Political Roundtable Part XV

[Kanyewest]

Also throwing this out there on another reason why tuition costs are higher in the US than they are in some other European countries, at least this was the explanation given to me by a European professor.

- American universities throws a lot of money investing in new facilities including football stadiums, basketball stadiums, sports facilities for non-profit sports, gyms for students, modern cafeteria, new classroom buildings, modern apartment buildings, better cafeteria food all in the attempts of attracting new students. True some of these activities generate revenue for the universities although practically nothing is added to a person's education while students have to pay more tuition. Yes, some schools make money (Alabama) although many schools do not (ie Maryland after they built a new basketball stadium).

My own personal opinion
- Students themselves want to go to the best ranked schools and are willing to pay a premium to go to these universities because it is ranked higher, tends to be in an urban center (where costs tend to be higher), and are probably operating at high capacities. In reality many students are not getting a good ROI when choosing these universities.
- Costs are dramatically higher for out of state students yet students often leave their states to get away from their families and often are not thinking about the huge amount of college debt that they have to pay in years to come.
- Universities find it tougher to say no to students and want to get bigger not smaller especially since there is not much of a difference.between the candidates that they accept and those they ultimately decline at the last minute.
- There is no salary cap as universities want to attract the best teachers, have smaller classrooms, have the best sports teams and recreation.
- Even if your state university is good, that makes it even harder to go since there are limited spots. For instance, it is very difficult for a Maryland resident to get into that school. Also, more people are willing to travel out of state which limits the spots for locals. Plus state schools get more money from out of state candidates and have an interest to reject local candidates.
- Local governments are no longer completing their financial obligations towards universities in attempt to balance their budgets. For instance, in Maryland, residents attending UMD graduate rose by 100% (or by 20,000) from 2010 to 2011 as a result of budgets cuts.

[stilldropin20]

Well your views are somewhat bizarre you are basically suggesting setting up concentration camps for foreigner workers to be abused by corporate giants and to be deported at the whim of those employers. Many of the undocumented workers in the USA are already being abused by American business and in many cases consumers picking up workers near Home Depots. Yes there is nothing wrong with having points systems for immigrants which Canada does successfully but also will take about double the number of refugees in real numbers that the USA does this year. By the way a good number of those refugees are crossing the border from the USA. Yes Canada requires seasonal workers and also service area workers but they also have the same protections in the work place as Canadians and the employers must pay minimum wages.

Not. At. All. Your own mind took you there and made it sound bizarre. not my words.

My family is from the south side of chicago. Roseland. Pullman precisely. they came here as immigrants in the early 1900's and worked for Geroge pullman in his "company town." They Rented(to own) one of his small company homes that he built for his workers, and used his company script(money on the books) to buy groceries at his company store, etc. It was a utopia at first. before the credit markets dried up for him because european investment bankers began to reinstitue our central banking system and constricted the money supply in the early 1900's so as to squeeze US politicians into accepting their federnal reserve system. ah but i digress again. Pullman was hit hard by the calling on his line of credit. Creditors called in their lines of credit everywhere in the US but espeicially Pullman who was using company script (which like bitcoin et al, could be a way to avoid constistions in the money supply). The calling of his credit and sharp increases in interests rates forced Pullman to make his workers work longer hours and pay more for rent and groceries-just to stay afloat. But It was still a utopia (for the working class) compared to most factory conditions and lving conditions in the US at that time. it was the First "city" in america with modern plumbing, modern electric, and amny things. just a beautiful small manufacturing town (10 minutes from down town chicago with no traffic). But the narrative got spun on Pullman and his town into this being a "bad" thing. And taking advantage of workers, blah blah blah.

yet, My grand parents never felt taken advantage of though. In fact, My family still owns that house today as well as multiple other family members still live in pullman today. and when i talked to my grandparents about those early times: they loved Pullman. stayed there their entire lives. Raised me to appreciate the town and what it meant for us(the 3rd and 4th generation). They cam here from nothing and with nothing. and went to work immediately. bought a home immediately. raised their children and grandchildren with the self respect of making a living.

So "Company towns" can work. they dont have to be evil. at all. And if you are newly immigrated to the US, like my great grand-parents, you should come here with the understanding that you ARE GOING TO WORK-likely for lower wages. You are going to "earn your keep." for whatever probationary period...i dont know? 4 years? 6 years? But there should be programs like these that benefit the newly arrived immigrant, and already present americans. And I believe that all american should spend time in the military. ALL of them!! My grandpa and great uncle did (1st gen) as did the 3rd and 4th gen).

