Elizabeth Warren for president

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.

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

You're right, Surt.

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

Originally posted by cdtm
You're right, Surt.

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

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

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.

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

And their children's deaths.

You're an idiot.

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 👆

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.

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%.

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.

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.

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.

So there's the rub.

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

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

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?

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

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.

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?