Become a safer, more confident driver with the AARP Smart Driver course! Use the promo code VET and save 25% during November.

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
225
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

225 Views
Message 21 of 95

I believe now, as I did in 2016, the bigger hurdle for Bernie is securing the Democratic nomination. He would have an easier time in the General Election where he has always appealed to Independents.

 

Even though there appears to be many Hillary supporters of 2016 who hate Bernie, I can't imagine many registered Democrats voting for Trump over Bernie. Some of them may stay home. Few will vote third party. I think that would be difficult for them to do. Democratic leaning Independents are more likely to consider "other options".

 

I'm sure many Hillary supporters are hoping Joe Biden will enter the race, as they'll be looking for someone to beat both Trump and Bernie. The most loyal Hillary supporters won't even consider voting for Elizabeth Warren or Tulsi Gabbard. 

 

If I recall correctly, Elizabeth Warren was the last women in the Senate to endorse Hillary. I believe that was in June, 2016.


Tulsi Gabbard was the last woman in the House to endorse her. She didn't endorse Hillary until after she formally nominated Sanders at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, which was held in late July.


“Given the remaining choices, like Bernie Sanders, I will be casting my vote for Hillary Clinton,” Gabbard told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser in a story published Wednesday.


“Moving forward, as a veteran and someone who knows firsthand the cost of war, I am going to continue to push for an end to counterproductive interventionist wars and lead our country toward a path toward peace," Gabbard added.


Sanders had called on his supporters to back Clinton and prevent Republican nominee Donald Trump from becoming president.


https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/290416-sanders-backer-tulsi-gabbard-voting-for-cli...

 

 

 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
225
Views
Recognized Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
224
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

224 Views
Message 22 of 95

I understand the whole argument of "enough taxes", but if they do not want to balance this scale with taxing the richest more, than don't we need to discuss the time to re-calculate the whole distribution of taxes? Like we all have to do in our daily lives....what can we reduce in spending to use this money toward other expenses. Do we continue to punish the lower sectors of society by cutting the social programs that are indeed desperately needed for other areas in the budget???  The recent shut down proved by many having to go to NGO's for food assistance if the paycheck for a month is gone, no? Far too many are living paycheck to paycheck and certainly do not have any "extra" to put into savings or stock. Just one personal disaster away from bankruptcy.

"Treat others as You would have Them treat you"
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
224
Views
Recognized Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
216
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

216 Views
Message 23 of 95

First of all, @GailL1 ,  I must apologize if my post was implicating that Bernie is going to take the whole CEO's making too much.  I was simply putting in an article I found went in conjunction with the whole inequality problem in our capitalism. I have not read the whole article because, being such a "laywoman" it will take me time to research where needed and understand what is explained.

 

I want to note that the subtitle under the "The 100 Most Overpaid CEOs 2019" is "Are Fund Managers Asleep At The Wheel".  You are so correct in the mindful watch in what investments one is contributing through, either knowing or left to the Shareholder's Board and/or Fund Managers.  

 

I have no idea but looking at a cap threshold along with a tax like many pay called "luxury tax"?? Like I said, I don't have the answers but I do believe those who are more informed and capable of figuring how we can approach such imbalance needs to help the rest of the taxpayers understand this complicated issue.  Many will misunderstand me, but I am all good with capitalism. When capitalism is growth for all and not just a means of the CEO and stockholders. When as explained in the linked article,  "For example, we learned this year that the median employee at Walmart, which has appeared on our overpaid CEO list for several years, was paid $19,177, and the pay ratio was 1,188:1." These type of business practices is looking more like endorsed slave labor when you do an income ratio, no?

 

You are certainly far more intelligent than I on this issue and I can and will respect that.  I am just a simple American trying to understand how and why our country has gotten into this situation in order to try to contribute to the conversation as to where are we going forward? Far too many American's are intimidated with the facts and therefore, in my opinion just leave it up to someone else to handle. We all are American's and need to try our best to understand in order to make better choices, no?

"Treat others as You would have Them treat you"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
216
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
213
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

213 Views
Message 24 of 95

@rker321 wrote:

@gordyfl wrote:

In less than 2 days....

 

600,000 supporters have signed up to join the Sanders campaign.

 

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1098388287557955584

 


I am very sorry to see those numbers,  I truly believe that Nationally,   Americans are not ok with extremists of any kind either left or right. and Bernie represents that left wing of the Democratic Party. 
Sorry, not good for the country. We just had a President that claims to be a Conservative and far Right individual we don't  need the opposite.


