WATCH NOW: Iowa presidential candidate forum from Council Bluffs. Appearing: Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. 

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
188
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

188 Views
Message 71 of 184

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

 

Now what happened in the world starting in possibly the '60s that created the leveling off of income increases among the workers? Certainly not the Reagan tax cuts - they came later.


The tax rates started getting cut back in the 1960's and continued. By 1970 the top TMR was around 70%, we went into a recession. In the 1980's the top ten brackets were eliminated by Reagan and the top TMR was cut in half.


I guess scout is going to have to start attacking the JFK tax scam rather than the Reagan tax scam.

 

However, the world economy was well on the way to recovery by then and all of a sudden we had competition - that had to have an effect.


How on earth could the rebuilding of war ravaged economies have ANY effect on the way American employers divided profits with their workers? Our output continued to grow at twice the current rate with the better paid American workers providing the expanded market for the higher production, and still saving 10% of their income.

 

It wasn't until the connection between worker productivity and worker wages was severed (first cuts made in '64 and '65, job done in '80 and '85) that wages for the bottom 90% stagnated while managerial pay for the top 10% skyrocketed, with the gains increasingly concentrated as you moved toward the top.

 

Adding back a TMR of 91% for incomes above $5,000,000 would be a great idea, but simply returning to the Pre-Reagan brackets (TMR 70%) will begin to reverse the 34 year redistribution of income from the Middle Class to the Uberrich and finance the rebuilding of our crumbling infrastructure.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
188
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
190
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

190 Views
Message 72 of 184
I am a devastatingly handsome stud-muffin. End of story...............I like this idea of self portrayal..........This week I am a swim suit model on my way to Paris for a photo shoot. Hope I can fit into a bikini.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
190
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
197
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

197 Views
Message 73 of 184

@easyed598 wrote:

You can do what AOC did. She was a bar tender -she ran for congress  and won. Her new salary is approximately $170,000/year . Her campaign manager diverted about 1 million dollars  in campaign funds to a private fund,which she can do pretty much what she wants . She has been in Congress for about 2 months and she is already a millionaire.BTW- She ran on a platform of doing away with DARK money. Hypocrisy reigns with the Democrat   Circe wrote-Cite your references for this nonsense, please.
Ocasio-Cortez chief of staff diverted $1M in campaign cash to his companies    ------In addition-you might also want to check her brief history in Congress.----She wants to ban all fossil fuel travel by   2030.(cars,planes and ships)  She wants Medicare for All which adds 10 trillion to the national debt if implicated.  She help killed the Amazon deal for NYC .She falsley claimed she saved New York 4 billion dollars by killing the deal .In reality she lost the city 14 billion dollars in future revenue and even the mayor of NYC commented it was a dumb move.(all this and she only been in Congress for 2 months)


So a right-wing political policy lobbying organization filed an unsubstantiated complaint and you post about it here as if the allegations were fact. Sounds about right...

 

You might want to check your "facts" .

 

Financial Disclosure

 

Net Worth

 

Net Worth

 

Finances

 

 

 

 

 


Assume nothing. Question everything. And start thinking.
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
197
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
208
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

208 Views
Message 74 of 184

@easyed598 wrote:

You can do what AOC did. She was a bar tender -she ran for congress  and won. Her new salary is approximately $170,000/year . Her campaign manager diverted about 1 million dollars  in campaign funds to a private fund,which she can do pretty much what she wants . She has been in Congress for about 2 months and she is already a millionaire.BTW- She ran on a platform of doing away with DARK money. Hypocrisy reigns with the Democrat   Circe wrote-Cite your references for this nonsense, please.
Ocasio-Cortez chief of staff diverted $1M in campaign cash to his companies    ------In addition-you might also want to check her brief history in Congress.----She wants to ban all fossil fuel travel by   2030.(cars,planes and ships)  She wants Medicare for All which adds 10 trillion to the national debt if implicated.  She help killed the Amazon deal for NYC .She falsley claimed she saved New York 4 billion dollars by killing the deal .In reality she lost the city 14 billion dollars in future revenue and even the mayor of NYC commented it was a dumb move.(all this and she only been in Congress for 2 months)


