Elizabeth Warren for president

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



cdtm
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-street-democratic-donors-may-back-trump-if-warren-is-nominated.html



I just want to watch the world burn.

Surtur
Why not make some pow wow chow and reflect on this a bit?

cdtm
You're right, Surt.


The wealth tax isn't nearly high enough. Try 70% on top earners.

NemeBro
Originally posted by cdtm
You're right, Surt.


The wealth tax isn't nearly high enough. Try 70% on top earners. I don't see a problem.

Emperordmb
Wait so you think top earners... should have 70% of their property forcibly taken from them?

eThneoLgrRnae
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Wait so you think top earners... should have 70% of their property forcibly taken from them?


Of course she has literally zero problem with that. She's a moronic socialist. No doubt she actually thinks it's moral to do so lol.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Wait so you think top earners... should have 70% of their property forcibly taken from them? Under threat of death. thumb up

And their children's deaths.

Blakemore
You're an idiot.

Bentley
The richest men in the World should be grateful we left them live enough to get that rich. They have more than enjoyed their fortune at this point thumb up

snowdragon
Originally posted by cdtm
You're right, Surt.


The wealth tax isn't nearly high enough. Try 70% on top earners.

My problem with taxes isn't paying them its that regardless of the puppets talking of change the system has been created with a lot of bias.

Specifically, when someone speaks of "rich" due to the nature of our tax codes and corporations being "individuals" it can have a larger impact on small business if they don't take a very nuanced approach to how taxes are applied.

dadudemon
Originally posted by NemeBro
I don't see a problem.

Neither do some top-earners.

Edit - I don't either. I'm okay with any income I make over $150k being taxed at 50%.

snowdragon
Originally posted by dadudemon
Neither do some top-earners.

Edit - I don't either. I'm okay with any income I make over $150k being taxed at 50%.

It's not the personal income tax code that needs to be adjusted, it's the corporate code and since corporations are "people" it requires some thought on application.

cdtm
Originally posted by dadudemon
Neither do some top-earners.

Edit - I don't either. I'm okay with any income I make over $150k being taxed at 50%.


What's the scam there?



Studies do claim that when it comes to taxation, there's an odd trend where the upper rich generally hate tax. But, when you get to the 1% of the 1%, they start looking more like Bernie.



Are the super duper rich that altruistic? Or is there some other angle at work, like their concern being to KEEP their position as the apex predator, and taxation somehow allowing them to maintain their status (Like a regulatory practice could hurt small businesses much more then a big business, and as a result wean out potential competiton?)



This is one thing us little people never really think about. The top rankers are all in the Game of Thrones, where keeping the top leaderboard status is everything to them.

dadudemon
Originally posted by cdtm
What's the scam there?



Studies do claim that when it comes to taxation, there's an odd trend where the upper rich generally hate tax. But, when you get to the 1% of the 1%, they start looking more like Bernie.



Are the super duper rich that altruistic? Or is there some other angle at work, like their concern being to KEEP their position as the apex predator, and taxation somehow allowing them to maintain their status (Like a regulatory practice could hurt small businesses much more then a big business, and as a result wean out potential competiton?)



This is one thing us little people never really think about. The top rankers are all in the Game of Thrones, where keeping the top leaderboard status is everything to them.


Bezos' dividends could be taxed at 70% and his wealth will still grow, year over year. When you have that much money, you do nothing and your money makes more money to the tune of billions.

It becomes more of an abstract concept of money rather than actual tangible money. And when things become abstract, you view them differently.

cdtm
So there's the rub.


They don't really feel it. If they did, perhaps their attitudes would change.

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Wait so you think top earners... should have 70% of their property forcibly taken from them?
That's more than a bit misleading, isn't it? It was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who proposed a 70% tax on incomes over $10 million, but even that's not a 70% tax on total income; just the portion over $10 million. Warren's plan is a 2% tax on incomes over $50 million, among other things.

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by cdtm
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-street-democratic-donors-may-back-trump-if-warren-is-nominated.html



I just want to watch the world burn.

Warren is Bernie-lite, without the consistency. She'd be my second choice in the primaries, but why vote for an imitation when I could vote for the real deal in Sanders?

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by dadudemon
Neither do some top-earners.

Edit - I don't either. I'm okay with any income I make over $150k being taxed at 50%.

