Democrat presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, has no problem with taking 90% of your income

[Flash]

[


I believe I've seen your list, but I am going on memory. Did your list provide the cost of each program and give a total? Simply saying this program or that isn't necessary doesn't really tell us anything unless we know the impact.

During the fifties we did pretty much what Sanders is suggesting, and it was a monumental success. We have been using the philosophy of cutting taxes and programs the last few decades, and it has been a failure. I have trouble buying more of what has failed will work while what has worked will fail. I don't think it is a bad idea, but I also don't think Sanders is the man who can accomplish it. We had Eisenhower before. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone even close to that quality now.

During the 1950s the total cost of government in the US was less than 20% of the GNP.

Nowadays with the total cost being over 40% with $18 trillion in debt and that idiot Sanders wants to tax more.

That is why he is a piece of dumbass shit.

Of course back in the 1950s nobody paid the 90% for a variety of reasons which have been discussed many times before but mostly ignored by those of you who don't want to hear it. I will educate you on that if you are confused about it.

We are going to achieve prosperity through the socialist greed of using the force of government to take money away from those who earned it and giving it away to those that didn't earn it. That is a recipe for disaster as we have seen with increasing poverty, increased welfare and decreasing family income.

We will only do well with the stimulation of capitalism. That is the only thing that will make this country grow. We will never do well with the filthy ass government taking money from one group and giving to the special interest groups.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Not one of the RWs read what he really said.

Not even one.

Most, if not all of the nutters on here, aren't capable of reading what was written, let alone comprehending it.

There was no need to read it, I saw the interview and my op title is 100% accurate.

Now run along child

 

[PratchettFan]

[


I believe I've seen your list, but I am going on memory. Did your list provide the cost of each program and give a total? Simply saying this program or that isn't necessary doesn't really tell us anything unless we know the impact.

During the fifties we did pretty much what Sanders is suggesting, and it was a monumental success. We have been using the philosophy of cutting taxes and programs the last few decades, and it has been a failure. I have trouble buying more of what has failed will work while what has worked will fail. I don't think it is a bad idea, but I also don't think Sanders is the man who can accomplish it. We had Eisenhower before. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone even close to that quality now.

During the 1950s the total cost of government in the US was less than 20% of the GNP.

Nowadays with the total cost being over 40% with $18 trillion in debt and that idiot Sanders wants to tax more.

That is why he is a piece of dumbass shit.

Of course back in the 1950s nobody paid the 90% for a variety of reasons which have been discussed many times before but mostly ignored by those of you who don't want to hear it. I will educate you on that if you are confused about it.

We are going to achieve prosperity through the socialist greed of using the force of government to take money away from those who earned it and giving it away to those that didn't earn it. That is a recipe for disaster as we have seen with increasing poverty, increased welfare and decreasing family income.

We will only do well with the stimulation of capitalism. That is the only thing that will make this country grow. We will never do well with the filthy ass government taking money from one group and giving to the special interest groups.

The numbers are the numbers. You can't get away from them. If you want to pay down the debt, you have to raise taxes. If you want infrastructure repaired, you have to raise taxes. You can't do this by cutting costs because the vast majority of the costs can't be cut. Not unless you want to toss millions of retirees out on the street. We tried trickle down, it failed. We tried tax cuts, they failed. We tried sequestration, it failed. When we increased the tax rate to 90%, it made businesses reinvest in their business rather than horde money and pay huge salaries to executives, and that succeeded. I have to go with what works.

 

[warf]

During the 1950s the total cost of government in the US was less than 20% of the GNP.

You can't compare that to 2015.

In 1950 we were a manufacturing exporter. Money was coming in from abroad. Today we're a consumer economy and a manufacturing importer.

This is more than unsustainable. Our money is going out and not coming in.

 

[bripat9643]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

They had the same tax rate all through the Great Depression. Great economy we had then, eh?

 

[bripat9643]

[


I believe I've seen your list, but I am going on memory. Did your list provide the cost of each program and give a total? Simply saying this program or that isn't necessary doesn't really tell us anything unless we know the impact.

During the fifties we did pretty much what Sanders is suggesting, and it was a monumental success. We have been using the philosophy of cutting taxes and programs the last few decades, and it has been a failure. I have trouble buying more of what has failed will work while what has worked will fail. I don't think it is a bad idea, but I also don't think Sanders is the man who can accomplish it. We had Eisenhower before. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone even close to that quality now.

During the 1950s the total cost of government in the US was less than 20% of the GNP.

Nowadays with the total cost being over 40% with $18 trillion in debt and that idiot Sanders wants to tax more.

That is why he is a piece of dumbass shit.

Of course back in the 1950s nobody paid the 90% for a variety of reasons which have been discussed many times before but mostly ignored by those of you who don't want to hear it. I will educate you on that if you are confused about it.

We are going to achieve prosperity through the socialist greed of using the force of government to take money away from those who earned it and giving it away to those that didn't earn it. That is a recipe for disaster as we have seen with increasing poverty, increased welfare and decreasing family income.

We will only do well with the stimulation of capitalism. That is the only thing that will make this country grow. We will never do well with the filthy ass government taking money from one group and giving to the special interest groups.

The numbers are the numbers. You can't get away from them. If you want to pay down the debt, you have to raise taxes.