And to that end i ask, why should a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th generation americans lose jobs to a newly arrived immigrant? All things being equal in terms of skills, if both people can do "the job" why on earth would we put a system in place that allows a corporation to give that "plush" job to a newly arrived immigrant? My family worked for very low wages for their entire lives. when they arrived and didn't speak any english. Yet my grandfather from spain via italy was an italian college graduate and was fluent in italian, spanish, french and german (all which made him one helluva an asset in ww2) but when he arrived here he got a very low paying job in sherwin williams mixing paint. He worked 60 or more hours per week and "tended bar" in the evenings and weekends. even christmas. he worked there 30 years!!!! His retirement (at 100% his last years monthly wages) was $852.00 per month!!! His social security was about $250.00 per month. My grandma made sandwiches for $5.00 per hour up until she was 75 years old!! yet they still managed to save over $500,000 and disperse to their children. Their children, my mom and uncle were put through trade schools in the 60's. They managed to buy my uncle his own mechanic shop and fully fund it. And my mom her own beauty salon and fully fund it. I ended up in private schools and a doctor (after I served in the US NAVY out of high school.) MY FAMILY PAID THEIR DUES!!!! the company town worked for me and my family. My entire family is and was very proud of our company town and the opportunities it provided us.

So Not only would it work. It could be a giant step forward compared current working conditions oversees and wages and life style and most importantly OPPORTUNITY going forward as compared to the current sweatshops oversees. Just like it was for our family...who again, paid our dues. i would like to think that any 3rd,4th, 5th, 6th 7th, etc. generation america has their own story not too much unlike mine and also paid their dues. Those americans deserve the higher paying jobs. newly arrived immigrants should be willing to understand that coming to the US is not necessarily going to be an overnight success. That they are going to pay their dues as well.

And of course, we haven't even touched how implementing programs like this can bring back low end manufacturing jobs. but also mid level and high end jobs will be created for current american workers. someone has to build "those corporate town" and then their will be whole new micro-economies created. new schools, new hospitals, etc etc. Mass migration could ensue. which equal mass growth. mass revenue. mass tax dollars! we might even be able to fund some of bernie sanders paltform with mass immigration plans like these.

But alas. it will never happen!! This is america!! we cant pay some one low wages!!!!!!!!! we can only buy product that are made in sweatshops overseas made by 12 year old children working for $12 per day!! out of site!! out of mind!!!! ah yes! the great "american" way. I totally forgot how we do things.

Yes turn back a civilized society back a 100+ years.
This is a major part of Trump versus NAFTA criticizing Mexico for unfair labor practices.
Its easy to stop exploitation of people in other countries buy fair trade products and stop shopping at Walmart the Satan of the modern world.

Turn back nothing!! Google has their own high end modern day version of the company town. I live 2 blocks away from the new google head quarters in chicago. Many friends work there. They provide free meals, relocation costs(with short term free rent at local high rises), and a ton of other company benefits. Their own modern day utopia.

A modern-day, fully-vetted, with multiple "watch dogs" company town could work. Just the scrutiny of the american public will make these companies provide just and humane working conditions with livable wages. But the "company town" aspect, if done right, makes it more efficient.

I trust Apple or Google to implement a school system, or a residential complex, or grocery store complex over the US government any day of the week and twice on sunday. They have too much to lose if it looks like they "exploit" their workers. In fact, Google and Apple may in fact lose(make less) money on such an effort. So if the US governement is smart, they could demand all products consumed by americans must be american made. So this could be nothing more than a covert tax on the richest corporations. No idea why you think it would be a bad thing. only the limitations of your mind are making it sound "dirty."

[dckingsfan]

The fact remains that the US can afford to spend a lot more...

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

But I actually believe we can afford these things. Raising taxes on the rich and cutting military spending would finance basically any single thing we'd want to do. Obviously there are limits to what we can afford, and I don't know precisely what those limits are, but that doesn't mean we can't have these conversations.

Like, personally I would prioritize more money being spent on healthcare, education and sustainability. I don't know exactly what we can afford, but I know we spend way more money than I'd like us to spend on the military. And I know we could definitely tax the 1% more.

At this point with our spending trajectory just on entitlements without defense or any other spending we will spend more than our GDP. It's easy to do the research on this one. Just google entitlement spending as a percentage of GDP. Historically, the federal government has been able to tax at around 18% of GDP before tax receipts fall. Even this number is getting harder because state and local tax revenues have risen to 40+ percent of GDP (just google federal, state and local tax revenues as a percentage of GDP). So, even if you taxed the 1% at 100% of their earnings - the math still doesn't work out.

At this point we are already well past what we can afford on military spending and entitlements - both need to decrease if we are to stay solvent.

