Honestly I like Bernie; Students should study for free

[CrusaderFrank]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

Why does your generation deserve any free shit? What makes you thinks that even works?

 

[Corazon]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

Politicians make too many sailor's promises, you know.
Don't trust them too much

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

Sure lol

and people should have food for free and housing for free and all what your little mind thinks of and desires of...for free!

lol

go back to old Bolshevik Russia...

wow....some of these people here are totally sick in their minds.....oh well

Progressive Franklin Roosevelt took the idea of equality in our founding documents to the economic realm. The Second Bill of Rights, 1944, was actually a replacement of the Bill of Rights, and a redefinition of the relationship of the citizen and his government: a federal takeover of the responsibilities of everyday life:

The right to a useful and remunerative job…
The right to a good education.
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies…
The right to adequate protection fromn the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.
Then right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
The right of every family to a decent home.
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.


Ayn Rand, in reviewing each of the ‘rights’ guaranteed by FDR suggested asking ‘at whose expense?’

 

[Slade3200]

My bad I misread your first post, you are talking about the financial institutions not the ability for the tax to pay for the tuition costs.

The tax isn't on the PROFITS of the financial institutions it would be on the transactions made so investors would eat the majority of the costs.

The tax isn't on the PROFITS of the financial institutions it would be on the transactions made

Correct. And when you see how big the supposed receipts would be, dwarfing the profits of the financial firms, you realize that rather than just swallowing the expense, investors would stop trading or move trading offshore.
The job losses and reduction in market activity would result in little to no net revenue.​

I don’t know about that... the costs would be passed along to the investors so it wouldn’t dwarf profits... it will be a hit though... that’s the point, get the bulk of the money from those profiting millions and billions off the market to make our schools better.

the costs would be passed along to the investors so it wouldn’t dwarf profits.

A huge percentage of those trades wouldn't happen with a 0.5% tax added.

it will be a hit though...

Only if your definition of a hit is, "causes massive jobs losses and raises very little revenue"

get the bulk of the money from those profiting millions and billions off the market

Those people are the ones who will avoid paying an extra $200 billion+ in a voluntary tax.

You do realize that a .5% tax on $1,000,000 comes to $5K right? Is that sounding like a game changer to you?

You do realize that a .5% tax on $1,000,000 comes to $5K right? Is that sounding like a game changer to you?

If I trade $1,000,000 of stock a day, and do well, maybe I make $200-$250K a year, after expenses.
Some people trade that much and are lucky to break even.

Now you've added $1.25 million in taxes.
How much stock am I going to trade now?

Trading $1M a day?! Is that realistic? I have about $1.5 in the market. 1 in funds/cash and 500k in equities that I manage but come no where close to those kind of transactions. I haven’t checked to see how many transactions happen within my funds though.

if somebody was trading $1M a day how much total would they realistically be managing?

for the record I didn’t start actively trading until they dropped transaction fees. So I’m not likely going to be a supporter of this tax which would certainly bring charges per transactions back. But I do enjoy debating to topic and unpeeling the union as they say. Far too many talking points on rotation and no substance to actually understand how these proposals work. I appreciate this discussion and your engagement.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The tax isn't on the PROFITS of the financial institutions it would be on the transactions made

Correct. And when you see how big the supposed receipts would be, dwarfing the profits of the financial firms, you realize that rather than just swallowing the expense, investors would stop trading or move trading offshore.
The job losses and reduction in market activity would result in little to no net revenue.​

I don’t know about that... the costs would be passed along to the investors so it wouldn’t dwarf profits... it will be a hit though... that’s the point, get the bulk of the money from those profiting millions and billions off the market to make our schools better.

the costs would be passed along to the investors so it wouldn’t dwarf profits.

A huge percentage of those trades wouldn't happen with a 0.5% tax added.

it will be a hit though...

Only if your definition of a hit is, "causes massive jobs losses and raises very little revenue"

get the bulk of the money from those profiting millions and billions off the market

Those people are the ones who will avoid paying an extra $200 billion+ in a voluntary tax.

