2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[Hediacrana]

Most Americans Support Warren’s ‘Ultramillionare Tax’. Sounds like promising news for all the more progressive Democratic candidates out there, and of course, especially for Warren.

Taxes on wealth (which is different from income) are unconstitutional, so what people think of them doesn't really matter.

Which has preciously little to do with the point of my post you're responding to: namely, that the fact that pollers find that current voters are enthusiastic about Warren's proposal for the wealthy paying more taxes bides well for her and other Democratic candidates running on a similar platform.

[Trumptonium1]

Doesn't answer my question.

None of the socialist principles are incompatible within a capitalist economy. They're just inherently shit and uncompetitive and collapse in on themselves without a constant ponzi scheme of confiscated money. Until it collapses again when that pool runs out.

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

I like that you chose to ignore my tax question, but to answer your question because I'm not a politician, no, capitalists don't "run the ponzi schemes" they create wealth.

Then again that depends on who you're talking about. When I see and hear 'capitalist' I don't imagine a rent-seeking landlord. I imagine an entrepreneur, a banker, a manufacturer, a builder, a farmer.

[Loben]

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

I like that you chose to ignore my tax question, but to answer your question because I'm not a politician, no, capitalists don't "run the ponzi schemes" they create wealth.

Then again that depends on who you're talking about. When I see and hear 'capitalist' I don't imagine a rent-seeking landlord. I imagine an entrepreneur, a banker, a manufacturer, a builder, a farmer.

socialists however see targets.

[Bear Stearns]

Doesn't answer my question.

None of the socialist principles are incompatible within a capitalist economy. They're just inherently shit and uncompetitive and collapse in on themselves without a constant ponzi scheme of confiscated money. Until it collapses again when that pool runs out.

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

This implies an incorrect understanding of both capitalism and ponzi schemes.

[Bear Stearns]

I imagine an entrepreneur, a banker, a manufacturer, a builder, a farmer.

Sell-side woot woot

[The Black Forrest]

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

This implies an incorrect understanding of both capitalism and ponzi schemes.

As I would take the advice from the honest people of Bear Sterns.

[The Black Forrest]

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

I like that you chose to ignore my tax question, but to answer your question because I'm not a politician, no, capitalists don't "run the ponzi schemes" they create wealth.

Then again that depends on who you're talking about. When I see and hear 'capitalist' I don't imagine a rent-seeking landlord. I imagine an entrepreneur, a banker, a manufacturer, a builder, a farmer.

Like Bernie Madoff?

[Bear Stearns]

This implies an incorrect understanding of both capitalism and ponzi schemes.

As I would take the advice from the honest people of Bear Sterns.

A close family member worked there.

Before '08, BS was pretty well-respected as lower bulge bracket and was considered the most traditional and old school firm on the Street. Lot's of stories to tell.

That being said...in the early 2000s, their high yield and MBS trading desks were pretty boneheaded.

[Bear Stearns]

I like that you chose to ignore my tax question, but to answer your question because I'm not a politician, no, capitalists don't "run the ponzi schemes" they create wealth.

Then again that depends on who you're talking about. When I see and hear 'capitalist' I don't imagine a rent-seeking landlord. I imagine an entrepreneur, a banker, a manufacturer, a builder, a farmer.

Like Bernie Madoff?

Bernie Madoff was a criminal and found guilty in a court of law. Hardly a rebuke of capitalism.

[The Black Forrest]

Like Bernie Madoff?

Bernie Madoff was a criminal and found guilty in a court of law. Hardly a rebuke of capitalism.

Indeed. He was still a capitalist. Ponzi scheme is a boring argument anyway.

[Hakons]

Taxes on wealth (which is different from income) are unconstitutional, so what people think of them doesn't really matter.

Does it now?

Where is that exactly?

Generally, the government cannot seize private property. There are some exceptions, like eminent domain, but the preservation of property is the norm. This is why we needed an amendment to make income taxes possible. Taxing wealth would also need an amendment.

Taxes on wealth (which is different from income) are unconstitutional, so what people think of them doesn't really matter.

All wealth is income. Whether one obtained that wealth by making a salary, investing in the stock market, inheriting it, finding a briefcase with a million dollars on the streets, or finding diamonds under their basement, it's all income.

