong I've explained to you and other people here multiple times why that "study" was wrong. You know this. The US has a very progressive taxation system <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928825360] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Broseph_Stalin posted...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>The US has a regressive tax system as of 2018 </quote> you know this is wrong</quote> </quote> I've explained to you and other people here multiple times why that "study" was wrong. You know this. The US has a very progressive taxation system </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#56	Post #56 was unavailable or deleted.
pls 10/16/19 12:40:19 AM #57:	It's not a conspiracy theory at all. AOC's people literally admitted that was the primary purpose of the Green New Deal and that any climate aspects are just secondary. --- Do good. <cite>pls posted [p:928825475] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>It's not a conspiracy theory at all. AOC's people literally admitted that was the primary purpose of the Green New Deal and that any climate aspects are just secondary. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
coolboy11 10/16/19 12:44:34 AM #58:	PleaseClap posted... How disconnected do you have to be from politics to be shocked that AOC supports Sanders? Like, how did you not already figure that that was the case? isn't AOC a member of the DSA also IIRC, her supporting the most Leftist candidate in the race isn't shocking at all lol. --- "A superhero in the flesh, even at my worst I'm the best"-Big KRIT <cite>coolboy11 posted [p:928825575] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>PleaseClap posted...</cite> <quote>How disconnected do you have to be from politics to be shocked that AOC supports Sanders? Like, how did you not already figure that that was the case?</quote> isn't AOC a member of the DSA also IIRC, her supporting the most Leftist candidate in the race isn't shocking at all lol.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 12:45:04 AM #59:	Godnorgosh posted... Last year billionaires paid less in taxes than the working class. That was the conclusion of the study. What about that was wrong? Everything. I've pointed this out multiple times since that study came out. 1. Saez and Zucman have not released the figures or methodology for this "study". They gave their data to the media who are reporting it as fact, as they usually do. 2. Their estimates of wealth concentration and tax burdens are at odds with all other data we have on the subject, like the CBO's figures. 3. Most of that existing data is a few years old for a reason, it uses official statistics. Saez and Zucman have somehow produced tax estimates for a year in which we don't even have official income tax statistics yet. 4. Most bizarrely they omitted the EITC, even though the entire reason it exists is to offset regressive taxation like the payroll tax. Of course the tax system is going to appear more regressive than it is when you totally exclude refundable credits aimed at helping lower-income people. When you include transfers AND taxes things look a little different though, don't they? <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928825586] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Last year billionaires paid less in taxes than the working class. That was the conclusion of the study. What about that was wrong?</quote> Everything. I've pointed this out multiple times since that study came out. 1. Saez and Zucman have not released the figures or methodology for this "study". They gave their data to the media who are reporting it as fact, as they usually do. 2. Their estimates of wealth concentration and tax burdens are at odds with all other data we have on the subject, like the CBO's figures. 3. Most of that existing data is a few years old for a reason, it uses official statistics. Saez and Zucman have somehow produced tax estimates for a year in which we don't even have official income tax statistics yet. 4. Most bizarrely they omitted the EITC, even though the entire reason it exists is to offset regressive taxation like the payroll tax. Of course the tax system is going to appear more regressive than it is when you totally exclude refundable credits aimed at helping lower-income people. When you include transfers AND taxes things look a little different though, don't they? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SapphireClassic 10/16/19 1:00:12 AM #60:	Why doesn't she want Warren? <cite>SapphireClassic posted [p:928826004] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Why doesn't she want Warren?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 10/16/19 1:01:12 AM #61:	pls posted... Webmaster4531 posted... You clearly read this when you replied to it. It's functionally not open borders like you claim. I responded to that post in the topic. It's clear what AOC's real goals are based on her actions. Which is not surprising, Marxists in general want open borders or a border that is so pathetic to cross / an immigration process that is basically just someone stamping "Approved" on any application I literally said you replied to it and no that bill does not imply she wants open borders. No where in your post did you contest the claim that the bill is functionally not open borders. Spare me the racist conspiracies of AOC's motivation. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:928826031] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>pls posted...</cite> <quote>Webmaster4531 posted... </cite> <quote>You clearly read this when you replied to it. It's functionally not open borders like you claim.</quote> I responded to that post in the topic. It's clear what AOC's real goals are based on her actions. Which is not surprising, Marxists in general want open borders or a border that is so pathetic to cross / an immigration process that is basically just someone stamping "Approved" on any application </quote> I literally said you replied to it and no that bill does not imply she wants open borders. No where in your post did you contest the claim that the bill is functionally not open borders. Spare me the racist conspiracies of AOC's motivation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