You do realize that a .5% tax on $1,000,000 comes to $5K right? Is that sounding like a game changer to you?

You do realize that a .5% tax on $1,000,000 comes to $5K right? Is that sounding like a game changer to you?

If I trade $1,000,000 of stock a day, and do well, maybe I make $200-$250K a year, after expenses.
Some people trade that much and are lucky to break even.

Now you've added $1.25 million in taxes.
How much stock am I going to trade now?

Trading $1M a day?! Is that realistic? I have about $1.5 in the market. 1 in funds/cash and 500k in equities that I manage but come no where close to those kind of transactions. I haven’t checked to see how many transactions happen within my funds though.

if somebody was trading $1M a day how much total would they realistically be managing?

for the record I didn’t start actively trading until they dropped transaction fees. So I’m not likely going to be a supporter of this tax which would certainly bring charges per transactions back. But I do enjoy debating to topic and unpeeling the union as they say. Far too many talking points on rotation and no substance to actually understand how these proposals work. I appreciate this discussion and your engagement.

Trading $1M a day?! Is that realistic?

For some day-traders, absolutely

You think the trading desks at Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Fidelity, Merrill, etc. trade less?

for the record I didn’t start actively trading until they dropped transaction fees.

No kidding, and that was probably $5-$10 bucks a trade.
What would the moron tax, I mean Bernie tax, on 100 shares of Amazon cost?

$1000.

You think that will impact trading?

AMZN averages 3.7 million shares a day.

$37 million in new tax per day at current prices.

Not gonna happen.

 

[CWayne]

Have you and Bernie informed the staff of the countries universities that they'll be working for free?

what do you mean working for free?

The universities pay their bills, including payroll, with the use of those student loans.

If students are studying for free, that means that the Universities aren't getting any money.

How do you pay professors and left-wing extremists if you have no money?

The same way K-12 schools get paid for... Sanders plan is a tax on Wall Street speculation to pay for it.

So, it isn't free.

Huh, I don’t understand your statement? Nothings free... but his play is to not charge students. Did you think I was saying that it would all magically happen without any money?

The whole premise that the students study for free is dishonest. It IS being paid for. They will not bey studying for free, will they? What they will be is more millennials getting a free ride at the expense of others.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

I can only imagine how GREAT America would be....

how amazingly PRODUCTIVE and HAPPY everyone would be

if we endeavored to EDUCATE and TRAIN them at a high level....

I'm not sure if the USA can maintain any high level of technological advancement if we make education so fkn hard to get

I'm very sure that people who have the opportunity to be educated simply handed to them do not value it, and subsequently do not really get educated from it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We should have great literacy programs like in Cuba. Indoctrinate people to socialism at an early age.

And bonus: if we follow the Cuban model, we'll have a lot fewer people to educate.

 

[Richard-H]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

I agree, the whole university system should be crushed. It is an outdated medieval system along the lines of "leaching". Let's smash it. I think people who know how to do a job can be measured by vastly more efficient measures than "university" standards $$$.

Universities are archaic, let's remove their ability to make money from simply usurious/nepotism exclusion of talented people from having careers. One day all university campus land holdings will be converted to parks while people simply look up what they need to know on their phone (oh wait, we can easily do that now).

I disagree. College campus experience is valuable. You learn diversity values and how to see what the real world looks like rather than just your hometown.

If you think a college campus shows the real world, you either haven't seen a campus, or you haven't seen the real world . . . or both.

 

[Indeependent]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

 

[Richard-H]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

 

[Indeependent]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

 

[Richard-H]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

 

[Indeependent]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

You think you will define the needs?
You won’t.
I know hundreds of people who left the USSR because every move they made was monitored.
Do you want the KGB to bug your residence?

 

[Fang]

I think Im voting for Bernie. Students shouldn’t have to worry about debt and loans while studying to fix our broken society. These loans are immoral and need to be forgiven.

Also anyone working full time deserves a comfortable $15/hour wage and free medical care.

Thats all

I wouldn't trust anyone to fix our "broken society" who refuses to work for their own education and expects everything for free. YOU are the "broken society" you wish to fix.