The majority of Americans are in favor of most of the things in Bernie's platform, whether you think he is an "extremist" or not.

 

You wanted trump elected so America would suffer and see how bad he was for America. So much for that. Yes, we do need the opposite of what trump stood for.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
213
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
223
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

223 Views
Message 25 of 95

@L42010 wrote:

I do believe that Bernie is fighting against income inequality, the Citizens United decision and the effect it has now along with other social issues.

 

I found this article and no, I have not read the whole thing but will.  My point is, what/who is going to really call out this bad situation just gaining speed?

 

"The 100 Most Overpaid CEOs 2019" from AS YOU SO.org

 

https://www.asyousow.org/report/the-100-most-overpaid-ceos-2019#introduction-2019

 

 


I should make this a new thread but it feeds right into your link and since you think Bernie has a way to solve it  - let's dive right in to it.

 

Interesting report, although I read the same one from a different source - MarketWatch.

Yes, it is up to the shareholders to vote for CEO and top executive pay packages - including base pay, stock options, bonuses and stock grants.  But when they do not have direct control in this matter, they leave it up to the fund manager in the case of mutual funds or EFT's.

 

And as long as these Funds keep making them money - I don't think most people care about this as individuals within a whole.

 

On the individual stocks which I own, each year I have the choice of voting for pay packages which the Board of Directors have suggested to be offered to these executives.  I also vote for the Board of Directors.  OR I can turn my proxy over to them for their vote in the matter.  I am free to go to the actual annual meeting and voice my concern or even add an item to the agenda.  But I am only (1) person - it requires more (people or more shares) to actually affect change as a shareholder.

 

Now I wonder how many people who own Mutual Funds or EFT's overseen by these huge management companies with public (nonprofit) or private money even know what this is talking about here.

Do they know how their pension plans work?

If options are given, do they really understand which option to pick?

Do they even understand an expense ratio of their partical funds?

Would they as individuals feel anymore confident in this corporate matter if they gave their proxy to their employer - public or private,  - pension fund, union - I doubt if that would solve the problem.

 

Like I said, as long as their investments are making money and even sometimes when they are not, they just let their money be used and hope for a good return. 

 

So Bernie wants to limit CEO pay and think this will solve "inequality" - HOW does he want to do it?

What are your ideas?  It is not easy especially if you understand the problem - CEO pay is like any other pay - it is based on some worth measure and this liberal source explains how.

 

There is no way Government can dictate the pay for these executive, IMO.  What talks loud and clear to companies - and indirectly to these money managers - TAXES - because taxes affect the bottom line of the company and that means shareholder returns.  Sounds so logical, doesn't it.

 

EPI 03/22/2018 - Does tax deductibility affect CEO pay? The case of the health insurance industry

 

President Obama tried it within the ACA and now President Trump is trying it within the Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA) -

 

from the link ~

One mechanism that has been proposed for containing CEO pay is to limit its tax deductibility. In the early 1990s, CEO pay in excess of $1 million was no longer an allowed deduction for the purposes of corporate income taxes. However, an exemption was made for “performance-based pay”—stock options and performance-based bonuses, for example. This type of pay could be fully deducted in any amount. The recently passed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ends this performance-based pay deduction.

 

Now has any of this worked or will it work in reducing the performance pay of these highly paid individuals??

 

The EPI doesn't think so - at least not completely.  In their analysis, they used the effect of Obamacare on CEO pay in the insurance industry compared to other companies who did not have this constraint.

from the link ~

 

Capping the deductibility of CEO pay can be seen as one mechanism for reining in pay. By making CEO pay in excess of the cap more expensive for corporations, it should lead to a reduction in pay. In this case, the shareholders don’t necessarily benefit from lower pay, since the reduction in pay would be largely offset by a higher tax burden. However, lower CEO pay would directly have an impact on inequality by reducing the pay of a substantial segment of very high earners. In addition, there should be a secondary effect from reducing CEO pay. Insofar as CEO pay provides a benchmark for other top executives at corporations and for top executives in the nonprofit sector, a reduction in CEO pay should put some downward pressure on the pay of other high earners as well.

 

The RESULTS from this liberal organization (EPI) - from the link ~

To sum up these findings, there clearly is no evidence that the cap on the deductibility of CEO pay for insurers in the years since 2012 has had an effect on reducing CEO pay.

