Nate Silver: Stop Comparing Donald Trump And Bernie Sanders

[imawhosure]

It is amazing. The socialists on this site are railing against billionaires. Do you know how many billionaires we have in this country? Between 540, and 550.

They are also railing against wealth distribution. It has consistently been more and more going to the top 1%. Why is that? How about because they can buy politicians, and of course lefties want to create a bigger government that those 540 to 550 can buy. That is brilliant, isn't it!

None of the republican outsiders are for crony capitalism. Neither is Sanders, but they are for Sanders. Why? Because he is not about creating jobs, he is about free stuff!!! Free college education. But we don't have any money. FORGET THAT, vote Sanders. Free healthcare from the government. But we don't have any money. Oh, TUT, TUT; forget that, vote Bernie. Expand social security. But we are broke. RACIST you are, we will just print more money, vote Bernie.

I agree with the Doctor. The question isn't is Trump going to win the nomination, the question is.......which one is going to beat him out. Same with Sanders. If Biden or Warren get in, it is over for both Sanders and Hillary.

The only real question is.................will the republicans push in Bush or Kasich to absolutely lose, or will they allow Carson, Cruz, or Rubio to have a fair chance; thus making them a 50-50 or better proposition?

The strongest Democratic candidate with longevity by far would be Biden. He is far from great, but at this point, he is all the Democrats have. Those of you who are thinking Warren, better think again. She has a lot of stuff in the closet; but hey, I am not a Democrat anyway, so I hope all of you go Sanders.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I think your analysis is spot on. I think the ideal candidate for the Dems at this point would be Biden. On the GOP side Kasich or Rubio. Those three guys have the best chance to win the Presidency.

The problem is both the Dems and GOP Parties are in disarray due to insurgence candidates. It will be interesting to see if either Party comes to it's senses and nominates the person with the best chance to win.

 

[Zander]

If Slow Joe Biden does not run, Democrats are facing the worst possible scenario- the choice between hiLIARy; an angry arrogant harridan that people view as untrustworthy, false, and insincere. Or Bernie: a crackpot socialist who sees nothing wrong with 90% tax rates, a ballooning national debt, and a "free" government program for every human problem.

I haven't seen bernie advocate a 90% tax rate.

Google took all of .000001 seconds. This is from Think Progress...

In an interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who is running for the Democratic presidential candidacy, said he could back a 90 percent top marginal tax rate.

Harwood brought up that some have likened efforts to combat income inequality to Nazi Germany. Sanders noted sarcastically, “When radical, socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, I think the highest marginal tax rate was something like 90 percent.”

Harwood followed up by asking, “When you think about something like 90 percent, you don’t think that’s obviously too high?” to which Sanders replied, “No.”

He continued, “What I think is obscene…when you have the top one-tenth of one percent owning almost as much as the bottom 90.”
Bernie Sanders Would Tax The Income Of The Wealthiest Americans At 90 Percent​

 

[Zander]

I think your analysis is spot on. I think the ideal candidate for the Dems at this point would be Biden. On the GOP side Kasich or Rubio. Those three guys have the best chance to win the Presidency.

The problem is both the Dems and GOP Parties are in disarray due to insurgence candidates. It will be interesting to see if either Party comes to it's senses and nominates the person with the best chance to win.

Sorry bro, you're wrong. TRUMP will be the GOP nominee. None of the GOP candidates can beat him. He has UNSTOPPABLE MOMENTUM. He's drawing crowds of 20,000 over a year before the election.

 

[MikeK]

If Slow Joe Biden does not run, Democrats are facing the worst possible scenario- the choice between hiLIARy; an angry arrogant harridan that people view as untrustworthy, false, and insincere. Or Bernie: a crackpot socialist who sees nothing wrong with 90% tax rates, a ballooning national debt, and a "free" government program for every human problem.

FDR imposed a 97% tax rate on the highest income categories. Eisenhower continued that redistribution effort at 90% and it attended the most prosperous and productive decades in our history, the 1940s through to the 1980s, the era which gave rise to the Great American Middle Class.

Then came Ronald Reagan, the great de-regulator, who gave us "trickle-down economics," which turned out to be siphon-up economics and led us down the path to today wherein one percent of the population has hoarded over ninety percent of the Nation's wealth resources.

