Forum Statistics

Threads
27,576
Posts
541,635
Members
28,554
Latest Member
pbtom
What's New?

Who is worse, Sanders or Clinton?

Which of these people would make you want to move out of America MORE


  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .
Swiper

Swiper

VIP Member
Jan 8, 2011
1,588
1,539
Bro, you didn't really think Bernie a self avowed commie was a honest guy? All politicians nowdays are shitbags. It's why I'm voting Trump.

no not at all.


Obama only paid 17% he took every possible tax deduction and didn't even bother sending a check in for the rest to pay his "fair share".

I wonder what all the Bernie Sanders, Obama and Hillary supporters think of them dodging their taxes while advocating everybody pays higher taxes. not one of them bothered to send a check in to pay their "fair share" if I was a supporter of one of them I would feel insulted how they're asking you to pay more but they don't even bother.
 
HGH

HGH

MuscleHead
Jan 11, 2013
1,215
185
Bernie Sanders is a piece of shit. And his followers are worse.

I know you guys don't travel in liberal circles, but just so you know, Sanders supporters are REGULARLY posting in blog comments that they believe that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are "basically republicans" and "center republicans" at best. This is standard belief for them.

They literally think Barack Obama is much too conservative.

Think about that. These people are F*CKING BONKERS.
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,311
4,997
Honestly, I'm glad that both Obama and Sanders don't pay more than 20% in Federal taxes. In fact, I think a total tax burden (Federal, State, local, sales tax, property tax, fuel tax, etc.) of more than 25% is simply immoral in principle.

I think we as a society ought to be asking the question: at what point (% tax burden) do the citizens of this country become subjects. If the gov't can't perform all it's functions at that tax rate, then the gov't has too many things to do and we need to remove some responsibilities, IMO.
 
HGH

HGH

MuscleHead
Jan 11, 2013
1,215
185
Honestly, I'm glad that both Obama and Sanders don't pay more than 20% in Federal taxes. In fact, I think a total tax burden (Federal, State, local, sales tax, property tax, fuel tax, etc.) of more than 25% is simply immoral in principle.

I think we as a society ought to be asking the question: at what point (% tax burden) do the citizens of this country become subjects. If the gov't can't perform all it's functions at that tax rate, then the gov't has too many things to do and we need to remove some responsibilities, IMO.

sure. the money is spent stupidly.
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,311
4,997
sure. the money is spent stupidly.

I agree with you 100% there. IMO, until an entity is told there is no more money, they don't really have to re-evaluate their present budgets and programs. Further, I can't tell you how many times that my local school district, every time complaints were made about education quality, simply stated that it was a funding issue. As long as you know you're going to get another X% increase in funding, you're never forced to look at how you're presently spending the money and make any changes.

This really isn't a Democrat or Repub type complaint, this happens everywhere with all layers of govt. The best program is one that is never started, because once it is started, it'll never die.
 
Swiper

Swiper

VIP Member
Jan 8, 2011
1,588
1,539
Bernie Sanders is a piece of shit. And his followers are worse.

I know you guys don't travel in liberal circles, but just so you know, Sanders supporters are REGULARLY posting in blog comments that they believe that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are "basically republicans" and "center republicans" at best. This is standard belief for them.

They literally think Barack Obama is much too conservative.

Think about that. These people are F*CKING BONKERS.

Those Bernie voters also think income inequality is a bad thing.
 
HGH

HGH

MuscleHead
Jan 11, 2013
1,215
185
Those Bernie voters also think income inequality is a bad thing.

they're being manipulative by using the buzzword "inequality" to champion their cause.

i agree that there are some absurdities in the system, and that income disparity should be reigned in. but it should obviously remain "unequal". a janitor should be making vastly less than an attorney.
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,311
4,997
they're being manipulative by using the buzzword "inequality" to champion their cause.

i agree that there are some absurdities in the system, and that income disparity should be reigned in. but it should obviously remain "unequal". a janitor should be making vastly less than an attorney.