"All wealth is income" is just economic illiteracy, but I guess it's just plain illiteracy as well. For [word] is entirely [other word] claims, it seems one needs to ignore that words actually have definitions. Income is the amount of money you make during a time span (usually a year), while wealth is the total amount of assets (property, securities, cash, ect...) you have. Gaining wealth from securities, like stocks, isn't income. Stocks are merely a percentage of ownership in a firm. One quickly realizes it isn't income when the stock declines. You would be making a negative income, which is antithetical to the word income. Take real estate as another example. You wouldn't be taxed for a rise in your house's evaluation (though your house may be taxed at a different rate. There is a distinction between taxing for an increase in evaluation and taxing based on tax brackets, which don't measure increases or decreases).

Not sure what you're getting at here. In a hypothetical where my parents had a great deal of assets that were passed onto me, naturally, I'd be fine with paying a higher tax rate. Can't speak for everyone here, but still.

Why can't socialism succeed without demanding everyone else participates in it?

You can already donate money to the IRS, it's right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gift ... nment.html

High tax rates aren't socialism. If we keep socialism to the barbarity that it is, without muddling up its definition, I think socialism would quickly fall out of vogue.

Why can't socialism succeed without demanding everyone else participates in it?

You can already donate money to the IRS, it's right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gift ... nment.html

Or......maybe the wealthy can pay their fair share?

The "wealthy" (ambiguous) are paying a "fair" (ambiguous) share. The top 10% pays around 70% of income taxes. That is probably lower now, given the Trump tax cuts, but the point still stands. The statement that "the wealthy should pay their fair share" sounds well and good until one realized how ambiguous, and how prone to bias, it is.

[Hakons]

Doesn't answer my question.

None of the socialist principles are incompatible within a capitalist economy. They're just inherently shit and uncompetitive and collapse in on themselves without a constant ponzi scheme of confiscated money. Until it collapses again when that pool runs out.

Aren't capitalists running the ponzi schemes?

A small percentage, but they're mostly destroyed by other capitalists blowing the whistle on something that would destroy other capitalist investors' livelihoods. Equating capitalism to ponzi schemes is just economic illiteracy.

EDIT: It looks like you weren't equating the two

[South Odreria]

Not sure what you're getting at here. In a hypothetical where my parents had a great deal of assets that were passed onto me, naturally, I'd be fine with paying a higher tax rate. Can't speak for everyone here, but still.

Why can't socialism succeed without demanding everyone else participates in it?

You can already donate money to the IRS, it's right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gift ... nment.html

Taxes =! socialism

[Bear Stearns]

what would happen if Bernie Sanders turned out to be a bloodthirsty warmonger and started nuking people like in Civ 5

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

what would happen if Bernie Sanders turned out to be a bloodthirsty warmonger and started nuking people like in Civ 5

The developers would fix the glitch.

[Tobleste]

Why can't socialism succeed without demanding everyone else participates in it?

You can already donate money to the IRS, it's right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gift ... nment.html

Taxes =! socialism

It basically is. To some people here, any economic idea vaguely left of centre is socialism. It's why plenty of young people in America embrace the label; every economic solution to inequality is 'socialist'.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Has anybody else had a read of AOC’s "Green New Deal" yet?

[South Odreria]

Taxes =! socialism

It basically is. To some people here, any economic idea vaguely left of centre is socialism. It's why plenty of young people in America embrace the label; every economic solution to inequality is 'socialist'.

If having a functional government is left of center then we've got a problem

[Ifreann]

Or......maybe the wealthy can pay their fair share?

The wealthiest 10% pay 69% of US income taxes and the wealthiest 1% pay 37%. How much higher would you regard as "fair share"? Should 1% pay 99% of taxes?

That sounds good, for a start.

[South Odreria]

Lol that Gillibrand has fewer votes than Delaney.

[The Lone Alliance]

Has anybody else had a read of AOC’s "Green New Deal" yet?

I compare it to Mao's "Great leap forward" in that it'll fail horribly and likely lead to millions and millions of people dying.

[Mystic Warriors]

Has anybody else had a read of AOC’s "Green New Deal" yet?

I compare it to Mao's "Great leap forward" in that it'll fail horribly and likely lead to millions and millions of people dying.

So you haven't read it?

[Mystic Warriors]

It basically is. To some people here, any economic idea vaguely left of centre is socialism. It's why plenty of young people in America embrace the label; every economic solution to inequality is 'socialist'.

If having a functional government is left of center then we've got a problem

If it gets the country to the left, then no we don't.

[The Lone Alliance]

I compare it to Mao's "Great leap forward" in that it'll fail horribly and likely lead to millions and millions of people dying.

So you haven't read it?

Yes I have read it.
It was very very stupid.

It needs to go back and be rewritten quite a bit to be more realistic in goals and means.

[Mystic Warriors]

So you haven't read it?

Yes I have read it.
It was very very stupid.

How so? What is wrong with it?