Welcome to Bernie/Independent/Third Party Land

^^^ Hah! Our cynicism in part is born out of over-doing-it shannigans LIKE THIS CLASSIC:

"I don't feel NO WAYS TI'ARRD..." Hillary Clinton

The far left politic, well meaning [[eh' I'm sure) increasingly ascribes almost as party-favors how/ why we're where we are. While at the same time limiting our pathway to success if we deviate from their standard [[orthodoxy). We've come to expect better from the dem side, but these ideologies are but another form of condescension [[handling) as shown here:

'I'm black': David Webb to CNN analyst accusing him of white privilege

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacha341

^^^ Hah! Our cynicism in part is born out of over-doing-it shannigans LIKE THIS CLASSIC:

"I don't feel NO WAYS TI'ARRD..." Hillary Clinton

The far left politic, well meaning [[eh' I'm sure) increasingly ascribes almost as party-favors how/ why we're where we are. While at the same time limiting our pathway to success if we deviate from their standard [[orthodoxy). We've come to expect better from the dem side, but these ideologies are but another form of condescension [[handling) as shown here:

'I'm black': David Webb to CNN analyst accusing him of white privilege

---

ABSOLUTELY hysterical! Kudos, Zacha341! And I want to buy David Webb a beer!

Video highlighting some of Bernie's accomplisments.

https://youtu.be/44m2LHT5DLc

Bernie is proposing to spend $2.5T/10years on new programs to “guarantee every American — regardless of income — a fundamental right to a safe, decent, accessible, and affordable home” and would be paid for by a wealth tax on the top one-tenth of 1 percent of income earners.".

Bernie's proposal is not to be confused with Elizabeth Warren's proposal of a "tax of 2% on households with net worth over $50 million and 3% on households with net worth over $1 billion." Warren's proposal was expected to raise $2.75T over 10 years." Warren is raising slightly more money [[$2.75T vs $2.5T) by taking in 2 and 3% of wealth while Bernie is taking in only 1/10 of a percent of 1% of income earners. If I am understanding these numbers, they are wildly divergent. Either Bernie or Warren's numbers don't work.

Warren wants to spend 3.3 M new houses for $445B. Bernie want to spend $1.88T to build 9.4M housing units.

Almost five months before the Iowa caucuses, the progressive Working Families Party announced its endorsement of Sen. Elizabeth Warren over Sen. Bernie Sanders in the 2020 presidential race on Monday.

https://www.businessinsider.com/work...sanders-2019-9

A quick search shows they are based out of Detroit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by user oladub

Bernie is proposing to spend $2.5T/10years on new programs to “guarantee every American — regardless of income — a fundamental right to a safe, decent, accessible, and affordable home” and would be paid for by a wealth tax on the top one-tenth of 1 percent of income earners.".

Bernie's proposal is not to be confused with Elizabeth Warren's proposal of a "tax of 2% on households with net worth over $50 million and 3% on households with net worth over $1 billion." Warren's proposal was expected to raise $2.75T over 10 years." Warren is raising slightly more money [[$2.75T vs $2.5T) by taking in 2 and 3% of wealth while Bernie is taking in only 1/10 of a percent of 1% of income earners. If I am understanding these numbers, they are wildly divergent. Either Bernie or Warren's numbers don't work.

Warren wants to spend 3.3 M new houses for $445B. Bernie want to spend $1.88T to build 9.4M housing units.

---

Not sure I see a discrepancy here. I haven't done any research, but looking at your quote, one tax applies based on net worth, the other refers to annual earnings.

These are 2 different things.

Also his tax, according to your quote doesn't even specify a rate; which Warren's does.

Rather he's talking strictly about the percentage of people to whom it applies.

How exactly does that work?People say some cities are not safe,so you move everybody out of the city into a safe neighborhood?

What happens when that neighborhood becomes unsafe?

The is the problem with millionaires like Bernie and Warren,they say they are for the people but they lost touch with reality.