[stilldropin20]

Our current education system (which is based upon central government planning - probably one of the most socialistic parts of our government) isn't very competitive with other countries. It needs to change. But we have entrenched interests that have worked to keep it in place, namely professional educators. Not only do they provide a bad product, they are bankrupting our local municipalities. They have done everything they can to keep competition out. In the best performing countries kids and their parents are recruited with more than one choice of school.

Higher education is more or less unfettered capitalism. There is infinite choice, and lots of for-profit institutions. Not sure what's so good about that, as it seems like that system is failing and potentially a huge bubble?

Maybe instead of turning every education level into a for-profit free market enterprise, we instead just adequately fund our schools?

how about we get tough on our candy ass children and make these snowflakes actually learn something in grade school and high school?

its funny, ive got a doctorate. and on my way to earning this doctorate something clicked. That i was learning all the same stuff over and over again. in fact I was. I just didn't know how to "learn" early on. I wasn't forced to learn. I wasn't made to learn. I had no sense of self urgency to learn. So I barely leanred things in grade school and high school. I could have easily done so. And many of my friends in fact did. so by the time we took our docotorate level classes together they cruised through them. They had these classes before. They paid attention. I didn't even know how to pay attention yet. My stupid ass was too busy playing sports!! yeah for sports!!!! Sports Sports sports!!! now did i learn somehting on the basketball court? yes. On the football field? yes. But my mind was on sports and other fun things when i was in biology class as a fresh in high shcool when it should have been on biology.

So yeah, this "free higher education" you speak of? Its already there. in grade school and high school. Kids just dont prioritize it no ttry hard enough OR there are too many jackasses like me in class disrupting the class or not trying hard enough. keeping the motivated kids back toi my level (speed) of learning.

You get the good kids in better programs! and get the jackasses like me in a more militant environment so we can "learn how to learn." and your "free higher education" is barely necessary. College is mostly for the lazy that didn't learn the same information the first time around in high school.

[stilldropin20]

[snip]

Maybe it was akin to his speech last night. We will respect the sovereignty or nations. Well, well will respect them if we want to respect them. The logic is there - and then it isn't. Or it is there and just not consistent.

EJ Dionne had some words about this today (WaPo op-ed)

We're all for our own sovereignty but not so much for other countries unless they do what we want or
prefer them to do, N Korea, Venezuela.

its quite simple logic. of course all countries do (and should) look out for themselves. in that regard they all want lines on the map that favor them the most and trade policies that do the same. this isn't news. and definitely NOT some flaw in trump.

[gtn130]

I think you are missing the dire straights that our state and local governments are in... I think you might want to do a bit of research on that... It is one thing to make a blanket statement like this and another to realize where we are at today with our receipts and expenditures.

Our country at nearly every level has a spending problem. But our citizens seem to think we have unlimited resources. The combination allows our politicians to run on false platforms. Trump ran on balancing the budget by reducing taxes and not touching entitlements - a winning platform. But a false platform.

You seem like a bright guy. You don't like the Trump supporters. But they are buying into the same false platform that you are buying into with Bernie. We can raise taxes on the top .01 and pay for expanded healthcare are for all, free high education for all and expanded social security. The numbers just don't add up - and I don't see you actively questioning those numbers.

But I actually believe we can afford these things. Raising taxes on the rich and cutting military spending would finance basically any single thing we'd want to do. Obviously there are limits to what we can afford, and I don't know precisely what those limits are, but that doesn't mean we can't have these conversations.

Like, personally I would prioritize more money being spent on healthcare, education and sustainability. I don't know exactly what we can afford, but I know we spend way more money than I'd like us to spend on the military. And I know we could definitely tax the 1% more.

At this point with our spending trajectory just on entitlements without defense or any other spending we will spend more than our GDP. It's easy to do the research on this one. Just google entitlement spending as a percentage of GDP. Historically, the federal government has been able to tax at around 18% of GDP before tax receipts fall. Even this number is getting harder because state and local tax revenues have risen to 40+ percent of GDP (just google federal, state and local tax revenues as a percentage of GDP). So, even if you taxed the 1% at 100% of their earnings - the math still doesn't work out.

At this point we are already well past what we can afford on military spending and entitlements - both need to decrease if we are to stay solvent.

Yes, I understand we have to pay for things. My point is that saying our government should provide X service doesn't mean that I am opposed to slashing spending elsewhere or I am oblivious to the concept that things cost money, which is why I don't see why the conversation has to always head in this direction of WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT.

Again, I would like better/more robust healthcare, education and sustainability programs. We can pay for them through:

-Slashing military spending
-Tax reform
-Social Security reform

Generally speaking it's a matter of priorities.