Gee a far right source that tells all Trump is great and honest. Need anyone say more. Our enablers just accept anything leadership tells them to. By the support article Trump must be trying to hire her. All should keep in mind Trump is from NYC and when he lived there he was doing anything he could to be accepted by her voters, the Clinton's (Chelsea and Ivanka were good friends from Jerrod side.), Shumer, and the other Dems. They for the most part saw what a fraud he was and he made little progress.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
208
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
214
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

214 Views
Message 75 of 184

You can do what AOC did. She was a bar tender -she ran for congress  and won. Her new salary is approximately $170,000/year . Her campaign manager diverted about 1 million dollars  in campaign funds to a private fund,which she can do pretty much what she wants . She has been in Congress for about 2 months and she is already a millionaire.BTW- She ran on a platform of doing away with DARK money. Hypocrisy reigns with the Democrat   Circe wrote-Cite your references for this nonsense, please.
Ocasio-Cortez chief of staff diverted $1M in campaign cash to his companies    ------In addition-you might also want to check her brief history in Congress.----She wants to ban all fossil fuel travel by   2030.(cars,planes and ships)  She wants Medicare for All which adds 10 trillion to the national debt if implicated.  She help killed the Amazon deal for NYC .She falsley claimed she saved New York 4 billion dollars by killing the deal .In reality she lost the city 14 billion dollars in future revenue and even the mayor of NYC commented it was a dumb move.(all this and she only been in Congress for 2 months)

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
214
Views
Gold Conversationalist
0
Kudos
221
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

221 Views
Message 76 of 184

Rep-Socialism- Privatize the profit and socialize the debt.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
221
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
248
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

248 Views
Message 77 of 184

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:


I don't have an obsession with the 47% who pay no taxes (because they can't afford to) but you most definitely have an obsession with the 53% paying more (than their fair share) to add on more government programs that are a waste (example - the new green deal)!


Had not paid any attention to this new green deal, mainly because I believe that Ocasio Cortez should simply learn her job first and then propose whatever she pleases. but I decided to read this bill and see what I liked and what I disliked.

There are good ideas and bad ideas in her bill.

For me the climate change issue and what to do about i. is good, and then there are some others that I found not to like. like redoing all old buildings to conform with the new laws etc. and many of how it would impact certain businesses.

Look, there has to be an initiative that deals with climate change. but, there is the need to pass bills that are applicable and fair to most of us.

Passing bills that are only good for a section of the population is not going to cut it.

Again, we need candidates that do not represent extremes, but that are moderate and that can deal with important issues in a manner that are not to the left or right.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
248
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
258
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

258 Views
Message 78 of 184

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Republicans have abandoned reality for a cursory reading of Atlas Shrugged and called it an economic theory.

Here's REALITY.

Civilization happened because somebody back around 14,000BCE realized that if they got together as a group, and TAXED the wealthiest among them to get the resources to provide things an individual could not provide for themself, everyone could begin concentrating on what they did best, and let the GOVERNMENT handle the other necessities, like public safety, distribution systems, currency and the education of the young.

 

Worked like a charm because the wealthy were NOT taxed to the point they had to give up any luxuaries and the people benefitting from all the FREE services were able to maximize their productivity resulting in a booming economy where everyone benefited. The poor were NOT taxed for the simple reason the society had determined they would not allow their fellow citizens starve and freeze in the dark just so they'd "have skin in the game" as demonstrated by paying taxes they could not afford and still be able to support themselves and their families.

 

Americans have NEVER collected taxes from "the poor" - to verify this simply check the tax tables going back to 1916 and match the Standard Deductions against the average wage. All that really changed was Reagan adding an Earned Income Tax Credit to give welfare to those who WORKED so they would be raised up out of poverty for their effort, AND Republicans began vilifying the 47% of American workers who are not paid enough to have to pay Federal Income Tax. GOPers do this to divert attention from the fact the country is falling apart because of the YUGE tax scams they have given the Uberrich, both human and Corporate, and the way Republicans have shredded the "social safety net".