jumi 10/16/19 1:03:49 AM #62:	Politics posted... My girl Warren will still win. --- XBL Gamertag: Rob Thorsman Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/robertvsilvers <cite>jumi posted [p:928826093] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Politics posted... </cite> <quote>My girl Warren will still win.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#63	Post #63 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 1:17:20 AM #64:	Godnorgosh posted... Again, did you read the 66-page PDF which outlines their methodology? Godnorgosh posted... There's a 66-page PDF with all the details. Did you read it? I think you might be confusing this study (which is based on a yet to be released book) with some of their earlier work. Feel free to post it though if you think I'm wrong. Godnorgosh posted... Do other sources account for rates of tax avoidance to determine the actual tax paid? They are based on effective tax rates, yes. Godnorgosh posted... Factoring in the EITC would not affect the conclusion that the very wealthy pay lower tax rates 1. They don't pay lower tax rates than the poor and 2. It's incredibly dishonest to look at tax burdens without factoring in refundable credits. The US has a very progressive tax system, that's just a fact. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928826401] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Again, did you read the 66-page PDF which outlines their methodology?</quote> Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>There's a 66-page PDF with all the details. Did you read it? </quote> I think you might be confusing this study (which is based on a yet to be released book) with some of their earlier work. Feel free to post it though if you think I'm wrong. Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Do other sources account for rates of tax avoidance to determine the actual tax paid? </quote> They are based on effective tax rates, yes. Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Factoring in the EITC would not affect the conclusion that the very wealthy pay lower tax rates</quote> 1. They don't pay lower tax rates than the poor and 2. It's incredibly dishonest to look at tax burdens without factoring in refundable credits. The US has a very progressive tax system, that's just a fact.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#65	Post #65 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 2:15:37 AM #66:	My takeaway is that if a study does not release figures or methodology and diverges from all existing data we have, we really shouldn't be posting it as fact. And if they're going to omit the EITC, it stops being a legitimate study and becomes political propaganda. You can't omit everything that makes the system progressive and then call it regressive. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928827603] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>My takeaway is that if a study does not release figures or methodology and diverges from all existing data we have, we really shouldn't be posting it as fact. And if they're going to omit the EITC, it stops being a legitimate study and becomes political propaganda. You can't omit everything that makes the system progressive and then call it regressive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#67	Post #67 was unavailable or deleted.
Balrog0 10/16/19 1:32:42 PM #68:	Omar has officially endorsed Sanders https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/1184310148191473666 Not sure when to expect the other two I hear Pressley is eyeing a Senate seat so she's probably hopeful Warren wins and endorses her as the replacement --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:928843926] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Omar has officially endorsed Sanders https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/1184310148191473666 Not sure when to expect the other two I hear Pressley is eyeing a Senate seat so she's probably hopeful Warren wins and endorses her as the replacement </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Monolith1676 10/16/19 1:38:36 PM #69:	Sanders needs to dropout if he is already having heartattacks at 78 years old. --- Gears of War 1 Assassination Legend <cite>Monolith1676 posted [p:928844163] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Sanders needs to dropout if he is already having heartattacks at 78 years old. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ElatedVenusaur 10/16/19 1:40:07 PM #70:	Balrog0 posted... Omar has officially endorsed Sanders https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/1184310148191473666 Not sure when to expect the other two I hear Pressley is eyeing a Senate seat so she's probably hopeful Warren wins and endorses her as the replacement I'm not surprised she's holding back, for a number of reasons, the biggest probably being what you stated: she has her eyes on Warren's Senate seat and doesn't want to alienate her(or the Mass Democratic Party) by endorsing an out-of-state Senator. It also bears mentioning Rep. Pressley is more conventional on Israel than the rest of The Squad and was a relatively conventional Democratic politician until she sought the endorsement of the Justice Democrats for her primary challenge of a conventionally-progressive incumbent. <cite>ElatedVenusaur posted [p:928844207] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote>Omar has officially endorsed Sanders https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/1184310148191473666 Not sure when to expect the other two I hear Pressley is eyeing a Senate seat so she's probably hopeful Warren wins and endorses her as the replacement </quote> I'm not surprised she's holding back, for a number of reasons, the biggest probably being what you stated: she has her eyes on Warren's Senate seat and doesn't want to alienate her(or the Mass Democratic Party) by endorsing an out-of-state Senator. It also bears mentioning Rep. Pressley is more conventional on Israel than the rest of The Squad and was a relatively conventional Democratic politician until she sought the endorsement of the Justice Democrats for her primary challenge of a conventionally-progressive incumbent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Awesome 10/16/19 1:41:41 PM #71:	shes doing this because she knows she'll lose her re-election next year and she hopes if sanders wins he'll give her a cabinet position. --- Hello. <cite>Awesome posted [p:928844265] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>shes doing this because she knows she'll lose her re-election next year and she hopes if sanders wins he'll give her a cabinet position.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Medzzz 10/16/19 1:55:19 PM #72:	Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her. --- Hi <cite>Medzzz posted [p:928844751] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 10/16/19 1:59:00 PM #73:	Medzzz posted... Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her. This is a pretty idiotic take in itself. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:928844905] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Medzzz posted...</cite> <quote>Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her.</quote> This is a pretty idiotic take in itself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 10/16/19 2:01:54 PM #74:	ElatedVenusaur posted... I'm not surprised she's holding back, for a number of reasons, the biggest probably being what you stated: she has her eyes on Warren's Senate seat and doesn't want to alienate her(or the Mass Democratic Party) by endorsing an out-of-state Senator. It also bears mentioning Rep. Pressley is more conventional on Israel than the rest of The Squad and was a relatively conventional Democratic politician until she sought the endorsement of the Justice Democrats for her primary challenge of a conventionally-progressive incumbent. She was a city council member, right? That's kind of a difficult position to distinguish yourself in politically, to be fair (imo) --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:928845018] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>ElatedVenusaur posted... </cite> <quote>I'm not surprised she's holding back, for a number of reasons, the biggest probably being what you stated: she has her eyes on Warren's Senate seat and doesn't want to alienate her(or the Mass Democratic Party) by endorsing an out-of-state Senator. It also bears mentioning Rep. Pressley is more conventional on Israel than the rest of The Squad and was a relatively conventional Democratic politician until she sought the endorsement of the Justice Democrats for her primary challenge of a conventionally-progressive incumbent.</quote> She was a city council member, right? That's kind of a difficult position to distinguish yourself in politically, to be fair (imo) </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#75	Post #75 was unavailable or deleted.
WellKnownNomad 10/16/19 3:23:24 PM #76:	Medzzz posted... Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1g84wnDoRA" data-time=" --- "Anime is for jerks" - Jeff Gerstmann <cite>WellKnownNomad posted [p:928848388] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Medzzz posted...</cite> <quote>Not good for Sanders. If she was smart she would endorse Trump to make him look bad just as her.</quote> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1g84wnDoRA" data-time="</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Paper_Okami 10/16/19 3:29:21 PM #77:	Awesome posted... she'll lose her re-election next year not with those high approval ratings in her on own district lmao --- "Conceit, arrogance and egotism are the essentials of patriotism"- Emma Goldman "Wimmy Wham Wham Wozzle!" -Slurms MacKenzie <cite>Paper_Okami posted [p:928848599] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Awesome posted... </cite> <quote>she'll lose her re-election next year</quote> not with those high approval ratings in her on own district lmao </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sylverlolol 10/16/19 3:31:27 PM #78:	Iodine posted... pls posted... Strongly reconsidering my support and any future donations for Bernie. AOC is a nut case and if she is supporting him, that means I was in the wrong to do so. Gonna take a gander at Warren or Biden instead. Yang is cool but he has no chance. You like Bernie but hate AOC? They have largely the same policies. pls is a republican that pretends to be liberal --- This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. <cite>sylverlolol posted [p:928848677] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Iodine posted...