I've had some interesting conversations with people regarding the minimum wage and income inequality. When someone tells me that they think the minimum wage should be $15/hour, I nod my head and don't argue with them. I simply ask them if they also believe in a maximum wage, and they look at me funny. I then ask them, "you've already told me that you believe that the government has the expertise and knowledge to know what a minimum income should be, isn't it equally qualified to determine what the maximum wage should be?" It's at about this time that the person starts to squirm? They so no, and then I ask them why?

Then I tell them, if we set the minimum wage at $15/hour and the maximum wage at $16/hour, we would wipe out income inequality, which they think is one of the biggest problems we're facing. Wouldn't that be great? With a maximum wage, unions would no longer need to bargain for you, so they would go away, and you could pocket that extra money you were paying in union dues. Further, a maximum wage would reduce payroll expenses and allow the business owners to reduce prices which would increase the employees purchasing power... That usually goes over like a fart in church....

No one has been able to explain to me why it's proper for the gov't to set a minimum wage, but not a maximum wage.

The gov't has no business interfering with the market. Regardless of good intentions, it simply creates yet another market dislocation.
 
HGH

HGH

MuscleHead
Jan 11, 2013
1,215
185
I've had some interesting conversations with people regarding the minimum wage and income inequality. When someone tells me that they think the minimum wage should be $15/hour, I nod my head and don't argue with them. I simply ask them if they also believe in a maximum wage, and they look at me funny. I then ask them, "you've already told me that you believe that the government has the expertise and knowledge to know what a minimum income should be, isn't it equally qualified to determine what the maximum wage should be?" It's at about this time that the person starts to squirm? They so no, and then I ask them why?

Then I tell them, if we set the minimum wage at $15/hour and the maximum wage at $16/hour, we would wipe out income inequality, which they think is one of the biggest problems we're facing. Wouldn't that be great? With a maximum wage, unions would no longer need to bargain for you, so they would go away, and you could pocket that extra money you were paying in union dues. Further, a maximum wage would reduce payroll expenses and allow the business owners to reduce prices which would increase the employees purchasing power... That usually goes over like a fart in church....

No one has been able to explain to me why it's proper for the gov't to set a minimum wage, but not a maximum wage.

The gov't has no business interfering with the market. Regardless of good intentions, it simply creates yet another market dislocation.

You know how cities like Los Angeles have hundreds of apartment buildings that have dozens of Mexicans crammed into a one bedroom, like literally 12 people sleeping all over the place, because theyre willing to work below minimum wage? If you think thats a good way for Americans to be living then lets get rid of minomum wage. Because thats what happens.

The Market, left totally unchecked, filters all the money to a very select group of people (that doesnt include you or me either). This isnt a mystery either. In england, france, rome, everywhere thats had this system the result is a massive peasant class and a small aristocracy. No thank you.

The idea of the US as a meritocracy is also a myth. I type this sitting at one of my best friends houses, who lives off money that was earned by a relative in the 1800s whose name he doesnt ever remember without calling his grandmother and asking. No one in his family has worked in over 5 generations.
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,311
4,997
You know how cities like Los Angeles have hundreds of apartment buildings that have dozens of Mexicans crammed into a one bedroom, like literally 12 people sleeping all over the place, because theyre willing to work below minimum wage? If you think thats a good way for Americans to be living then lets get rid of minomum wage. Because thats what happens.

The Market, left totally unchecked, filters all the money to a very select group of people (that doesnt include you or me either). This isnt a mystery either. In england, france, rome, everywhere thats had this system the result is a massive peasant class and a small aristocracy. No thank you.

The idea of the US as a meritocracy is also a myth. I type this sitting at one of my best friends houses, who lives off money that was earned by a relative in the 1800s whose name he doesnt ever remember without calling his grandmother and asking. No one in his family has worked in over 5 generations.

Then let's make the minimum wage $50/hour. That will make everyone rich!