[popper]

America does have a spending problem. The real trick, though, is the kind of value for dollar they're actually getting, and on a lot of fronts, it isn't very good. The solution may include reducing, and likely at the very least restructuring entitlements, but there needs to be a bit of a hard look at why the value for dollar isn't there anymore.

Capitalism is great, but at its core, it's basically an economic system powered by greed. That isn't actually as bad as it might seem on the surface, but it requires a check to it, and that check absolutely is a functioning government. I'd suggest that government has ceased to function nearly so well relatively recently thanks to capitalism seeping into the system, which is not desirable in the same way it isn't desirable to have the government seep into business. It's a tricky distinction, too, because the governments job is to regulate capitalism, but not control it or save it or hinder it, while capitalism as a force clearly has an incentive to try to gain access to government. It really isn't hard to see how Trump the businessman is benefiting from being president. How big of an issue that is can be debated, but the reality is clear.

There are a lot of forces at play, though, and I couldn't hope to capture them all. Automation is increasing the disparity between the well-off and those not so, and shifting the numbers away from the well-off. Those well-off, except for a few super wealthy, aren't necessarily doing wonderfully, either, and so bristle at the idea of helping those falling behind. That's going to change, though. Automation is eventually going to hit sectors like law, medicine, pharmacy, engineering, etc., too. Then what?

I'd actually suggest that we need a long, hard rethink of capitalism. That doesn't necessarily mean socialism or communism or that we need to do away with capitalism completely or anything in particular, but we need creative ideas and we need them soon, because the economic structure we currently have in place isn't going to work for another century, and it's going to cause an awful lot of social upheaval on an awful lot of levels as people's base beliefs they keep hidden come out more in order to justify their secret belief that they're really better than most of society, so when things go relatively poorly for them, they should go worse for others. We're seeing it already.

We do need a rethink. I believe it was Pres. Wilson in 1913 that facilitated passage of the 16th and 17th amendments (Federal Reserve too I think.) With passage of these two amendments our a glide path to profligate spending and outside corrupting influence on govt. were baked in to the system. If we want to have any hope of turning things around we should repeal the 17th amendment first and then sometime later figure out a self-limiting way of funding govt. (the role that tariffs played prior to 1913.) I won't hold my breath though. Too many powerful people are raking in the cabbage at the expense of current and future taxpayers. I wish I could be more optimistic.

[doclinkin]

Hey stilldropin20,

I know we've been hard on you, but hear me out here:

My Grandfather smoked his whole life. I was about 10 years old when my mother said to him, 'If you ever want to see your grandchildren graduate, you have to stop immediately.'. Tears welled up in his eyes when he realized what exactly was at stake. He gave it up immediately. Three years later he died of lung cancer. It was really sad and destroyed me. My mother said to me- 'Don't ever smoke. Please don't put your family through what your Grandfather put us through." I agreed. At 28, I have never touched a cigarette. I must say, I feel a very slight sense of regret for never having done it, because your posts gave me cancer anyway.

Hallafame.

And see this is why I love this thread. And dont mind the insults etc. I mean like my insults and trolling thread, and bump it every now and again, but its kinda pointless venting and self-gratifying entertainment. But here at least we insult each other about things that really matter. I mean if you cant get passionate and insult someone about life changing world changing topics, then why throw insults at all?

And in the case of a democracy these things matter. Its kinda terrifying that Russia found out a way to judo flip Democracy and use our uniformed populace and knee jerk emotional voting as a weapon. Weaponized confusion. Wicked. I don't know how to inoculate our political systems against this. This was in fact what the Electoral college was intended for, that the will of the people would be filtered through an educated elite, but this too was used against us. Whether or not you are happy with the election results, this aspect ought to make you uncomfortable, that a foreign power who does not have out best interests at heart managed to steer and game our democratic process.

So. It seems to me that a petri dish like this forum, where we already have many things in common, western democracy, education, wizards fandom god help us all, is a perfect place to learn how to influence and change each others opinions. We can insult each other. Doesn't work all that great so far as I can tell. But its fun. We can crush each other with superior facts and knowledge. Ditto, as people find countersources that refute anothers' facts and people take comfort in confirmation bias, but you walk away from the keyboard feeling like an intellectual samurai. We can stalk away in a huff. But honestly, however we learn from this, these things matter.

One reason why I like reading the anecdotes and history of how people on here have formed their concrete and durable opinions. PIF and his holocaust survivor family and hepcat teenagerhood with the beatniks. Stilldroopy and his Company Store ancestry. I learn more from how a person formed their opinions, your history is not going to change. Your early experiences matter. Your prejudices are tough to budge. But that area, our subconscious foundations, are what we have to understand if we are going to move anyone in the right direction.