</cite> <quote>pls posted...</cite> <quote>Strongly reconsidering my support and any future donations for Bernie. AOC is a nut case and if she is supporting him, that means I was in the wrong to do so. Gonna take a gander at Warren or Biden instead. Yang is cool but he has no chance. </quote> You like Bernie but hate AOC? They have largely the same policies.</quote> pls is a republican that pretends to be liberal</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 6:02:02 PM #79:	Godnorgosh posted... Q: You also have a broader definition of income, right? Youre saying billionaires get certain income that theyre not reporting to the Internal Revenue Service. Zucman: The very rich can earn a lot of economic income while reporting very little. One striking example is Warren Buffett. He is worth $80 billion, and his true economic income per year is something like 6% of that, close to $5 billion. And yet what he reports in his tax returns -- and we know this because he discloses this himself -- is taxable income on the order of $10 million. The reason is that he owns Berkshire Hathaway, and he instructed the company not to pay dividends. So the only taxable income he gets is when he sells a few shares and pays taxes on this realized income. Thats a rate of essentially 0%. Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are in the same situation. There are also billionaires who have high tax rates, but some have very, very low rates. I don't think you understand what they're saying here. When Buffett pockets dividends or sells stocks for a profit, it is taxed. Obviously no one is taxed when an asset they own rises in value, as that would be a terrible idea. They don't actually make money off it until it's sold. A lot of socialist don't understand the difference between net worth and income. Buffett isn't reporting $10 million in taxable income because he's dodging taxes, it's because he legitimately only made $10 million in taxable income in that year. The $80 billion part isn't income, it can't be taxed. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928854975] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>Q: You also have a broader definition of income, right? Youre saying billionaires get certain income that theyre not reporting to the Internal Revenue Service. Zucman: The very rich can earn a lot of economic income while reporting very little. One striking example is Warren Buffett. He is worth $80 billion, and his true economic income per year is something like 6% of that, close to $5 billion. And yet what he reports in his tax returns -- and we know this because he discloses this himself -- is taxable income on the order of $10 million. The reason is that he owns Berkshire Hathaway, and he instructed the company not to pay dividends. So the only taxable income he gets is when he sells a few shares and pays taxes on this realized income. Thats a rate of essentially 0%. Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are in the same situation. There are also billionaires who have high tax rates, but some have very, very low rates.</quote> I don't think you understand what they're saying here. When Buffett pockets dividends or sells stocks for a profit, it is taxed. Obviously no one is taxed when an asset they own rises in value, as that would be a terrible idea. They don't actually make money off it until it's sold. A lot of socialist don't understand the difference between net worth and income. Buffett isn't reporting $10 million in taxable income because he's dodging taxes, it's because he legitimately only made $10 million in taxable income in that year. The $80 billion part isn't income, it can't be taxed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#80	Post #80 was unavailable or deleted.
#81	Post #81 was unavailable or deleted.
#82	Post #82 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 6:15:16 PM #83:	Godnorgosh posted... The income that they're referring to is about $5 billion. All of that should be taxable, but he only reported $10 million. No, they are talking about economic income. Godnorgosh posted... He is worth $80 billion, and his true economic income per year is something like 6% of that, close to $5 billion. https://bizfluent.com/info-8782291-economic-income-vs-gross-income.html Economic income is, like I said, the rise in value of an asset. That is NOT taxable, for good reason. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928855515] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>The income that they're referring to is about $5 billion. All of that should be taxable, but he only reported $10 million. </quote> No, they are talking about economic income. Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>He is worth $80 billion, and his true economic income per year is something like 6% of that, close to $5 billion.</quote> https://bizfluent.com/info-8782291-economic-income-vs-gross-income.html Economic income is, like I said, the rise in value of an asset. That is NOT taxable, for good reason.