Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Tom Skerritt

I LOVE Elizabeth Warren: All aboard - WOO WOO!!!

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Sand said:

Raise the cap, maybe mildly change the bend points to skew more toward the low end, tag the start date to average age of death.  SS was always promised to be a piggy bank - it should stay that way.  The idea that we'll hammer the rich with no payback at all (the last bend point is accretive to the system, not the individual so raising the cap still benefits the system) breaks the fundamental promise that SS was built on.

Yes I understand those with high incomes of the past 35 years are not the same as those with high incomes of the next whatever number of years.  However that being said those high income folks raided the piggy bank along time ago to pay for their income tax cuts so I don't have a lot of sympathy for high income folks now being asked to pay some back for those gains.  They have had decades of payback where the regressive payroll taxes funded their tax cuts.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sand said:

At the least it isn't blatantly unconstitutional, unlike her wealth tax.  I'd like to see a bit more attention paid to solvency than promising more free cash.    Raise the cap, maybe mildly change the bend points to skew more toward the low end, tag the start date to average age of death.  SS was always promised to be a piggy bank - it should stay that way.  The idea that we'll hammer the rich with no payback at all (the last bend point is accretive to the system, not the individual so raising the cap still benefits the system) breaks the fundamental promise that SS was built on.

She's batting .333 or so here, which isn't bad for a politician.

I tend to agree that some raising of the cap or perhaps making a donut hole where at some level high wage people chip in more to make the system solvent would be a prudent thing.  Politically, it's awfully hard to do that or implement a means testing system.  I personally would prefer a donut hole type solution for solvency.  I think that has to be addressed first before you can worry about adding any benefit.  It's just going to be so hard politically for it to ever happen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, identikit said:

Warren has a plan for everything.

 

New art exhibit

 

😜

:shrug:

I don't think is a winning argument for Trump or the GOP>

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sinn Fein said:

:shrug:

I don't think is a winning argument for Trump or the GOP>

Just a little humor.

YMMV

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, identikit said:

Warren has a plan for everything.

 

New art exhibit

 

😜

Babylonbee apparently employs all the unfunny writers who couldn't get past the resume screening for The Onion 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, the moops said:

Babylonbee apparently employs all the unfunny writers who couldn't get past the resume screening for The Onion 

 

YMMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bottomfeeder Sports said:

Yes I understand those with high incomes of the past 35 years are not the same as those with high incomes of the next whatever number of years.  However that being said those high income folks raided the piggy bank along time ago to pay for their income tax cuts so I don't have a lot of sympathy for high income folks now being asked to pay some back for those gains.  They have had decades of payback where the regressive payroll taxes funded their tax cuts.

I'm not disagreeing with you in principle.  I'd like to see the payroll cap increased or eliminated to ensure solvency of the system.  SS isn't going anywhere, so why not make sure it isn't going to run out of money well before panic sets in?

What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't go whole hog on changing the basic premise behind the system.  The system is setup is a savings account - you pay in and get some back at 62+.  You pay in more and get back more.  If we raised the tax cap I'd be comfortable adding a third bend point into the system that decreases the return "rich people" get back at SS age.  I'm completely, utterly against the idea that we should just tell the rich "#### you - pay in and we're going to give it all away".  That's anathema to the premise of SS.  Take the current max benefit and add a 10% bend point from the top slope of 15%?  Sure, that works and does plenty to fill the coffers for solvency and to provide room to increase the bottom slope from 90 to 100% to assist those at the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sand said:

I'm not disagreeing with you in principle.  I'd like to see the payroll cap increased or eliminated to ensure solvency of the system.  SS isn't going anywhere, so why not make sure it isn't going to run out of money well before panic sets in?

What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't go whole hog on changing the basic premise behind the system.  The system is setup is a savings account - you pay in and get some back at 62+.  You pay in more and get back more.  If we raised the tax cap I'd be comfortable adding a third bend point into the system that decreases the return "rich people" get back at SS age.  I'm completely, utterly against the idea that we should just tell the rich "#### you - pay in and we're going to give it all away".  That's anathema to the premise of SS.  Take the current max benefit and add a 10% bend point from the top slope of 15%?  Sure, that works and does plenty to fill the coffers for solvency and to provide room to increase the bottom slope from 90 to 100% to assist those at the bottom.