I honestly think political parties get trapped by pointing out the differences between themselves and their opponents. When we do better if we can appeal to the things that we hold in common and form bridges.

And if we disagree, hell, at least be funny about it.


-=DAMMIT, an old meme, so not HOF. But still. Funny.

[cammac]

Not. At. All. Your own mind took you there and made it sound bizarre. not my words.

My family is from the south side of chicago. Roseland. Pullman precisely. they came here as immigrants in the early 1900's and worked for Geroge pullman in his "company town." They Rented(to own) one of his small company homes that he built for his workers, and used his company script(money on the books) to buy groceries at his company store, etc. It was a utopia at first. before the credit markets dried up for him because european investment bankers began to reinstitue our central banking system and constricted the money supply in the early 1900's so as to squeeze US politicians into accepting their federnal reserve system. ah but i digress again. Pullman was hit hard by the calling on his line of credit. Creditors called in their lines of credit everywhere in the US but espeicially Pullman who was using company script (which like bitcoin et al, could be a way to avoid constistions in the money supply). The calling of his credit and sharp increases in interests rates forced Pullman to make his workers work longer hours and pay more for rent and groceries-just to stay afloat. But It was still a utopia (for the working class) compared to most factory conditions and lving conditions in the US at that time. it was the First "city" in america with modern plumbing, modern electric, and amny things. just a beautiful small manufacturing town (10 minutes from down town chicago with no traffic). But the narrative got spun on Pullman and his town into this being a "bad" thing. And taking advantage of workers, blah blah blah.

yet, My grand parents never felt taken advantage of though. In fact, My family still owns that house today as well as multiple other family members still live in pullman today. and when i talked to my grandparents about those early times: they loved Pullman. stayed there their entire lives. Raised me to appreciate the town and what it meant for us(the 3rd and 4th generation). They cam here from nothing and with nothing. and went to work immediately. bought a home immediately. raised their children and grandchildren with the self respect of making a living.

So "Company towns" can work. they dont have to be evil. at all. And if you are newly immigrated to the US, like my great grand-parents, you should come here with the understanding that you ARE GOING TO WORK-likely for lower wages. You are going to "earn your keep." for whatever probationary period...i dont know? 4 years? 6 years? But there should be programs like these that benefit the newly arrived immigrant, and already present americans. And I believe that all american should spend time in the military. ALL of them!! My grandpa and great uncle did (1st gen) as did the 3rd and 4th gen).

And to that end i ask, why should a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th generation americans lose jobs to a newly arrived immigrant? All things being equal in terms of skills, if both people can do "the job" why on earth would we put a system in place that allows a corporation to give that "plush" job to a newly arrived immigrant? My family worked for very low wages for their entire lives. when they arrived and didn't speak any english. Yet my grandfather from spain via italy was an italian college graduate and was fluent in italian, spanish, french and german (all which made him one helluva an asset in ww2) but when he arrived here he got a very low paying job in sherwin williams mixing paint. He worked 60 or more hours per week and "tended bar" in the evenings and weekends. even christmas. he worked there 30 years!!!! His retirement (at 100% his last years monthly wages) was $852.00 per month!!! His social security was about $250.00 per month. My grandma made sandwiches for $5.00 per hour up until she was 75 years old!! yet they still managed to save over $500,000 and disperse to their children. Their children, my mom and uncle were put through trade schools in the 60's. They managed to buy my uncle his own mechanic shop and fully fund it. And my mom her own beauty salon and fully fund it. I ended up in private schools and a doctor (after I served in the US NAVY out of high school.) MY FAMILY PAID THEIR DUES!!!! the company town worked for me and my family. My entire family is and was very proud of our company town and the opportunities it provided us.

So Not only would it work. It could be a giant step forward compared current working conditions oversees and wages and life style and most importantly OPPORTUNITY going forward as compared to the current sweatshops oversees. Just like it was for our family...who again, paid our dues. i would like to think that any 3rd,4th, 5th, 6th 7th, etc. generation america has their own story not too much unlike mine and also paid their dues. Those americans deserve the higher paying jobs. newly arrived immigrants should be willing to understand that coming to the US is not necessarily going to be an overnight success. That they are going to pay their dues as well.

And of course, we haven't even touched how implementing programs like this can bring back low end manufacturing jobs. but also mid level and high end jobs will be created for current american workers. someone has to build "those corporate town" and then their will be whole new micro-economies created. new schools, new hospitals, etc etc. Mass migration could ensue. which equal mass growth. mass revenue. mass tax dollars! we might even be able to fund some of bernie sanders paltform with mass immigration plans like these.