The last time they tried that approach government funded it was really the projects under a nice sounding name,what makes them think it will be any different when funded by a rich tax?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Not sure I see a discrepancy here. I haven't done any research, but looking at your quote, one tax applies based on net worth, the other refers to annual earnings.

These are 2 different things.

Also his tax, according to your quote doesn't even specify a rate; which Warren's does.

Rather he's talking strictly about the percentage of people to whom it applies.

---

Amount to be spent on subsidized or free housing Bernie $2.5T, Warren $2.75T

Tax targets- both are wealth taxes as far as I know:

Bernie would have to raise about the same amount of taxes from the 1/10% as Warren would from everyone with a net worth of over $50M. Neither mentioned any inflation adjustment.
As an aside: Woodrow Wilson passed the income tax and the 16th. Amendment to allow it by promising his income tax would only tax with 4% with the highest incomes. Neither mentioned passing an amendment to allow a wealth tax.

With their new wealth taxes, Bernie plans to build 3.3M housing units for $445B or an average cost of $134,848 each. Warren plans to build 9.4M housing units for $1.88T or an average cost of $191,489 each. Both will probably have to build much more expensive houses in Californian than in e.g. Arkansas to arrive at those averages. It's a win-win for California.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Amount to be spent on subsidized or free housing Bernie $2.5T, Warren $2.75T

---

Verifiable source?

Of course not.

^^^ Here's the link from Sanders:

Bernie Sanders says ‘housing must be a right’ with $2.5 trillion plan

14


Includes national rent control, community land trust, and housing assistance as an entitlement

https://www.curbed.com/2019/9/16/208...e-housing-plan

A related link from Warren:
Senator Warren Unveils Proposal to Tax Wealth of Ultra-Rich Americans

Annual Tax on Richest 0.1% of Americans Would Generate $2.75 Trillion in Revenue Over Ten Years

https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsro...rich-americans

^^^ Sorry for the messy spacing above. Cannot edit even thru captcha confirmation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

Verifiable source?

Of course not.

---

Ask Zacha how to open the links I provided.

I posted what I could above... computer acting up. I'm out for a while...:cool:...

Then there's the verifiable source thing where the source is dismissed anyway if it does not agree with desired premise [[even if source is verifiable) which is why I rarely do down the 'link' hole too much.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-...illion-donors/

Announced today:

Quote:

---

Bernie Sanders' campaign announced Thursday it has now received contributions from over 1 million individual donors.
"With 1 million contributors, this is the only Democratic campaign that has more supporters than Donald Trump," said campaign manager Faiz Shakir. "Our strength is in numbers, and that is why Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who is able to say his campaign will rely only on grassroots funding in both the primary and against Donald Trump."

---

Sanders reached the milestone seven months after he announced his candidacy in February, faster than any candidate ever.

The whole thing above is supposed to be a quote, having trouble editing.

Mainstream media forgets on purpose that Bernie is running. He's not shown in this clip of an event that he attended. He is in the top tier of candidates but instead they show losers like Klobuchar and O'Rourke.

https://youtu.be/FeAumDlnsA0

ABC host George Stephanopoulos challengedSanders over his proposal on Sunday. Stephanopoulos mentioned a January poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation that found that support for "Medicare for All" dropped sharply, from 56% to 37%, when people were told it would eliminate private health insurance companies.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/07/03/pol...0GFLXC6x9yj_4-

There is a reason that people come to this country for medical care that other countries deem to expensive to offer in thier health care programs for all.

In post #308, I raised the question of how Bernie was going to accomplish more 'progressive' things than Elizabeth Warren with a smaller wealth tax on rich people. Since then, Sen. Warren has been cornered in interviews about did she plan to increase taxes on middle class people as Bernie was honest enough to say he would. Warren always refuses to answer that question. However, Bernie has now straightened out his numbers and said he plans an 8% wealth tax on rich people to accomplish his 'progressive' agenda.

"Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders proposed an annual wealth tax topping out at 8% for the richest Americans, offering the farthest-reaching Democratic plan to pay for expanded government programs and break up concentrated fortunes. Mr. Sanders’s plan would hit more households and raise more money than the tax proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, his chief rival for progressive voters. According to an analysis by economists who consulted with both campaigns, Mr. Sanders’s plan would generate $4.35 trillion over a decade, compared with Ms. Warren’s $2.75 trillion. Mr. Sanders’s plan would increase federal revenue by about 10%."

^ the thing is,both Warren and Sanders are multi millionaires,they are not going to give up thier accumulated wealth in order to get dirty in the streets.

There is a saying,for every tax implemented there is also a back door to offset it.

The people that write the tax code also pay taxes.

The rich millionaires can afford really good accountants that the middle class and lower cannot,so as we see that is who always ends up paying for it in the end.

So to say the rich is going to pay for it is fake.

Anybody interested in a government controlled healthcare system just needs to do a little reasearch on how the VA has been handled in the past.

That is actual real time proof of an example.

Bernie visits GM strikers.

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2019/09/bernie-sanders-joins-picket-line-at-detroit-uaw-strike.html

^ he calls GM decisions to employ in Mexico corporate greed but how is that any different then any other American.

From the clothes that they wear to the utensils they eat with,all made in China,so is that indicative of personal greed because they choose to purchase items not made in this country.

The American consumer demanded cheap products and the manufacturers complied,then place the blame on corporate greed.

Yep. The 'rich' will be the mid and upper middle class, aiming downward, for more taxing. While they in turn are tethered further on the rhetoric of getting at those richer above them. So it will go...:rolleyes:...

It's old story: The 'get the rich' narrative is grand, gabbing lots of support and it feeds the base-envy mind-set of the lumpin, who care little about the outcomes but just want what others have = more voters - whippie!

The ultra rich whoever they are stay rich as they'll always exclude themselves from that which they dictate.

History has show this again and again.

Get ready to divulge your most secretive financial information if Bernie or Warren get elected. You'll be ready for a plucking. There is no way that a wealth tax can be levied if the IRS doesn't know who has what. This will be like heaven on earth for litigious lawyers. If you like IRS audits and TSA pat downs, this is for you.

"Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders on Tuesday rolled out his plan to levy an “extreme wealth tax” on millionaires and billionaires, which he plans to enforce through the creation of a “national wealth registry.”" "The Vermont senator’s plan seeks to combat capital flight and other forms of tax avoidance through a “national wealth registry” and the addition of “significant additional third party reporting requirements.” The proposal calls for increased funding for the Internal Revenue Service to cover the bureaucratic costs associated with enforcing the wealth tax."

^^^ Yeah terms such as 'national wealth registry' et al are zesty morsels put forth to provoke votes from the ascribed victim classes to covet [[justifiably so) what the um' greedy others have.

Great until you find your own rank and file self out-of-compliance of said 'registry'! Ala YOUR wealth as defined by some official of the government you didn't even directly vote for. Good times! NOT.

Setting aside the perennial rich who PLAN to benefit from such a new governance, the true rich entities of wealth along with more manufacturing will leave the US along with their companies if too pressed.

They're not going to deal with the economic syllabus of a Warren or taxing rubric from Sanders etc.

They are pretending to go along now just to keep the extreme social justice warriors off their door steps. LOL!

The poor underclass will remain, more disillusioned as another batch of promises are conceived to keep them voting appropriately.

What I don't get is how the same left leaning factions of the academy can sign on to Sanders rhetoric of 'free college'? Really!?

Working in post secondary education it's obviously expensive -- check that. But they also knows there's been a dip in some programs re. the morale and commitment of students who are PAYING!

Now they will be expected to work harder for that which is completely free?

Where's the money going to come from to run the heat and cooling of the buildings, the technology [[where applicable - hah)??

Further, who'll pay the high tenured salaries of our great educational denizens of all of this eh, progress?

I guess they are moving on to their retirements in the sky. Let the lower wage adjuncts toil on! Got it.

Or live too close to the peeps either. Hah!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

^ the thing is, both Warren and Sanders are multi millionaires, they are not going to give up thier accumulated wealth in order to get dirty in the streets.

---