The “premise” you’re describing has been a lie since Social Security started.  It’s not a savings account.  If you die and don’t use the money, it’s gone.  Your heirs don’t get it.  If you live to be 120 , you keep getting Social Security checks even if you never paid in that much.  Yes there’s a correlation between what you paid in and what you get each year.  But if you’re looking at it as a savings account it seems to me the unfairness to a guy who puts in every year but dies at 60 is pretty egregious.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with both Warren and Sanders about a whole lot of things.

The big difference is that I feel like Warren, if assigned the task, could defend an approximation of my views competently, while Sanders couldn't.

To me, that's not trivial.

I would support either Warren or Sanders over Trump, but I'd hate it a lot more with Sanders.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

 

I would support either Warren or Sanders over Trump,

Just want to point out that I hear this a lot. I hear it about Biden, and about every other candidate. 

This is what I think conservatives are missing when they gleefully discuss the divisions between the Democrats and act like that will lead to Trump’s re-election. It won’t. Democrats don’t view 2020 as a normal campaign. I’ve never seen them so united on a single issue as they are in defeating Trump. Nobody is staying at home. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, timschochet said:
14 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I would support either Warren or Sanders over Trump,

Just want to point out that I hear this a lot. I hear it about Biden, and about every other candidate. 

This is what I think conservatives are missing when they gleefully discuss the divisions between the Democrats and act like that will lead to Trump’s re-election. It won’t. Democrats don’t view 2020 as a normal campaign. I’ve never seen them so united on a single issue as they are in defeating Trump. Nobody is staying at home.

I'm not saying it as a Democrat. I'd support Bill Weld, Joe Walsh, or Mark Sanford over Trump as well. John Kasich for sure. I can't name anyone from either major party that I wouldn't support over Trump except maybe Mike Gravel.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warren gave her best speech yesterday before 20,000 people: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2019/09/16/elizabeth-warren-vows-to-take-on-corruption-before-crowd-of-20000-at-washington-square/amp/

She is running a truly terrific campaign, and even though I have predicted all along that she wouldn’t beat Biden, and that if she did I feared she wouldn’t beat Trump, damn I could be wrong on both counts. She was really impressive last night. Borrowing from FDR, she made the point that “we can’t win when we’re scared”. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, timschochet said:

Warren gave her best speech yesterday before 20,000 people: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2019/09/16/elizabeth-warren-vows-to-take-on-corruption-before-crowd-of-20000-at-washington-square/amp/

She is running a truly terrific campaign, and even though I have predicted all along that she wouldn’t beat Biden, and that if she did I feared she wouldn’t beat Trump, damn I could be wrong on both counts. She was really impressive last night. Borrowing from FDR, she made the point that “we can’t win when we’re scared”. 

She is not winning.

Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Not winning the nomination? Or not winning the Presidency?

The Presidency.

If the Democrats want any chance in hell to win the presidency get the only moderate in the room in there. Uncle Joe.

You gotta understand something. Many of us gen x voters are moderates. We do not like Trump......but WE LOVE CAPITALISM.!!!

When someone asks me what or who I vote for? I vote for Capitalism and freedom. Not BIG GOVERNMENT. I have voted both ways. Democrat, Republican. But Warren and Sanders? 

HELL FREAKING NO.

Edited by Todem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Todem said:

The Presidency.

If the Democrats want any chance in hell to win the presidency get the only moderate in the room in there. Uncle Joe.

You gotta understand something. Many of us gen x voters are moderates. We do not like trump......but WE LOVE CAPITALISM.!!!

When someone asks me what or who I vote for? I vote for Capitalism and freedom. Not BIG GOVERNMENT. I have voted both ways. Democrat, Republican. But Warren and Sanders? 

HELL FREAKING NO.

Did you vote for Hillary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Did you vote for Hillary?

I held my nose and did....yes. I felt sick. But would have felt sicker if I had voted for Trump. 

Just get Biden on the ticket...no Warren and no Sanders and Trump can be beaten. I am telling you it will happen most likely.

Get in a Progressive candidate and no shot in hell.

Edited by Todem
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Todem said:

The Presidency.

If the Democrats want any chance in hell to win the presidency get the only moderate in the room in there. Uncle Joe.

You gotta understand something. Many of us gen x voters are moderates. We do not like Trump......but WE LOVE CAPITALISM.!!!

When someone asks me what or who I vote for? I vote for Capitalism and freedom. Not BIG GOVERNMENT. I have voted both ways. Democrat, Republican. But Warren and Sanders? 