Implications of the findings

The failure to find any evidence that the cap on deductibility had any impact on CEO pay is striking, but we do have to point out the limited size of this sample. We are focusing on a relatively small number of insurers in four years in which the market underwent a major expansion and transformation due to the ACA. It is certainly possible that the factors determining pay are more complicated than the variables we have included in our regressions. This means that we have to interpret our finding of no effect with considerable caution. However, it is nonetheless worth assessing the implication, if, in fact, caps on deductibility do not affect CEO pay.

 

Most immediately, the lack of a negative effect supports the view that CEO pay is determined more by the power of the CEO relative to shareholders, rather than anything close to an approximation of the CEO’s marginal product. As noted earlier, the loss of deductibility in these years meant that CEO pay in excess of the cap cost the company 50 percent more than when the pay was deductible. If the original pay were close to the CEO’s marginal product, then the pay with the cap in effect would be 50 percent more than the CEO’s marginal product. We should expect to see at least some reduction in CEO pay reflecting the greater cost to the company when the pay is not deductible.

 

The failure of deductibility caps to lower CEO pay is consistent with the alternative explanation of CEO pay: that it primarily reflects a broken corporate governance system in which CEO pay has little connection to performance. From this perspective, the higher cost of CEO pay is something that the directors are willing to simply pass on to shareholders in the form of reduced profits. They are more concerned with staying on good terms with their CEOs than with maximizing returns to shareholders.

 

In addition to what the failure of the cap on deductibility to reduce CEO pay may tell us about the nature of the market for CEOs, it also indicates that capping the salary deduction is not likely to be an effective route for reducing CEO pay. The TCJA of 2017 included a cap on the deductibility of CEO pay in excess of $500,000 for all corporations, not just health insurance companies. Our analysis suggests that this broader cap is likely to have little effect in reducing CEO pay.

 

So, if this tax deductibility does NOT work - the EPI thinks that changing the governance model of corporations is the hope.  Since the TCJA extended this tax deductibility model to all corporations and it is just now getting started - it does warrant a bigger research in a few years before giving up altogether on this strategy.

 

If our analysis correctly measures the impact of capping deductibility on pay, then it will be necessary to use other mechanisms to actually rein in CEO pay, most likely, changing the rules of corporate governance.  While altering the rules of corporate governance may seem more complicated than just changing the tax code, it could prove to be easier politically. If CEO pay does not reflect CEO value to the company, then excessive pay is coming at the expense of the shareholders. Shareholders should have a direct interest in changes in corporate governance that would make it easier for them to limit the pay of CEOs and other top corporate executives.

 

Conclusion

The policy of limiting the deductibility of even performance-based pay for CEOs has much to make it worthy of recommendation. Evidence strongly indicates that performance-based pay is not an efficiency enhancing institution that should be given preferential treatment in the tax code, so ending this preferential treatment is the rare provision in the TCJA that seems to make some economic sense. Further, ending the performance-based pay deductibility will raise a modest amount of revenue to roughly $9 billion per year (Balsam 2012).

 

However, this analysis finds little evidence that ending the deductibility of performance-based pay will significantly affect the trajectory of CEO pay. We find no evidence that the provision of the ACA limiting the deductibility of CEO pay for insurers had any effect in reducing CEO compensation. This would tend to support the view that CEO pay is determined much more by the power of CEOs in corporate decision-making than the returns they generate for shareholders since the change in tax treatment unambiguously raised the cost of CEO pay to the companies that employ them. This also suggests that efforts to rein in CEO pay by limiting deductibility more generally, as was done in the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017, will not be effective. In order to limit CEO pay it may be necessary to alter the rules of corporate governance in ways that increase the power of shareholders over the CEO. This assessment must be qualified by the fact that our sample included a relatively small number of firms over a span of just four years.

 

So HOW do we change the governance model of corporations when most shareholders could care less ?????

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
223
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
216
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

216 Views
Message 26 of 95

@rk9152 wrote:

@mickstuder wrote:

 


You may be right. We have something like 47% of the population leaching off the rest (no tax paying but benefits collecting) - that does give you a good base to start with. All you need is a few more "bleeding hearts" to tip the scales to your Marxist State.


Your missing the point............