Could be a "crackpot socialist," which is what they called FDR, is exactly what contemporary America needs. All that deviously acquired and hoarded wealth must be redistributed to restore America to it's supremely productive status.

 

[Zander]

If Slow Joe Biden does not run, Democrats are facing the worst possible scenario- the choice between hiLIARy; an angry arrogant harridan that people view as untrustworthy, false, and insincere. Or Bernie: a crackpot socialist who sees nothing wrong with 90% tax rates, a ballooning national debt, and a "free" government program for every human problem.

FDR imposed a 97% tax rate on the highest income categories. Eisenhower continued that redistribution effort at 90% and it attended the most prosperous and productive decades in our history, the 1940s through to the 1980s, the era which gave rise to the Great American Middle Class.

Then came Ronald Reagan, the great de-regulator, who gave us "trickle-down economics," which turned out to be siphon-up economics and led us down the path to today wherein one percent of the population has hoarded over ninety percent of the Nation's wealth resources.

Could be a "crackpot socialist," which is what they called FDR, is exactly what contemporary America needs. All that deviously acquired and hoarded wealth must be redistributed to restore America to it's supremely productive status.

Mike you are partially right. We do need tax reform. We need to Cut rates and INCREASE INCOME. Why do we have a deduction for mortgage interest?

 

[MikeK]

Mike you are partially right. We do need tax reform. We need to Cut rates and INCREASE INCOME. Why do we have a deduction for mortgage interest?

Then it looks like we're on the same page. I am aware of no good reason for the mortgage interest deduction, which is only one of many elements of the tax structure that needs to be addressed.

 

[Zander]

Mike you are partially right. We do need tax reform. We need to Cut rates and INCREASE INCOME. Why do we have a deduction for mortgage interest?

Then it looks like we're on the same page. I am aware of no good reason for the mortgage interest deduction, which is only one of many elements of the tax structure that needs to be addressed.

I believe we should all be able to file our taxes with a short one page form. There should be very few deductions. We need to stop allowing the government to use tax policy to pick winners and losers.

 

[Derideo_Te]

We do need tax reform. We need to Cut rates and INCREASE INCOME.

Cutting rates and increasing income for the 1% is why we currently have the massive national debt.

Why do you want to repeat what is already a proven failure?

 

[MikeK]

Not crap at all.

We have, in this country, some 500 billionaires.

Just counting to a billion would take over 3 decades.


Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math

Whenever this discussion arises I am amazed at how vigorously willing so many ordinary wage-earning Americans are to defend accumulations of wealth so vast they actually are incapable of comprehending its reality. These are decent, honest people, few of whom have ever been out of debt or ever will be, and they seem oblivious to the simple fact that there is no decent, honest, ethical way to accumulate the kind of opulence they so readily defend with almost religious fervor.

Not really sure what these folks have done to accumulate so much.

Maybe you can explain it.

One way to learn how a great deal of that hoarded wealth is accumulated is to watch the FREE and very interesting Inside Job video accessible at my signature line (below). It's a fast and valuable education.

 

[Skylar]

Not crap at all.

We have, in this country, some 500 billionaires.

Just counting to a billion would take over 3 decades.


Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math

Whenever this discussion arises I am amazed at how vigorously willing so many ordinary wage-earning Americans are to defend accumulations of wealth so vast they actually are incapable of comprehending its reality.

It really is the ideological battle of our age: that income is supposed to be this unequal. And the key to convincing some of this idea is to moralize wealth. To treat the accumulation of money as a demonstration of character. Those who have are the 'makers'. Those who don't are the 'takers'. The accompanying vilification of poverty is the flip side of the same moralization effort.

In every practical purpose its the opposite of Christianity.

 

[MikeK]

It really is the ideological battle of our age: that income is supposed to be this unequal. And the key to convincing some of this idea is to moralize wealth. To treat the accumulation of money as a demonstration of character. Those who have are the 'makers'. Those who don't are the 'takers'. The accompanying vilification of poverty is the flip side of the same moralization effort.

In every practical purpose its the opposite of Christianity.

I think you're right on. It is the emerging religion of Greed.

 

[MikeK]

[...]
Sure, security is important, but anyone can find security from a prison cell. Despite socialist promises of utopia, bureaucratic programs of the political state cannot guarantee security. Instead the socialist state uses its coercive powers to seize the wealth and properties of those who have earned financial security by their own hands. It is theft- plain and simple. Socialism does not help poor people; it makes people poor so that they have to become dependent on the socialist state and therefore beholden to those in charge of the government.