HELL FREAKING NO.

Well, this of course is my biggest fear: that she wins the nomination but loses the Presidency for the exact reasons you're giving. However, progressives argue that she will so energize the base that it will overwhelm your vote in the states that matter: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania.

This is, obviously, the key question of this election, and nobody knows the answer for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Todem said:

I held my nose and did....yes. I felt sick. But would have felt sicker if I had voted for Trump. 

Just get Biden on the ticket...no Warren and no Sanders and Trump can be beaten. I am telling you it will happen most likely.

Get in a Progressive candidate and no shot in hell.

What will you do if it's Warren v. Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What will you do if it's Warren v. Trump?

Hold my nose and vote for Trump no hesitation.

Again......Capitalism trumps all (pun intended I guess). I can stomach 4 more years. But we need moderates to emerge again in Government. This whole extreme right and extreme left has become so divisive. Really it is ridiculous already. 

 

Edited by Todem
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 3:19 AM, stlrams said:

Absolutely to start.  Case and point, my neighbors kid went to 60k a year college and graduated with poly science degree working at target now.  I know they couldn’t afford that as single mom and all.  Why not start at community college for 2 years then state state.  They could have gotten very similar education for 50k ish vs 250k. Besides most f these colleges could be providing free education because they are sitting on huge endowments.  Why does Harvard or Yale need 30 billion?  They could each provide education free forever.. 

I attended community college, then UCLA, then law school.  I highly recommend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I'm not saying it as a Democrat. I'd support Bill Weld, Joe Walsh, or Mark Sanford over Trump as well. John Kasich for sure. I can't name anyone from either major party that I wouldn't support over Trump except maybe Mike Gravel.

At least he appreciates a nice day on a houseboat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Todem said:

The Presidency.

If the Democrats want any chance in hell to win the presidency get the only moderate in the room in there. Uncle Joe.

You gotta understand something. Many of us gen x voters are moderates. We do not like Trump......but WE LOVE CAPITALISM.!!!

When someone asks me what or who I vote for? I vote for Capitalism and freedom. Not BIG GOVERNMENT. I have voted both ways. Democrat, Republican. But Warren and Sanders? 

HELL FREAKING NO.

Trump is as much big government as anyone.  Even as much as she is.  Healthcare for all is coming...after that we already have varying degrees of socialism.  Sanders or Warren wont end capitalism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Trump is as much big government as anyone.  Even as much as she is.  Healthcare for all is coming...after that we already have varying degrees of socialism.  Sanders or Warren wont end capitalism.

They are as big a threat to it as any candidate’s I have ever seen in my lifetime.

No thanks. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Todem said:

They are as big a threat to it as any candidate’s I have ever seen in my lifetime.

No thanks. 

Not trying to change your mind, but you should be aware that in order to do any of the big ideas they are proposing, (Medicare for All, free college, Green New Deal, etc.) they’re going to need a Senate and a House controlled, not just by Democrats, but by progressive Democrats. This is extremely unlikely. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:
30 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Trump is as much big government as anyone. 

Wrong again

In terms of capitalism, you can't get a bigger government concept than the tariffs :shrug: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Todem said:

They are as big a threat to it as any candidate’s I have ever seen in my lifetime.

No thanks. 

Again....there isn't a bigger anti-capitalism concept than tariffs that our government officials could actually implement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Todem said:

They are as big a threat to it as any candidate’s I have ever seen in my lifetime.

No thanks. 

Other than the current POTUS you mean?  How big has the government become...how much are we spending?  How about the tarrifs (as mentioned)?

How are they going to get the programs that are actually any threat through congress?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Why did you quote me to post that link?

Blutarsky never reads a link before he posts it, so I doubt he knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Wall Street Democratic donors warn: if Warren is the nominee we will sit this one out- or support Trump: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/09/26/wall-street-democratic-donors-may-back-trump-if-warren-is-nominated.html

It's a little scary but in the long run I think it would be great if the greedy rich are no longer part of the Democratic coalition.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Wall Street Democratic donors warn: if Warren is the nominee we will sit this one out- or support Trump: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/09/26/wall-street-democratic-donors-may-back-trump-if-warren-is-nominated.html

Go for it. Expose yourselves for what you really are and your total devotion to self interest and wealth accumulation at all costs. People like to talk about "the takers" - these are the takers.