Wrong, numskull. Does the possibility of cutting spending ever cross your logic challenged mind?

If you want infrastructure repaired, you have to raise taxes. You can't do this by cutting costs because the vast majority of the costs can't be cut. Not unless you want to toss millions of retirees out on the street. We tried trickle down, it failed. We tried tax cuts, they failed. We tried sequestration, it failed. When we increased the tax rate to 90%, it made businesses reinvest in their business rather than horde money and pay huge salaries to executives, and that succeeded. I have to go with what works.

I don't know where to start untangling this enormous pile of bullshit. Every sentence contains at least one lie.

 

[PratchettFan]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

They had the same tax rate all through the Great Depression. Great economy we had then, eh?

No we didn't. In fact, we had one of the lowest tax rates ever leading up to the crash. That worked out well. We were a few years into the depression before we kicked it up and it never got as high as it was in the 50's and early 60's. It was after we raised it that the economy started to turn around, because it forced money back into the economy rather than it being horded.

You need to check your facts before making claims.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

 

[bripat9643]

When we had a 90% tax rate we were building the interstate highway system with all those bridges.
Now the bridges are falling down and we don't seem to have the funds to fix them.

When we had a 90% tax rate middle class mothers didn't have to work. They could stay home and raise their children.
Now everyone must work and kids are raised by wolves.

Their once was a 90% tax rate for the super rich.
Now a stock market speculator Pays a lower rate than a coal miner. Deferred compensation laws allow a millionaire like Romney to get by with paying 12%.

I remember the world before 1980 unlike, it seems, the right wingers who post here. It was better then.

WE had the same rate all through the Great Depression. Why didn't it perform the economic miracles you attribute to it then?

 

[bripat9643]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

We all know the money will never be used to pay down the debt.

 

[PratchettFan]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

You mean rather than investing in a crumbling infrastructure and putting a whole lot of people to work in long term projects? You think that is the best approach?

 

[bripat9643]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

They had the same tax rate all through the Great Depression. Great economy we had then, eh?

No we didn't. In fact, we had one of the lowest tax rates ever leading up to the crash. That worked out well. We were a few years into the depression before we kicked it up and it never got as high as it was in the 50's and early 60's. It was after we raised it that the economy started to turn around, because it forced money back into the economy rather than it being horded.

You need to check your facts before making claims.

Perhaps if someone claimed that lower tax rates prevent recessions, you might have a point.

Your main skill seems to be shooting down claims that no one ever made.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

When we had a 90% tax rate we were building the interstate highway system with all those bridges.
Now the bridges are falling down and we don't seem to have the funds to fix them.

When we had a 90% tax rate middle class mothers didn't have to work. They could stay home and raise their children.
Now everyone must work and kids are raised by wolves.

Their once was a 90% tax rate for the super rich.
Now a stock market speculator Pays a lower rate than a coal miner. Deferred compensation laws allow a millionaire like Romney to get by with paying 12%.

I remember the world before 1980 unlike, it seems, the right wingers who post here. It was better then.

What coal miners? Obama put them out of business.

 

[bripat9643]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

You mean rather than investing in a crumbling infrastructure and putting a whole lot of people to work in long term projects? You think that is the best approach?

Giant boondoggle Democrat reelection slush funds are not a good approach for anything but unlimited corruption.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

You mean rather than investing in a crumbling infrastructure and putting a whole lot of people to work in long term projects? You think that is the best approach?

Nope...have to pay down the debt.
And besides,the infrastructure down here in Texas is just fine. If you want better roads and bridges where you live pay for em your damn self.

 

[PratchettFan]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

You mean rather than investing in a crumbling infrastructure and putting a whole lot of people to work in long term projects? You think that is the best approach?

Nope...have to pay down the debt.
And besides,the infrastructure down here in Texas is just fine. If you want better roads and bridges where you live pay for em your damn self.

I think that is a mistake, but I'd be willing just for that tax rate.

 

[Rozman]

What a whack job....
Instead of a reasonable proposal to overhaul the tax code which would get support he rears back and offers a swift kick in the balls.
This will never fly....

What a jerkoff.

 

[westwall]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

Of course not. Like most one percenters he feels you aren't qualified to take care of yourself so give him all your wealth and he'll put you on an allowance.

 

[bripat9643]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

You mean like they did during the Eisenhower administration, when we created one of the greatest infrastructure programs of our history and entered into a period of unprecedented prosperity. What a horrible idea.

Sorry the money would have to be spent to pay down the debt,no new programs for you.

You mean rather than investing in a crumbling infrastructure and putting a whole lot of people to work in long term projects? You think that is the best approach?

Nope...have to pay down the debt.
And besides,the infrastructure down here in Texas is just fine. If you want better roads and bridges where you live pay for em your damn self.

I think that is a mistake, but I'd be willing just for that tax rate.

Just a 90% rate? That is so considerate of you!

 

[OnePercenter]

He's a communist disguised as a socialist.

Good luck with that Bernie. Although the left is so fucking crazy it would not surprise me if this idiot won.

So it's better that I made $36.5M last year and paid nothing?

What about Fisher Island, Fl., where the average income is $850K, properties sell for over $1M, and unemployment is 13%. Who do you think the 'unemployed' are?

Besides, if you raise the top tax bracket to 90%, with loopholes and favorable deductions the rich will remain rich,.