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anteaterking 10/16/19 6:18:26 PM #84:	Broseph_Stalin posted... only made $10 million in taxable income in that year It feels like you're making a circular argument. People who think that Buffett should pay more in taxes don't think that he's illegally evading taxes. --- http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b136/Anteaterking/scan00021.jpg http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b136/Anteaterking/scan00021.jpg <cite>Anteaterking posted [p:928855660] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Broseph_Stalin posted...</cite> <quote>only made $10 million in taxable income in that year</quote> It feels like you're making a circular argument. People who think that Buffett should pay more in taxes don't think that he's illegally evading taxes.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 6:21:51 PM #85:	Anteaterking posted... People who think that Buffett should pay more in taxes don't think that he's illegally evading taxes. No, he actually thinks it's taxable income which is why he's claiming Buffett "didn't report it". And taxing assets for gaining value is a fucking terrible idea. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928855810] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Anteaterking posted...</cite> <quote>People who think that Buffett should pay more in taxes don't think that he's illegally evading taxes. </quote> No, he actually thinks it's taxable income which is why he's claiming Buffett "didn't report it". And taxing assets for gaining value is a fucking terrible idea.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#86	Post #86 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 7:11:58 PM #87:	If you have to expand the definition of income to include money he's not even making then yes, you are making political propaganda and not a legitimate study. You wouldn't have to go to such lengths to show how regressive a system is if it was actually regressive. And no I don't believe people should be taxed for something that hasn't even made them any money. There's a reason wealth taxes have failed everywhere they've been introduced. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928857760] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>If you have to expand the definition of income to include money he's not even making then yes, you are making political propaganda and not a legitimate study. You wouldn't have to go to such lengths to show how regressive a system is if it was actually regressive. And no I don't believe people should be taxed for something that hasn't even made them any money. There's a reason wealth taxes have failed everywhere they've been introduced.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
rookieplayer03 10/16/19 7:18:31 PM #88:	I think the best ticket to beat Trump is Gabbard/Yang but I dont think either will get far as they arent part of the establishment --- Princes are born. Kings are made. https://gfycat.com/BowedGrimAddax <cite>rookieplayer03 posted [p:928858010] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>I think the best ticket to beat Trump is Gabbard/Yang but I dont think either will get far as they arent part of the establishment </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Doom_Art 10/16/19 7:20:32 PM #89:	rookieplayer03 posted... Gabbard/Yang Why --- Not removing this until Mega Man 64 is released on the Wii Virtual Console. Started on: 12/1/2009 https://imgur.com/mPvcy <cite>Doom_Art posted [p:928858094] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>rookieplayer03 posted... </cite> <quote>Gabbard/Yang</quote>Why </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 7:21:18 PM #90:	thats a shokan alt fyi <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928858123] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>thats a shokan alt fyi</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/16/19 7:23:24 PM #91:	@Broseph_Stalin Don't you realize that no matter what, Godnorgosh will never recant his opinions because at the foundation he cares more about revolutionary communism than anything else, even if he is wrong? --- Do good. <cite>pls posted [p:928858212] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>@Broseph_Stalin Don't you realize that no matter what, Godnorgosh will never recant his opinions because at the foundation he cares more about revolutionary communism than anything else, even if he is wrong? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MrToothHasYou 10/16/19 7:26:43 PM #92:	So according to Politico, Bernie got the call from AOC telling him she was going to endorse while he was in the hospital from his heart attack. --- http://weareontherun.bandcamp.com ^^^^^ HEY! ^^^ LISTEN! ^^^^^ <cite>MrToothHasYou posted [p:928858344] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>So according to Politico, Bernie got the call from AOC telling him she was going to endorse while he was in the hospital from his heart attack. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
rookieplayer03 10/16/19 7:29:40 PM #93:	Doom_Art posted... Why I think its because they talk more about the country rather than other candidates. At the end of the day, I think thats what matters to most people whore voting --- Princes are born. Kings are made. https://gfycat.com/BowedGrimAddax <cite>rookieplayer03 posted [p:928858466] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Doom_Art posted... </cite> <quote>Why</quote> I think its because they talk more about the country rather than other candidates. At the end of the day, I think thats what matters to most people whore voting </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#94	Post #94 was unavailable or deleted.