But alas. it will never happen!! This is america!! we cant pay some one low wages!!!!!!!!! we can only buy product that are made in sweatshops overseas made by 12 year old children working for $12 per day!! out of site!! out of mind!!!! ah yes! the great "american" way. I totally forgot how we do things.

Yes turn back a civilized society back a 100+ years.
This is a major part of Trump versus NAFTA criticizing Mexico for unfair labor practices.
Its easy to stop exploitation of people in other countries buy fair trade products and stop shopping at Walmart the Satan of the modern world.

Turn back nothing!! Google has their own high end modern day version of the company town. I live 2 blocks away from the new google head quarters in chicago. Many friends work there. They provide free meals, relocation costs(with short term free rent at local high rises), and a ton of other company benefits. Their own modern day utopia.

A modern-day, fully-vetted, with multiple "watch dogs" company town could work. Just the scrutiny of the american public will make these companies provide just and humane working conditions with livable wages. But the "company town" aspect, if done right, makes it more efficient.

I trust Apple or Google to implement a school system, or a residential complex, or grocery store complex over the US government any day of the week and twice on sunday. They have too much to lose if it looks like they "exploit" their workers. In fact, Google and Apple may in fact lose(make less) money on such an effort. So if the US governement is smart, they could demand all products consumed by americans must be american made. So this could be nothing more than a covert tax on the richest corporations. No idea why you think it would be a bad thing. only the limitations of your mind are making it sound "dirty."

Your description of a special economic zone utilizing unskilled foreign workers is eons away from Google & Apple campuses be realistic. They are excellent simply they require excellence I suggest you look at Mexican factories in places like Juarez owned by American companies who are exploiting workers would they be any different in the USA. I spent 10 years in Shenzhen which started as a Special Economic Zone in 35years the city grew from 135,000 people to 16 million and is still economically viable because its major products are higher tech I Phones, contact lenses but the average wages have grown over 100% in 10 years.

[dckingsfan]

But I actually believe we can afford these things. Raising taxes on the rich and cutting military spending would finance basically any single thing we'd want to do. Obviously there are limits to what we can afford, and I don't know precisely what those limits are, but that doesn't mean we can't have these conversations.

Like, personally I would prioritize more money being spent on healthcare, education and sustainability. I don't know exactly what we can afford, but I know we spend way more money than I'd like us to spend on the military. And I know we could definitely tax the 1% more.

At this point with our spending trajectory just on entitlements without defense or any other spending we will spend more than our GDP. It's easy to do the research on this one. Just google entitlement spending as a percentage of GDP. Historically, the federal government has been able to tax at around 18% of GDP before tax receipts fall. Even this number is getting harder because state and local tax revenues have risen to 40+ percent of GDP (just google federal, state and local tax revenues as a percentage of GDP). So, even if you taxed the 1% at 100% of their earnings - the math still doesn't work out.

At this point we are already well past what we can afford on military spending and entitlements - both need to decrease if we are to stay solvent.

Yes, I understand we have to pay for things. My point is that saying our government should provide X service doesn't mean that I am opposed to slashing spending elsewhere or I am oblivious to the concept that things cost money, which is why I don't see why the conversation has to always head in this direction of WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT.

Again, I would like better/more robust healthcare, education and sustainability programs. We can pay for them through:

-Slashing military spending
-Tax reform
-Social Security reform

Generally speaking it's a matter of priorities.

Okay, I probably didn't explain this well enough. Entitlements + interest at their current trend will take all of our revenues. No amount of military cuts or tax reform will take care of that.

Sanders knows this and yet proposed expanding SS and the other entitlements. One thing you have right - it isn't who is going to pay for this or what we would cut to make it happen. It just can't happen without deep cuts or major changes in those programs. And that is most certainly not what he is proposing.

It is similar to Trump proposing to cut deficits and expand the economy but slash immigration and wipe out trade agreements. He was lying - the difference is, I don't think (and becoming more certain as time goes on) Trump actually understands the ramifications of his policy proposals.

[DCZards]

Sanders knows this and yet proposed expanding SS and the other entitlements. One thing you have right - it isn't who is going to pay for this or what we would cut to make it happen. It just can't happen without deep cuts or major changes in those programs. And that is most certainly not what he is proposing.

It is similar to Trump proposing to cut deficits and expand the economy but slash immigration and wipe out trade agreements. He was lying - the difference is, I don't think (and becoming more certain as time goes on) Trump actually understands the ramifications of his policy proposals.

Again, I think you underestimate Bernie. Just because he's only put half a cake on the table doesn't mean he hasn't baked a whole cake...and is waiting for the right time to serve it up.

You start with your priorities--increased spending on healthcare, higher ed and SS--and later (at the appropriate time) you get into the weeds regarding how to pay for it.