Won't raising the minimum wage simply cause more businesses to hire people and pay them under the table for less? If Mexicans are working for less than $7.35/hr, won't they continue to work for less than $15/hr? Not sure how the minimum wage helps that.

Meritocracy works pretty well in the U.S., IMO. Trust fund babies exist, but they aren't causing the plight of the poor people. In the poor neighborhoods in my area, they are wracked with dysfunction. My wife taught second grade in the hood. In her class of 22 students, 2 of them had fathers who were in the picture. Whether you're black, white, yellow, or whatever, growing up without your mom and dad screws you over. Get rid of racism, sexism, and every other kind of "ism", and if people continue to live destructive lifestyles, they're screwed.

Take the trust fund baby's money away, and he'll be screwed, but it won't help the poor. The poor will continue to live destructively, and the trust fund baby will no longer be spending or investing his money, which at least made capital available for new businesses or kept people employed at the businesses he frequented.

Here's my biggest problem with the minimum wage. Young people (ages 14-19) have very few job skills (yet). Consequently, paying them a decent wage makes little sense because initially they're adding very little value. However, after 3-6 months on the job, they've learned quite a bit, and can actually contribute to whatever business they're at. Typically, these employees slowly get pay increases. More importantly, they now have job skills that allow them to leave the low pay jobs and take a position that utilizes their skills at a higher wage. Consequently, the minimum wage jobs shouldn't be "career" jobs, but instead jobs that give low skill workers a chance to enter the job market.

If we raise the minimum wage too much, we've created a massive incentive for businesses to automate the low wage positions, thus greatly diminishing the ability of young people to enter the job market. I think we're going to see, over time, a gradual increase in youth unemployment, which cascades further into their careers. I understand the "good intentions" of the minimum wage, but it's consequences are not very compassionate in helping the people they're intended to help.
 
tommyguns2

tommyguns2

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Dec 25, 2010
6,311
4,997
Here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. My brother is on the board of directors of a small "ministry" that has a mission to help ex-cons as they exit jail. It's a small manufacturing company that does very simple things (like wash oily gloves, sand off burrs from machined piece parts, etc.), for local manufacturing shops. They pay the ex-cons minimum wage, but also provide them job training, and basic life skills. (e.g., teaching them how to use an alarm clock so they are at work on time, brushing their teeth, etc. (no lie)).

The goal is that after 6 months, these felons now have a work history, and some basic job skills so they can be hired by local businesses (at a higher wage, usually about $10-11/hour). Without some work history where these excons can show that they won't be absentee, and aren't disciplinary problems, most local businesses won't take the risk on them.

My brother indicated that if the minimum wage is raised, the local manufacturing companies will pull that piece work in-house or send it overseas, as the labor costs will just become too expensive. How does that help these low skill ex-cons who desperately need to develop job skills?

(Sadly, my brother also said that they're biggest competition is food stamps, section 8 housing, EBT, WIC, welfare, medicaide, etc. When you add all that up, an ex-cons benefits add up to about $14/hr. What incentive does the ex-con have to take that minimum wage job? So they never develop the job skills necessary from them to enter the workface and actually keep a job).
 
Swiper

Swiper

VIP Member
Jan 8, 2011
1,588
1,539
You know how cities like Los Angeles have hundreds of apartment buildings that have dozens of Mexicans crammed into a one bedroom, like literally 12 people sleeping all over the place, because theyre willing to work below minimum wage? If you think thats a good way for Americans to be living then lets get rid of minomum wage. Because thats what happens.

The Market, left totally unchecked, filters all the money to a very select group of people (that doesnt include you or me either). This isnt a mystery either. In england, france, rome, everywhere thats had this system the result is a massive peasant class and a small aristocracy. No thank you.

The idea of the US as a meritocracy is also a myth. I type this sitting at one of my best friends houses, who lives off money that was earned by a relative in the 1800s whose name he doesnt ever remember without calling his grandmother and asking. No one in his family has worked in over 5 generations.



Switzerland and Singapore, among others, have no minimum wage yet they have one of the highest incomes in the world.
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top