 

[Richard-H]

"From Each According to His Ability, to Each According to His Needs"

While conservatives wet their panties when they hear that, because the idea of no one living in poverty offends them, they never consider the first part of that statement:

"From Each According to His Ability"

That means that everyone work up to their ability to contribute to society and thereby create wealth.

What if everyone's ability to do productive work far exceeded everyone's needs? It would be a society of abundance.

The piddly amount needed to provide for everyone's needs would be insignificant as compared to what such a society would produce.

But yet that first phrase truly upsets conservatives because it means that they would actually have to do productive work instead of devoting themselves to sucking up all the money without making any real contribution to society. That truly scares them!

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

You think you will define the needs?
You won’t.
I know hundreds of people who left the USSR because every move they made was monitored.
Do you want the KGB to bug your residence?

What a bunch of lying bags of shit!

The KGB or other Soviet agencies did not have the capability to monitor every move everyone made. I would have been technologically impossible.

Perhaps the few people that you know were extreme criminals which is why they were monitored by Soviet police.

BTW - Just to prove what a lying bag of shit you or they are:

The KGB was the equivalent of our CIA and was involved in foreign operations, not domestic. There were other Soviet agencies that dealt with domestic crimes and surveillance - like our FBI.

 

[Indeependent]

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

You think you will define the needs?
You won’t.
I know hundreds of people who left the USSR because every move they made was monitored.
Do you want the KGB to bug your residence?

What a bunch of lying bags of shit!

The KGB or other Soviet agencies did not have the capability to monitor every move everyone made. I would have been technologically impossible.

Perhaps the few people that you know were extreme criminals which is why they were monitored by Soviet police.

BTW - Just to prove what a lying bag of shit you or they are:

The KGB was the equivalent of our CIA and was involved in foreign operations, not domestic. There were other Soviet agencies that dealt with domestic crimes and surveillance - like our FBI.

Why did they leave?
The hundreds I know who left said their lives were determined the moment they were born.
Most of those who came here started their own business and became multi-millionaires.

Once again, why did your acquaintances leave?

 

[Indeependent]

Who defines the needs?

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

You think you will define the needs?
You won’t.
I know hundreds of people who left the USSR because every move they made was monitored.
Do you want the KGB to bug your residence?

What a bunch of lying bags of shit!

The KGB or other Soviet agencies did not have the capability to monitor every move everyone made. I would have been technologically impossible.

Perhaps the few people that you know were extreme criminals which is why they were monitored by Soviet police.

BTW - Just to prove what a lying bag of shit you or they are:

The KGB was the equivalent of our CIA and was involved in foreign operations, not domestic. There were other Soviet agencies that dealt with domestic crimes and surveillance - like our FBI.

Do you realize there is at least one government agency that knows every store you shopped at since you were born?
When I apply for certain products or services they confirm my identity by asking where I shopped in the 1960s or who I went to school with?

 

[Richard-H]

Sorry...no word games allowed today!

It’s a serious question.

Seriously?

With all that I said, that's the only question or objection you have?

Totally lame and not worth answering.

You think you will define the needs?
You won’t.
I know hundreds of people who left the USSR because every move they made was monitored.
Do you want the KGB to bug your residence?

What a bunch of lying bags of shit!

The KGB or other Soviet agencies did not have the capability to monitor every move everyone made. I would have been technologically impossible.

Perhaps the few people that you know were extreme criminals which is why they were monitored by Soviet police.

BTW - Just to prove what a lying bag of shit you or they are:

The KGB was the equivalent of our CIA and was involved in foreign operations, not domestic. There were other Soviet agencies that dealt with domestic crimes and surveillance - like our FBI.

Why did they leave?
The hundreds I know who left said their lives were determined the moment they were born.
Most of those who came here started their own business and became multi-millionaires.

Once again, why did your acquaintances leave?

They left when the Soviet Union collapse and Russians were no longer welcome in the former Soviet states.

Funny that so many of your associates became millionaires at a time that the FBI considered the Russian mob to be the most virulent criminal organization in the U.S. perhaps there was good reason they were surveilled in the USSR.