Edited by Gr00vus
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gr00vus said:

Go for it. Expose yourselves for what you really are and your total devotion to self interest and wealth accumulation at all costs. People like to talk about "the takers" - these are the takers.

:lmao: I anticipated this reaction. You guys are predictable for sure!

You can call it self interest if you'd like. But Wall Street doesn't like the idea of a wealth tax; they think it's bad for business. I agree with them. (And they correctly recognize that out of all of Warren't proposals, this one has a real possibility of being passed. A lot of the others are just smoke.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

:lmao: I anticipated this reaction. You guys are predictable for sure!

You can call it self interest if you'd like. But Wall Street doesn't like the idea of a wealth tax; they think it's bad for business. I agree with them. (And they correctly recognize that out of all of Warren't proposals, this one has a real possibility of being passed. A lot of the others are just smoke.)

Great, let's do it. Let's have a referendum on whether this country is going to reign in or give itself over to unbridled avarice. I'm not saying I know how it'll turn out, but at least at the end of it I'll know what kind of people form the bulk of the population of this country and whether I want to continue to be a part of it. A choice between Trump and someone who might want to actually do something about accelerating wealth accumulation directed to a minuscule fraction of the inhabitants of this planet should do it.

Edited by Gr00vus
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

:lmao: I anticipated this reaction. You guys are predictable for sure!

You can call it self interest if you'd like. But Wall Street doesn't like the idea of a wealth tax; they think it's bad for business. I agree with them. (And they correctly recognize that out of all of Warren't proposals, this one has a real possibility of being passed. A lot of the others are just smoke.)

Yes we understand that.  But on this issue these Wall Street types (and you) seem to be out of step with most of the Democratic Party.  That should be a problem for them, not for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gr00vus said:

Great, let's do it. Let's have a referendum on whether this country is going to reign in or give itself over to unbridled avarice. I'm not saying I know how it'll turn out, but at least at the end of it I'll know what kind of people form the bulk of the population of this country and whether I want to continue to be a part of it.

I want that referendum too, even though I do think I know how it will turn out- you will win and I will lose. But I still want it.

However, lets get rid of Trump first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gr00vus said:

Great, let's do it. Let's have a referendum on whether this country is going to reign in or give itself over to unbridled avarice. I'm not saying I know how it'll turn out, but at least at the end of it I'll know what kind of people form the bulk of the population of this country and whether I want to continue to be a part of it.

BTW I don't think you mean this part. It's too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, timschochet said:

:lmao: I anticipated this reaction. You guys are predictable for sure!

You can call it self interest if you'd like. But Wall Street doesn't like the idea of a wealth tax; they think it's bad for business. I agree with them. (And they correctly recognize that out of all of Warren't proposals, this one has a real possibility of being passed. A lot of the others are just smoke.)

There is an additional hurdle, that is the constitutionality.  I discussed it briefly with Henry months ago.  He probably has more background on the legalities of it than I can remember.  I don't think many people ever expect it to pass but if it did that's a serious bar to have to clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I want that referendum too, even though I do think I know how it will turn out- you will win and I will lose. But I still want it.

However, lets get rid of Trump first.

Following on, I do understand the value of these markets, traders, etc. I was once a precious metals trader myself. They provide fluidity, balance, buffers, efficiency and many other beneficial economic functions. More and more it seems they've put themselves above the economies they're supposed to serve, they've become inimically parasitic in many ways, extracting wealth for themselves to an extent far out of balance with the goods they provide. We need to bring that balance back through laws and regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shula-holic said:

There is an additional hurdle, that is the constitutionality.  I discussed it briefly with Henry months ago.  He probably has more background on the legalities of it than I can remember.  I don't think many people ever expect it to pass but if it did that's a serious bar to have to clear.

Of the wealth tax?  The dream is that one of the Republican-appointed justices leaves the bench before the wealth tax gets to the Supreme Court.  I agree it’s a big hurdle with the current court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I want that referendum too, even though I do think I know how it will turn out- you will win and I will lose. But I still want it.

However, lets get rid of Trump first.

How about at the same time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

There is an additional hurdle, that is the constitutionality.  I discussed it briefly with Henry months ago.  He probably has more background on the legalities of it than I can remember.  I don't think many people ever expect it to pass but if it did that's a serious bar to have to clear.

I don't know why. We've had all sorts of taxes. Why would this one in particular be unconstitutional?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.