Daaaaaaamn, DDM...You been working out? naughty

cdtm
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Warren is Bernie-lite, without the consistency. She'd be my second choice in the primaries, but why vote for an imitation when I could vote for the real deal in Sanders?


Because he's pigeonholed into irrelevancy. Like it or not, he's a charactiture with no chance of being approached with an open mind by anybody.


At least with the pale imitation, opinions there's room to sway opinions.

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by cdtm
Because he's pigeonholed into irrelevancy. Like it or not, he's a charactiture with no chance of being approached with an open mind by anybody.


At least with the pale imitation, opinions there's room to sway opinions.

Whose opinions are you referring to?

Silent Master
I would perfer that rather than increase taxes on guys like Bezos, we instead forced them to pay their employees better wages/benefits.

If they actually paid their employees decent wages, so many of the employees wouldn't be dependent on programs funded by taxes.

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by Silent Master
I would perfer that rather than increase taxes on guys like Bezos, we instead forced them to pay their employees better wages/benefits.

If they actually paid their employees decent wages, so many of the employees wouldn't be dependent on programs funded by taxes.
I really don't see why we shouldn't do both.

eThneoLgrRnae
It's so sad that we live in a time when such a large percentage of americans think it's perfectly fine for the government to steal most of someone's income and give to other people.

It's funny, DDD just said in the other thread that he thinks Trump is a "terrible human being." Trump though doesn't support taking other people's money to give to other people who have no right to it as ddd and other leftists on this forum do. Doing that would be far worse than anything Trump has ever done.


Do you moroninc socialists really think the extremely wealthy will just sit idly by while they're being taxxed into oblivion? They won't. They will just move somewhere (to a different country) where they can keep more of their money. Then who're you going to overtax to pay for your socialist bs? The middle class? LOL.

Big government socialism would only succeed in ruining this country.

Putinbot1
Originally posted by NemeBro
Under threat of death. thumb up

And their children's deaths. thumb up

Putinbot1
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I really don't see why we shouldn't do both. thumb up

snowdragon
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
It's so sad that we live in a time when such a large percentage of americans think it's perfectly fine for the government to steal most of someone's income and give to other people.
.

I agree with the sentiment yet large corporations OWN the govt through the lobby. Do you want to press the issue between govt taxes and lobbies with large corporations?

Silent Master
Exactly, how else do you think Bezos managed to be worth over a hundred billion dollars when a lot of his employess are on government assistance.

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
It's so sad that we live in a time when such a large percentage of americans think it's perfectly fine for the government to steal most of someone's income and give to other people.

I think it is sad we live in a time when people like you think that billionaires earned their wealth. No one makes a billion dollars without stealing the value of the collective labor of the working-class.

Robtard
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
That's more than a bit misleading, isn't it? It was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who proposed a 70% tax on incomes over $10 million, but even that's not a 70% tax on total income; just the portion over $10 million. Warren's plan is a 2% tax on incomes over $50 million, among other things.

If you look at Warren through the fact lens, she's not as easy to label a "socialist!" and "communist!". So it's easier to just misrepresent her points.

NemeBro
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
They will just move somewhere (to a different country) where they can keep more of their money. Not if we kill them, their children, and distribute their wives into poorer communities to be rape slaves if they try it. smile

eThneoLgrRnae
Originally posted by Silent Master
Exactly, how else do you think Bezos managed to be worth over a hundred billion dollars when a lot of his employess are on government assistance.


Definitely not a big fan of lefty globalist shill Jeff Bezos... he's almost as bad as nazi collaborator George Soros, imo. Still, I can't criticize him too much considering the ton of business I give Amazon every single week. That would probably make me seem like a hypocrite to some people.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Silent Master
I would perfer that rather than increase taxes on guys like Bezos, we instead forced them to pay their employees better wages/benefits.

If they actually paid their employees decent wages, so many of the employees wouldn't be dependent on programs funded by taxes.

Yup. I agree. thumb up

You're showing why we our scores are so close on the political compass test.

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yup. I agree. thumb up

You're showing why we our scores are so close on the political compass test.

Was there a thread for this? I just made a similar thread on a boxing forum I frequent, and I'm curious to see the results on KMC as well.

dadudemon
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
It's so sad that we live in a time when such a large percentage of americans think it's perfectly fine for the government to steal most of someone's income and give to other people.