You win philosophical wars by first establishing your priorities and getting your troops behind that vision. Patience, young grasshopper.

[Ruzious]

Ruz/popper - the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 was bipartisan. Meaning that both the Ds and Rs voted to lower capital gains. There were many reasons for the tax breaks - but if there was one driving force behind the tax breaks, I would say it was the Ds from NY. And the Rs have passed tax cuts in the past without reducing spending - driving up our deficit spending. And don't forget tax breaks to deduct state and local income taxes - the Ds push that one as well.

And? What's that got to do with now - other than some kind of attempt to place blame?

[dckingsfan]

Ruz/popper - the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 was bipartisan. Meaning that both the Ds and Rs voted to lower capital gains. There were many reasons for the tax breaks - but if there was one driving force behind the tax breaks, I would say it was the Ds from NY. And the Rs have passed tax cuts in the past without reducing spending - driving up our deficit spending. And don't forget tax breaks to deduct state and local income taxes - the Ds push that one as well.

And? What's that got to do with now - other than some kind of attempt to place blame?

Hey Ruz, great question... my point only by the part above is that getting to a solid tax platform is going to be really tough. The carveouts are on both sides including the capital gains carveout that you bring up. If you go through the tax code there are as many brought into play by the Rs as the Ds and vice versa.

It seemed like you both thought that tax reform is a good idea. I agree - but it seems like that is going to be super difficult to do.

Your citing indirectly of the Death Tax Repeal Act is a good example of an R carveout that has grown.

Another one that has grown has been the minimum alternative tax. It was only supposed to hit the rich - but as time goes on it is hitting the upper middle class. It was set in 1969 with no adjustment for inflation. It also has some unintended consequences - like removing energy incentives to purchase electric or hybrid cars or solar systems for your house. If we have a solid bout of inflation it is going to drop down and hit even middle class or even below that... but now that the revenue is flowing in - there seems little interest in taking care of the problem.

I could go on with examples from both sides - but I think you get the drift...

[dckingsfan]

Sanders knows this and yet proposed expanding SS and the other entitlements. One thing you have right - it isn't who is going to pay for this or what we would cut to make it happen. It just can't happen without deep cuts or major changes in those programs. And that is most certainly not what he is proposing.

It is similar to Trump proposing to cut deficits and expand the economy but slash immigration and wipe out trade agreements. He was lying - the difference is, I don't think (and becoming more certain as time goes on) Trump actually understands the ramifications of his policy proposals.

Again, I think you underestimate Bernie. Just because he's only put half a cake on the table doesn't mean he hasn't baked a whole cake...and is waiting for the right time to serve it up.

You start with your priorities--increased spending on healthcare, higher ed and SS--and later (at the appropriate time) you get into the weeds regarding how to pay for it.

You win philosophical wars by first establishing your priorities and getting your troops behind that vision. Patience, young grasshopper.

Nope, I am not missing it at all. He is promoting false promises - then he will come back and say - damn legislature won't pass my agenda. He is flat out lying.

If he is trying to win the war like Trump did - okay - just don't have to respect that.

[Ruzious]

Ruz/popper - the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 was bipartisan. Meaning that both the Ds and Rs voted to lower capital gains. There were many reasons for the tax breaks - but if there was one driving force behind the tax breaks, I would say it was the Ds from NY. And the Rs have passed tax cuts in the past without reducing spending - driving up our deficit spending. And don't forget tax breaks to deduct state and local income taxes - the Ds push that one as well.

And? What's that got to do with now - other than some kind of attempt to place blame?

Hey Ruz, great question... my point only by the part above is that getting to a solid tax platform is going to be really tough. The carveouts are on both sides including the capital gains carveout that you bring up. If you go through the tax code there are as many brought into play by the Rs as the Ds and vice versa.

It seemed like you both thought that tax reform is a good idea. I agree - but it seems like that is going to be super difficult to do.

Your citing indirectly of the Death Tax Repeal Act is a good example of an R carveout that has grown.

Another one that has grown has been the minimum alternative tax. It was only supposed to hit the rich - but as time goes on it is hitting the upper middle class. It was set in 1969 with no adjustment for inflation. It also has some unintended consequences - like removing energy incentives to purchase electric or hybrid cars or solar systems for your house. If we have a solid bout of inflation it is going to drop down and hit even middle class or even below that... but now that the revenue is flowing in - there seems little interest in taking care of the problem.

I could go on with examples from both sides - but I think you get the drift...