 

We have several National Democratic Socialist Programs that a Majority of Americans Support

 

A Majority of Americans when polled today support even more National Democratic Socialist Programs like Medicare For All

 

There is No Majority of Americans who support Trump as our President or a 1.5 Trillion Trump/GOP Tax Break for the Richest Americans & Corporations

 

So what you seem to be supporting is Kleptocracy instead of Democracy

 

Democracy reflects the will of a majority of the people

 

Kleptocracy reflects the will of a few financially rich & politically powerful people

 

Which of the two do you support?

 

Which point did I miss - the one about non taxpayers approving of others paying more or the bleeding hearts?


No, you missed all of the points that Mickstuder posted and you still don't address them.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
216
Views
Recognized Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
230
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

230 Views
Message 27 of 95

Another point to my previous post is, we all know that the tech savvy group of intelligence can indeed break into a person's account and take it over without even being aware of it happening!


@L42010 wrote:

@gordyfl  Well, we all know NOW that the Russians are very good at sending their operatives in and pose as American supporters perhaps even as Americans.  Which brings us to the problem of, how in the world is an everyday American without all the privy to information on an app to tell us who is actually they proclaim to be??? These are issues we face in our everyday lives as our information anymore comes from the almighty web, no? A web with no regulations/restrictions on just how and who is privy to use such a powerful tool, no?

 


@gordyfl wrote:

Just a word for all. We have heard in the last few days that Russia is still involved in trying to control our elections.  We were told they are in the Democratic primary. Today we hear how Trump is trying to control the Democratic primary to select who he wants to run against. We were even given the names of who they are after one of which has not entered the race yet. One way they want to influence the election is using social media by posting in it against the people they do not like.

In 2016 we saw what got to be a big fight between Hillary and Bernie. Hillary won and a lot of Bernie people would not vote for the winner Hillary. Some went for Jill. We now know she was supported by Russia....

 

mccarthy is back.jpg


 


 

"Treat others as You would have Them treat you"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
230
Views
Recognized Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
225
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

225 Views
Message 28 of 95

@gordyfl  Well, we all know NOW that the Russians are very good at sending their operatives in and pose as American supporters perhaps even as Americans.  Which brings us to the problem of, how in the world is an everyday American without all the privy to information on an app to tell us who is actually they proclaim to be??? These are issues we face in our everyday lives as our information anymore comes from the almighty web, no? A web with no regulations/restrictions on just how and who is privy to use such a powerful tool, no?

 


@gordyfl wrote:

Just a word for all. We have heard in the last few days that Russia is still involved in trying to control our elections.  We were told they are in the Democratic primary. Today we hear how Trump is trying to control the Democratic primary to select who he wants to run against. We were even given the names of who they are after one of which has not entered the race yet. One way they want to influence the election is using social media by posting in it against the people they do not like.

In 2016 we saw what got to be a big fight between Hillary and Bernie. Hillary won and a lot of Bernie people would not vote for the winner Hillary. Some went for Jill. We now know she was supported by Russia....

 

mccarthy is back.jpg


 

"Treat others as You would have Them treat you"
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
225
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
220
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

220 Views
Message 29 of 95

Just a word for all. We have heard in the last few days that Russia is still involved in trying to control our elections.  We were told they are in the Democratic primary. Today we hear how Trump is trying to control the Democratic primary to select who he wants to run against. We were even given the names of who they are after one of which has not entered the race yet. One way they want to influence the election is using social media by posting in it against the people they do not like.

In 2016 we saw what got to be a big fight between Hillary and Bernie. Hillary won and a lot of Bernie people would not vote for the winner Hillary. Some went for Jill. We now know she was supported by Russia....

 

mccarthy is back.jpg

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
220
Views
Recognized Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
227
Views

Re: BERNIE SANDERS FOR PRESIDENT?

227 Views
Message 30 of 95

I do believe that Bernie is fighting against income inequality, the Citizens United decision and the effect it has now along with other social issues.

 

I found this article and no, I have not read the whole thing but will.  My point is, what/who is going to really call out this bad situation just gaining speed?

 

"The 100 Most Overpaid CEOs 2019" from AS YOU SO.org

 

https://www.asyousow.org/report/the-100-most-overpaid-ceos-2019#introduction-2019

 

 

"Treat others as You would have Them treat you"
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
227
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Open Enrollment: Oct 15-Dec 7, 2019 Find resources to help you decide on the best healthcare insurance plans for you during Open Enrollment season

Top Authors