It's funny, DDD just said in the other thread that he thinks Trump is a "terrible human being." Trump though doesn't support taking other people's money to give to other people who have no right to it as ddd and other leftists on this forum do. Doing that would be far worse than anything Trump has ever done.


Do you moroninc socialists really think the extremely wealthy will just sit idly by while they're being taxxed into oblivion? They won't. They will just move somewhere (to a different country) where they can keep more of their money. Then who're you going to overtax to pay for your socialist bs? The middle class? LOL.

Big government socialism would only succeed in ruining this country.

Trump is terrible because of his multiple bouts of adultery, debauchery, opulence, selfishness, lying, violence (including thousands of murders), and gluttony. And that's just an average Monday for him.

While you pretend to believe in Christian beliefs and you support your wicked president, I'll continue to call a spade a spade.


He's an evil wicked man. Terribly evil wicked.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Was there a thread for this? I just made a similar thread on a boxing forum I frequent, and I'm curious to see the results on KMC as well.

Yes, here's a thread:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=16687326#post16687326



There's updated scores with an even better test.

Edit - And here's a party in a thread with updated scores and an even better test is linked. Start reading here:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=16949679#post16949679

BackFire
We should kill anyone who makes over $40k a year.

Rage.Of.Olympus

Eternal Idol
Originally posted by BackFire
We should kill anyone who makes over $40k a year.
Backfire 2020

cdtm

dadudemon
Originally posted by BackFire
We should kill anyone who makes over $40k a year.

Just pay or do we have to take in "total employee compensation"? Because of Obamacare, almost everyone who works for an employer, full time, even making minimum wage, gets a TEC over $40k. Means you're going to save minimum wage working part timers and the unemployed. Idiocracy future it is!

"But raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour!"

Adam_PoE

dadudemon
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Uh, no. If Amazon was not exploiting its workers, Bezos would not be a billionaire. It is almost as if the entire value generated by the company comes from their collective labor.

Not to mention, if they were being paid a living wage, the rest of us would not have to prop up their existence with social safety net programs. This, on top of the tax deficit we have to make up, because Amazon is also not paying its fair share of taxes, which means taxpayers are getting hit twice.

And for what? So Jeff Bezos can sit on more money than he could ever spend in several lifetimes? Get the **** out of here with that.

He exploited more than his workers. His team of experts also exploited tax loopholes, legal battles, strong-armed book distributers and sellers to fall within their pricing model, pushed the envelope (pun intended) with legal distribution practices (which caused some laws and regulations to have to be changed), and probably a list of a dozen other things that I'm ignorant of or forgetting.


Amazon is an example of a behemoth of capitalism. Almost a perfect series of capitalistic execution that led to their position of ultimate retail power.

cdtm
I don't understand why price fixing works.


When Nintendo said "Meet our price point, or no stock for you", why didn't the retailers all say "Ok. We're carrying Sega from now on."

dadudemon
Originally posted by cdtm
I don't understand why price fixing works.


When Nintendo said "Meet our price point, or no stock for you", why didn't the retailers all say "Ok. We're carrying Sega from now on."


Pretend you're a retailer.


You have to go to your boss and justify the loss of $200 million in margins on the new Nintendo Switch because Nintendo will not distribute to retailers that mark-up their products.

Let me know how that conversation goes.

But you might ask, "If all of them do it, there's no margins for anyone because it doesn't sell."

That's where you're wrong, bucko. Try to convince all potential retailers to cooperate to dump one of the largest video gaming companies. They are literally competitors with each other. If Target vies to dump the Nintendo Switch due to the strong-arm tactics of Nintendo, here comes Amazon and Walmart to sell the shit out of the Switch, taking over all of Target's potential lost margins: now they split those $200 million in margins between the two of them, increasing their own margins.



Capisci?

Surtur
Uh oh, Zucky don't want her:

Leaked: Facebook CEO says he will 'go to the mat and fight' if Elizabeth Warren is elected president

So sorry this is happening to this poor millionaire. Awful.

Robtard
Trumpers who were anti Facebook now cuck for the Zuck because this involves Lizzy Warren. Too funny.

Surtur
^Classic Rob, trolling again. Too funny.

Eternal Idol
0_oPh4hNajE

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.