Broseph_Stalin 10/16/19 8:42:54 PM #95:	Godnorgosh posted... "See, when you look at the relatively small proportion of income for the extremely wealthy we've decided is taxable Economic income isn't taxable for anyone, because it would be a very dumb thing to do. You can't tax a person for owning baseball cards when the haven't actually made money off them. Godnorgosh posted... So really you're just saying we shouldn't tax the vast majority of income for the top 0.1%, because it's economic income I'm saying we shouldn't tax money that someone doesn't have. I hate admitting this, but proudclad has a point. You're arguing with emotion and don't really care if the facts support you or not, it's just about blaming the rich for everything. I will try to make this as simple as possible. Buffett's net worth increases by $5 billion in a given year. That's economic income. The government decides that needs to be taxed, let us say at a very low rate of 1%. 1% of $5 billion is $50 million. He owes the government $50 million based on what he owns. He only earned $10 million that year. You have now established an effective tax rate of 500%. Do you see why wealth taxes always fail? Do you understand why they never bring in the projected amount of revenue, why they lead to capital flight and why virtually every country that adopted them ditched them? Zucman doesn't actually explain how you tax money people aren't making, he just claims it's needed because... because. I can't keep arguing reason against emotion. There's no point. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:928861442] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote> "See, when you look at the relatively small proportion of income for the extremely wealthy we've decided is taxable</quote> Economic income isn't taxable for anyone, because it would be a very dumb thing to do. You can't tax a person for owning baseball cards when the haven't actually made money off them. Godnorgosh posted...</cite> <quote>So really you're just saying we shouldn't tax the vast majority of income for the top 0.1%, because it's economic income</quote> I'm saying we shouldn't tax money that someone doesn't have. I hate admitting this, but proudclad has a point. You're arguing with emotion and don't really care if the facts support you or not, it's just about blaming the rich for everything. I will try to make this as simple as possible. Buffett's net worth increases by $5 billion in a given year. That's economic income. The government decides that needs to be taxed, let us say at a very low rate of 1%. 1% of $5 billion is $50 million. He owes the government $50 million based on what he owns. He only earned $10 million that year. You have now established an effective tax rate of 500%. Do you see why wealth taxes always fail? Do you understand why they never bring in the projected amount of revenue, why they lead to capital flight and why virtually every country that adopted them ditched them? Zucman doesn't actually explain how you tax money people aren't making, he just claims it's needed because... because. I can't keep arguing reason against emotion. There's no point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#96	Post #96 was unavailable or deleted.
Machete 10/16/19 8:56:24 PM #97:	MrToothHasYou posted... She needs the left wing to get to the general, though. I dont think shes going to win over centrist Dem voters over Biden or, say, Buttigieg. Antifar posted... who is from Massachusetts, so make of that what you will. I'm from MA too and am center left (Independent) and I plan to vote for whichever Democrat comes out on top, but Warren is the one I'd most like to see get the nomination. --- https://talktotransformer.com The Internet is kind of the whole ****ing Internet. <cite>Machete posted [p:928862025] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>MrToothHasYou posted...</cite> <quote>She needs the left wing to get to the general, though. I dont think shes going to win over centrist Dem voters over Biden or, say, Buttigieg. </quote> Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>who is from Massachusetts, so make of that what you will.</quote> I'm from MA too and am center left (Independent) and I plan to vote for whichever Democrat comes out on top, but Warren is the one I'd most like to see get the nomination.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ElatedVenusaur 10/16/19 11:17:36 PM #98:	MrToothHasYou posted... So according to Politico, Bernie got the call from AOC telling him she was going to endorse while he was in the hospital from his heart attack. https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/bernie-sanders-aoc-endorsement-2020-election-048586 It seems to have been the catalyst for both AOC and Ilhan Omar, though the latter in particular already planned on endorsing Bernie. AOC was inspired to get involved in politics by Bernie's 2016 campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHlJnAMgg3g" data-time=" Rep. Omar has already cut an official endorsement video for Bernie. She also cites Bernie's 2016 campaign as an inspiration. <cite>ElatedVenusaur posted [p:928867207] in AOC to End... [t:78089088]...</cite> <quote>MrToothHasYou posted...</cite> <quote>So according to Politico, Bernie got the call from AOC telling him she was going to endorse while he was in the hospital from his heart attack. </quote> https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/bernie-sanders-aoc-endorsement-2020-election-048586 It seems to have been the catalyst for both AOC and Ilhan Omar, though the latter in particular already planned on endorsing Bernie. AOC was inspired to get involved in politics by Bernie's 2016 campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHlJnAMgg3g" data-time=" Rep. Omar has already cut an official endorsement video for Bernie. She also cites Bernie's 2016 campaign as an inspiration.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > AOC to Endorse Bernie Sanders for POTUS (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > AOC to Endorse Bernie Sanders for POTUS