Bernie still believes in the Socialist fairy tale. That makes him a fool.

Does that help?

It helps me to see that you have a rather pessimistic view of socialism.

While I do not believe the U.S. is amenable to adopting a totally socialist form of government, mainly because of its deeply embedded and habituated capitalist structure, you might be surprised to know that Denmark, which is known as the happiest nation in the world, is a socialist country, as are most of the Scandinavian countries.

Like Bernie Sanders I am best described as a Socialist. But I believe the best form of government is capitalism which is regulated by certain socialist policies and constraints. In fact, many of the economic problems we are having today are the result of the repeal of such socialistic regulations as the Glass-Steagall Act which constrained the banks from gambling with depositors money.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... Trump an' Bernie is different...

... as salt n' pepper."

 

[Statistikhengst]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... Trump an' Bernie is different...

... as salt n' pepper."

Lol...

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[WelfareQueen]

We do need tax reform. We need to Cut rates and INCREASE INCOME.

Cutting rates and increasing income for the 1% is why we currently have the massive national debt.

Why do you want to repeat what is already a proven failure?

No...we have a massive National debt because 79% of the budget is either free stuff or debt service. You cannot tax your way to prosperity.

The entitlement state doesn't work and must be cut. Period.

 

[David_42]

Not crap at all.

We have, in this country, some 500 billionaires.

Just counting to a billion would take over 3 decades.


Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math

Whenever this discussion arises I am amazed at how vigorously willing so many ordinary wage-earning Americans are to defend accumulations of wealth so vast they actually are incapable of comprehending its reality.

It really is the ideological battle of our age: that income is supposed to be this unequal. And the key to convincing some of this idea is to moralize wealth. To treat the accumulation of money as a demonstration of character. Those who have are the 'makers'. Those who don't are the 'takers'. The accompanying vilification of poverty is the flip side of the same moralization effort.

In every practical purpose its the opposite of Christianity.

The religion of greed and worship of material wealth..

 

[WelfareQueen]

Not crap at all.

We have, in this country, some 500 billionaires.

Just counting to a billion would take over 3 decades.


Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math

Whenever this discussion arises I am amazed at how vigorously willing so many ordinary wage-earning Americans are to defend accumulations of wealth so vast they actually are incapable of comprehending its reality.

It really is the ideological battle of our age: that income is supposed to be this unequal. And the key to convincing some of this idea is to moralize wealth. To treat the accumulation of money as a demonstration of character. Those who have are the 'makers'. Those who don't are the 'takers'. The accompanying vilification of poverty is the flip side of the same moralization effort.

In every practical purpose its the opposite of Christianity.

The religion of greed and worship of material wealth..

Thanks for volunteering to be poor. Send your check to the RNC.

 

[David_42]

Not crap at all.

We have, in this country, some 500 billionaires.

Just counting to a billion would take over 3 decades.


Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math

Whenever this discussion arises I am amazed at how vigorously willing so many ordinary wage-earning Americans are to defend accumulations of wealth so vast they actually are incapable of comprehending its reality.

It really is the ideological battle of our age: that income is supposed to be this unequal. And the key to convincing some of this idea is to moralize wealth. To treat the accumulation of money as a demonstration of character. Those who have are the 'makers'. Those who don't are the 'takers'. The accompanying vilification of poverty is the flip side of the same moralization effort.

In every practical purpose its the opposite of Christianity.

The religion of greed and worship of material wealth..

Thanks for volunteering to be poor. Send your check to the RNC.

What are you talking about?

 

[MikeK]

No...we have a massive National debt because 79% of the budget is either free stuff or debt service. You cannot tax your way to prosperity.

The entitlement state doesn't work and must be cut. Period.

We have a massive national debt because of the War on Drugs, including an emerging Prison Industrial Complex, a tax structure which enables the diversion of trillions of dollars of America's wealth resources to offshore sanctuaries, and hundreds of unnecessary military bases spread out all over the world.

Don't take the food out of the mouths of the needy to enable continuation of such examples of monumental waste. You've been brainwashed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and a number of other millionaire propagandists in service to the One Percent.