By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Thuglas on 20 January 2017
Edit Thread
Hiku said:
 

Which is probably why Trump put his buddy who previously said he didn't want a governemnt position because he was afraid to "cripple the presidency" and has no experience in the field whatsoever, in that position.
Whether he realizes it or not.

 

What Bernie buys with his money is of no relevance. What is relevant is that he doesn't take coorporate checks and buys things with that money.
And I don't know if those numbers are accurate. But you can be a part of the top 2% and still think that they, including yourself, should pay their fair share in taxes, instead of getting more tax breaks. That he's ok with taxing himself doesn't makle him a hypocrit, but more admirable.

 

I've seen that clip before btw, and that business owner was extremely ambigous with his question. He didn't specify which regulations or taxes he's refering to. And if Bernie pressed him on it, asking "Which tax? Which regulation?" I bet he wouldn't have had an answer. And it's evident because in Obama's first term alone, he did over a dozen small business tax cuts. And the marketplace nearly doubled since Obama took office. The US were losing 800 000 jobs a month when Obama first took office, and now 12 million jobs have been created since. That's definitely not something I would consider a success, but it contradicts the general statement this random guy made.
His question was basically "Why is this administration so against small businesses" to which Bernie answered "I don't believe they are."
Bernie can't give a specific solution to an unspecified problem, so he went on a tangent about his concerns of multinational coorporations and the income inequality that comes from that.

As for his numbers, I don't know, but his general message is one I still agree on, as well as many of the policies he supports.
It's still unbeliavable to me that USA is the only modern nation where the people don't see being kept alive by medicine as a basic human right, like the right to an education. It wasn't always like that, but people stood up for themselves and said that their children deserve an education as much as the right people. And so it became something people considered a right. They have still not drawn that conclusion about medicine, even though USA pays more for medicine per person than in any other country. Because in the US most of it goes to profit, instead of saving lives. And that continues because pharma companies donate so much to politicians, and brainwash people into thinking its not something the deserve, or that they can't afford it (even though tax payers already pay more per person than in any country that has universal health care).

- You ignored my point about Warren's question being dishonest. I wasn't even arguing why he appointed Carson only that Warren was being ill-intentioned. go rewatch her question and notice how she said "a simple yes or no answer" is needed even though it was clearly a complex question requiring a complex answer. simply an attempt to smear him. And Trump appointed him because he was born in Detroit so he has a lot of appeal to people from Urban areas. As someone who was born in Detroit and cares about the state of failing cities like it, it's really assuring to see Trump appoint someone born into the same city as me. Having good intentions matter a lot in government. I think Dr. Carson will actually try and I hope he is sucessful

- http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/06/17/How-Much-Money-It-Takes-Be-Top-1-Every-State  :   Vermont is $299k for top 1%, then I took salery of senator and salery his wife made and added them together for their household income. she left her job in 2011. And yes it does matter because he is LITERALLY top 2% and was top 1% in his state yet he never acknowledges that. and not only that, he continually tries to paint all 1% as "multimillionaires and billionaires" knowing damn well it isn't true. Even upper middle class people are often 2%ers. it defeats his whole narrative and image of being "one of us".

- 100 new regulations affecting small business were implemented in Obama's first 4 years. Sander's cut him off when the guy tried to speak during his rant about the greedy billionaires which obviously wasn't relevant. Anybody could tell he wasn't referring to regulations about "polluting the air and poisoning the food" lets be real here, Sander's was obviously deflecting the issue. my source is a Forbes article i am going to link but they summarize the most important new regulations and none of them even mentions air or food so I can't possibly imagine that Sanders was honestly trying to address the issue. and yeah, there was 100 new regulations in the first 4 years alone and the guy asking stress a point that there was A LOT he was referring to with the "regulation after regulation," statement. He was referring to the accumulation of the 100 small new regulations and how they make it much more difficult to start a business. Obama creating jobs wasn't very irrelevent i think, but I am curious to your source for "doubling the market place" claim. can I have a source for that? http://www.forbes.com/sites/waynecrews/2013/02/06/small-business-regulations-surge-under-obama/#6be0b94629f2

- I don't agree with heavy Socialism.  we can argue if it is fair to take money from EVERYONE to provide for the poor but that is a different argument for another day. As for Bernie giving two completely different numbers, I really just came across that just now. nobody ever mentioned that inconsistancy and a lot of it is because people don't fact check what he says. I know i didn't when I was a Bernie fan.