By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Bernie Sanders confuses me

fatslob-:O said:
His proposals are bat shit insane from an economical standpoint ...

His solution is totally robbing businesses of any money ...

He does seem crazy but he also seems like one of the few honest politicians. I'm not so worried about all the stuff he wants to do because the Congress and Senate will never let it happen. At the same time though he'll stop them from doing any more damage to this country or creating more laws to benefit buissness. Honestly I think he's the perfect guy for the job. If he doesn't win I want a republican to win just so I can watch people complain about republicans reuning this country.



Around the Network
hershel_layton said:

I understand European countries doing so, but America? An extremely important country with 300 million civilians in it? Can Bernie's vision of a country benefit us? 

 

You make it sound like europe is a third world micro-en-omic-climate with unique policies that kinda allows them to stay afloat while Murrica's great as it is.

Welfare State has proven to be a great alternative to neo-liberalism in a number of great countries that looks to have a bright future, maybe brighter than the United States from an outsider point of view (Sweden for example). Of course there would be other challenges due to United States larger scale, but the biggest challenge he would face is the american undying optimism towards neoliberalism and blindness towards any other politics.



WolfpackN64 said:

You know the state can just seize assets if they attempt to do so just to flee taxes they know they should have paid and are perfectly capable of paying.

It is not within the governments right to take away an owner's right to their property accordng to the fifth amendment! 

If US government does attempt such they will be condemned by the international community for what is essentially outright "stealing" and such an action would scare the shit out of businesses to the point where they would flee to Canada or some other 1st world country which could ruin the US economy ... 

Most businesses aren't able to muster up more than a 10% profit margin so Bernie's taxation plans would literally put tons of companies out of business ... 



the-pi-guy said:

Just Compensation Clause

While the federal government has a constitutional right to "take" private property for public use, the Fifth Amendment's Just Compensation Clause requires the government to pay just compensation, interpreted as market value, to the owner of the property. The U.S. Supreme Court has defined fair market value as the most probable price that a willing but unpressured buyer, fully knowledgeable of both the property's good and bad attributes, would pay. The government does not have to pay a property owner's attorney's fees, however, unless a statute so provides.

 

The government absolutely does this, whether we realize it or not.  

"Compensation" is different from "stealing" and the government still can't take forcefully take away assets from a business ...



the-pi-guy said:
fatslob-:O said:

It is not within the governments right to take away an owner's right to their property accordng to the fifth amendment! 

If US government does attempt such they will be condemned by the international community for what is essentially outright "stealing" and such an action would scare the shit out of businesses to the point where they would flee to Canada or some other 1st world country which could ruin the US economy ... 

Most businesses aren't able to muster up more than a 10% profit margin so Bernie's taxation plans would literally put tons of companies out of business ... 

Just Compensation Clause

While the federal government has a constitutional right to "take" private property for public use, the Fifth Amendment's Just Compensation Clause requires the government to pay just compensation, interpreted as market value, to the owner of the property. The U.S. Supreme Court has defined fair market value as the most probable price that a willing but unpressured buyer, fully knowledgeable of both the property's good and bad attributes, would pay. The government does not have to pay a property owner's attorney's fees, however, unless a statute so provides.

 

The government absolutely does this, whether we realize it or not.  

in fact Donald Trump tried to take away an elderly widows home through "eminent domain" to build a parking lot for his casino in Atlantic City

the compensation Trump wanted to pay was $250k, yet 10 years before that the publisher of Penthouse offered her $1m for the property (she refused)

"eminent domain" is ment to be used to clear land for public use, like highways and such, but corps perverted that one to use it for not strictly private buildings or in Trumps case he tried that for his parking lot (but lost)



Around the Network
fatslob-:O said:
WolfpackN64 said:

You know the state can just seize assets if they attempt to do so just to flee taxes they know they should have paid and are perfectly capable of paying.

It is not within the governments right to take away an owner's right to their property accordng to the fifth amendment! 

If US government does attempt such they will be condemned by the international community for what is essentially outright "stealing" and such an action would scare the shit out of businesses to the point where they would flee to Canada or some other 1st world country which could ruin the US economy ... 

Most businesses aren't able to muster up more than a 10% profit margin so Bernie's taxation plans would literally put tons of companies out of business ... 

No it wouldn't. Most companies that would have to really pay up could easily pay the taxes by cutting in the top salary's. And honestly, I don't give a damn for any of your "amendments". They're amendments, they're supposed to be temporary adjustments to a constitution, not the word of the almighty.



WolfpackN64 said:

No it wouldn't. Most companies that would have to really pay up could easily pay the taxes by cutting in the top salary's. And honestly, I don't give a damn for any of your "amendments". They're amendments, they're supposed to be temporary adjustments to a constitution, not the word of the almighty.

Yes it would, the BoD and executives claims less than 3% of the entire business expenses so attacking their income statements does nothing. You would need to apply considerable amount of corporate taxes in order to get any sort of appreciable gains ... 

Good for you on not caring about the amendments that are supposed to protect citizens so please keep your progressive views to yourself as you don't live in the US ...



WolfpackN64 said:
hershel_layton said:

His plans for America make me skeptical- $15 minimum wage, free college, universal health care, etc etc.

 

I understand European countries doing so, but America? An extremely important country with 300 million civilians in it? Can Bernie's vision of a country benefit us? 

 

Our debt is already bad as it is. Wouldn't his goals make our debt skyrocket once again?

If your financial institutions would stop taking huge risks and putting so many middle class families in debt, your debt problem wouldn't be so big. Not to mention that if more citizens can achieve better education and get better jobs, that benefits the economy and thus the US treasury.

Otherwise, I can see another debt crisis arise when the amount of people defaulting on their debt becomes too big.

American economics is confusing. I mean, wow. This thread just leaves me in more shambles. 

 

One thing I saw repeated was corporations ignoring taxes. Also saw a lot about Wall Street. I'm going to need to read up on US economics.



 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

the-pi-guy said:

What he was talking about is companies that owe money, if they are leaving to avoid paying, those companies would be stealing from the government. 

Companies don't owe crap to their governments if they choose to siphon profits to tax haven and that's not illegal ... 

Businesses aren't stealing anything from governments, it's the other way around. Believe me ... 

The government can take something, as long as they give some sort of compensation.  Since the business would owe money, not owing money would likely be considered the compensation in this case.  

No it wouldn't. The government is not justified in stealing assets, period ...

Having the law acting like robin hood is madness ...



fatslob-:O said:
WolfpackN64 said:

You know the state can just seize assets if they attempt to do so just to flee taxes they know they should have paid and are perfectly capable of paying.

It is not within the governments right to take away an owner's right to their property accordng to the fifth amendment! 

If US government does attempt such they will be condemned by the international community for what is essentially outright "stealing" and such an action would scare the shit out of businesses to the point where they would flee to Canada or some other 1st world country which could ruin the US economy ... 

Most businesses aren't able to muster up more than a 10% profit margin so Bernie's taxation plans would literally put tons of companies out of business ... 

5th amendment is commonly known as the right to remain silent. Are you thinking of the 4th amendment against unlawful search and seizure? In the case of tax evasion it would be a lawful seizure in lieu of debt owed to the US government.