I remember 1969 for man landing on the moon and the Mets winning the WS, but AMT still lingers. Yeah, it's become ridiculous and outlived its use. Of course, it does raise revenue, so if it is repealed, it should be done so with a revenue raiser - such as reducing cap gains rate - regardless that Bill Clinton lowered it 20 years ago.

As far as actually getting something done - yeah, that's not gonna happen with the current president and Congress. And I doubt things would pass if someone as far left as Sanders gets elected. Radicals and fools on each side aren't likely going to get useful things accomplished.

[Wizardspride]

Yep. He barely knows him.

Read on Twitter

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-offered-chris-christie-vice-president-role-before-mike-pence/

Manafort had arranged for Trump to meet with his first choice for the job on July 13: Indiana Governor Mike Pence. Afterwards, the plans was for Trump and Pence to then fly back to New York together and a formal announcement would be made, a campaign source said of Manafort’s thinking.


What had previously been reported as a “lucky break” by the New York Times was actually a swift political maneuver devised by the now fired campaign manager. Set on changing Trump’s mind, he concocted a story that Trump’s plane had mechanical problems, forcing the soon-to-be Republican nominee to stay the night in Indianapolis for breakfast with the Pence family on Wednesday morning.

[stilldropin20]

If we are being real terms of cutting costs. Both to the american people directly and cutting government spending. As a doctor let me be clear. Costs are out of control. Not exactly because doctors fees have risen at an alarming rate.

Quite the contrary. If we are speaking large-scale rise in cost, there are 2 major issues.

1. A middle man has emerged between the doctor and his patients in the last 25 years. where unions and corporations mostly don't provide direct insurance for their employees or members . Instead those members and employees insurance benefits have been sold off to a third party, the insurance companies. That middle man being insurance companies. Another pseudo middleman is the US government where people don't have insurance yet need medical care. Both the us government and insurance companies have done everything they can to pay health providers significantly less money. Which unfortunately creates tension between doctors and their patients. Especially when we start talking about corporation owned medical care facilities that are basically just businesses using medicalfor profit no different than a grocery store. So conflicts of interest easily arise. One way or another doctors and corporate owned Medical Care Facilities will find a way to get paid. Especially corporate-owned Medical Care Facilities.

When The US government reimburses health care providers at low rates, to keep overall spending down it makes sense to everyone. However, when Insurance corporations reimburse providers at alarmingly low rates, so they can profit more, a major alarm bell should be going off for every single American. but it's not.

But that's really the short end of the problem.

2. The larger issue is that Americans are living longer and have lived a significantly less healthy lifestyle in the last 50 years then the previous 100 years. The EPA FDA and other Federal Watchdog agency agencies have been for sale for a long time too large corporations who have essentially been feeding the American public poison for quite some time. Add to that the sedimentary lifestyle of "advanced Society" and frankly everyone is really sick.

Compounding this issue is a combined healthcare and Pharmaceutical force over treating everyone. We are over treated overdiagnosed and over medicated with very expensive medicine that is mostly unnecessary if we just ate right and live healthier lifestyles.

You deal with that and Healthcare is no longer one-fifth of our economy not even one eighth not even one tenth. You deal with all that effectively and you cut the cost of healthcare by a factor of 10 minimally maybe 20.

But the pharm. Insurance. and Healthcare lobbyists are too strong. So in a way it's really a campaign Finance reform issue first.







Sent from my SM-N920T using RealGM mobile app

[Kanyewest]

Nope, I am not missing it at all. He is promoting false promises - then he will come back and say - damn legislature won't pass my agenda. He is flat out lying.

If he is trying to win the war like Trump did - okay - just don't have to respect that.

Not being able to get your agenda passed doesn't make you a liar.

Although speaking of the current president, there are other things that make him a liar

[stilldropin20]

Nope, I am not missing it at all. He is promoting false promises - then he will come back and say - damn legislature won't pass my agenda. He is flat out lying.

If he is trying to win the war like Trump did - okay - just don't have to respect that.

Not being able to get your agenda passed doesn't make you a liar.

Although speaking of the current president, there are other things that make him a liar

You can keep your doctor? They all lie man. Modern day americans are too immature to understand that politics require a give and take.

Sent from my SM-N920T using RealGM mobile app

[gtn130]

Nope, I am not missing it at all. He is promoting false promises - then he will come back and say - damn legislature won't pass my agenda. He is flat out lying.

If he is trying to win the war like Trump did - okay - just don't have to respect that.

Not being able to get your agenda passed doesn't make you a liar.

Although speaking of the current president, there are other things that make him a liar

You can keep your doctor? They all lie man. Modern day americans are too immature to understand that politics require a give and take.

Sent from my SM-N920T using RealGM mobile app

This is a Fox News talking point coming from someone who claims to have voted for Obama 3x