 

How bad is it? Well, our average life expectancy is DECREASING because of he increase in suicides and drug overdoses among 25-40 year olds. And WHY are the Americans who are just starting out on their adult lives be so depressed they cannot continue to live? BECAUSE THEY SEE THEY HAVE NO FUTURE, WILL NEVER GET OUT OF DEBT, WILL NEVER GO AS FAR AS THEIR PARENTS DID, WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO HELP THEIR KIDS IMPROVE THEIR LIVES.

Why such feelings? BECAUSE GOPers redistributed all the income gains since 1970 into the pockets of the top 10% and left the bottom 50% with NOTHING.

 

Republicans gleefully eliminated pollution controls so an ADDITIONAL 1.400 Americans will die from coal pollution EACH YEAR, raising the TOTAL of such deaths to 14,400, so it's no surprise they have gleefully destroyed hope in the future for 30,000 Americans each year. Suicides have increased 30% since 1999, rising in 49 States, Nevada being the single exception.

 

But for Republicans, allowing the Uberrich a free ride on our common infrastgructure is MUCH more important than lowering death rates - for them it's Better to stay poor and dead than to become a socialist "red".


Tax table from 1916 (I'm sure you can guess the values of these dollars in 2019!

 

Revenue Act of 1916
Normal Tax and Additional Tax on Individuals

39 Stat. 756 [2]

Net Income
(dollars)
Normal Rate
(percent)
Additional Rate
(percent)
Combined Rate
(percent)
0202
20,000213
40,000224
60,000235
80,000246
100,000257
150,000268
200,000279
250,0002810
300,0002911
500,00021012
1,000,00021113
1,500,00021214
2,000,00021315
  • Exemption of $3,000 for single filers and $4,000 for married couples.

So Scout, in 1916 multimillionaires were taxed at 15%!


You failed to read the rest of the sentence - ... and match the Standard Deductions against the average wage. AVERAGE wage in 1916=$2,775, SO even a single worker would pay NOTHING because the Standard deduction of $3,000 exceeded what 50% OF WORKERS EARNED. Your obsession with finding ways to tax that 47% of Americans you hate because they are not paid enough to pay Federal Income taxes is absurd simply because ITS BEEN OUR NATIONAL POLICY SINCE THE INVENTION OF THE MODERN INCOME TAX.

BTW - that 15% rate lasted EXACTLY 1 year. Here's whatr happened next:

1917=67%; 1918=77%; 1919-21=73%; 1922-24=58%; 1925-31=25%; 1932-35-63%; 1036-40=79%; 1941=81%; 1942-43=88%; 1944-45=94%; 1946-64=91%' 1964=77%; 1965-1981=70%


I don't have an obsession with the 47% who pay no taxes (because they can't afford to) but you most definitely have an obsession with the 53% paying more (than their fair share) to add on more government programs that are a waste (example - the new green deal)!

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
258
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
249
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

249 Views
Message 79 of 184

@Richva wrote:

Part of our problem is that the people who are not Dem Socialists keep making up their own definition of the terms "Socialist" and "Democratic Socialist". I think the people who use either term look to the Nordic countries as their goal while the Right pretends they want a system like Venezuela. 

 

I think the people BEING defined should have final say in how they are portrayed. 


The right defines others with lies and deception. They also often define themselves with lies and deceptions. Trump supporters elected a man to the White House that does the same.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
249
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
249
Views

Re: Dem-Socialism

249 Views
Message 80 of 184

@Richva wrote:

Part of our problem is that the people who are not Dem Socialists keep making up their own definition of the terms "Socialist" and "Democratic Socialist". I think the people who use either term look to the Nordic countries as their goal while the Right pretends they want a system like Venezuela. 

 

I think the people BEING defined should have final say in how they are portrayed. 


An interesting theory.

 

I am a devastatingly handsome stud-muffin. End of story.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
249
Views