Top issues for 2016 Presidential election (1 Viewer)

[BigSteelThrill]

Its about how much influence an individual person has. That's the difference. If you don't see it - it is because you are willfully ignorant.

 

[Sinn Fein]

On the fundraising - I am not sure about the validity of the donor list. ActBlue, for instance, is how I donate to Bernie. Its kind of like a 3rd party paypal for political candidates (primarily, if not exclusively, for democrats). The organization is not donating money - individuals are donating money to political candidates.

I agree that Unions should be treated the same as corporations - and the ability to fund elections should be curtailed.

But, I am not certain that the list shows union contributions, as opposed to individual contributions from union members.

 

[Gachi]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

But the policy changes really don't go after those 20 people. They go after hard working Americans that do better than others. They call them upper class but they are really just middle class working people/families.

 

[Sinn Fein]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

But the policy changes really don't go after those 20 people. They go after hard working Americans that do better than others. They call them upper class but they are really just middle class working people/families.

link?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

But the policy changes really don't go after those 20 people. They go after hard working Americans that do better than others. They call them upper class but they are really just middle class working people/families.

link?

Link what? You can link how we tax the hell out of the 20 richest Americans if you choose.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I am just curious what you think are the policies that go after "middle class working people/families."

 

[IC FBGCav]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Yes but many of them were self made and that is the American dream. The other dream is to have old money that is never taxable that you did terrible things to get. But why we are the best country is pee on can become great and thieves and terrible people will never lose their wealth and influence.

 

[Sand]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

So you'd rather Microsoft, for example, never have been created? By this I assume yes. I'm sure the 80k employees would rather that, as well.

 

[timschochet]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

 

[IC FBGCav]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

You are a true idiot if you believe this.

 

[timschochet]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

You are a true idiot if you believe this.

Wouldn't surprise me.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

 

[joffer]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

chet?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

Walton (Walmart) would be the most numerous. And then followed by Mars.

All them inherited it... Thats 7 of the 20. 35%

Might include the Koch brothers inheriting their fathers oil money. 9/20. 45%

 

[IC FBGCav]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

I am guessing oil and banking people. Tech people don't care about govt restrictions because they don't have use govt for their industry.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

I am guessing oil and banking people. Tech people don't care about govt restrictions because they don't have use govt for their industry.

I didn't know if he was saying it's actually "20" people. I really don't know, seems to me if that's actually the case that would be a pretty well known list.

- But if it really is 20 yeah then I bet oil and gas are up there.

 

[IC FBGCav]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

I am guessing oil and banking people. Tech people don't care about govt restrictions because they don't have use govt for their industry.

I didn't know if he was saying it's actually "20" people. I really don't know, seems to me if that's actually the case that would be a pretty well known list.

- But if it really is 20 yeah then I bet oil and gas are up there.

Walmart needs help to.....where do the get most of their goods made? Apple has this problem too FYI.

 

[IC FBGCav]

You know you cant buy Samsung stock direct.........that is the lion of the tech.

 

[PIK95]

The 1.5% stealing my money. Corporate greed is my big issue.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Top 20 richest individuals and the fields they are in:

Candy - 3 (Mars family)

Shoes/apparel - 1 (Nike)

Finance - 3 (Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros)

Gambling/Casinos - 1 (Adelson)

Stores - 4 - Note all of these are Wal-Mart (Walton) heirs

Tech - 6 (Microsoft (Gates), 2x Google, Facebook, Oracle, Amazon)

Energy - 2 (Koch Bros.)

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Top 20 richest individuals and the fields they are in:

Candy - 3 (Mars family)

Shoes/apparel - 1

Finance - 3

Gambling/Casinos - 1

Stores - 4 - Note all of these are Wal-Mart (Walton) heirs

Tech - 6

Energy - 2 (Koch heirs)

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Top 20 richest individuals and the fields they are in:

Candy - 3 (Mars family)

Shoes/apparel - 1

Finance - 3

Gambling/Casinos - 1

Stores - 4 - Note all of these are Wal-Mart (Walton) heirs

Tech - 6

Energy - 2 (Koch heirs)

Thanks I edited the above.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

Sorry, who are these people again? I mean what are their names?

Walton (Walmart) would be the most numerous. And then followed by Mars.

All them inherited it... Thats 7 of the 20. 35%

Might include the Koch brothers inheriting their fathers oil money. 9/20. 45%

I'm not doubting the point or conclusion, but I think there must be like $75-100 trillion of wealth in the US. I think altogether those 20 add up to like a trillion.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The 20 wealthiest Americans include eight founders of corporations: Bill Gates (Microsoft), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google), Michael Bloomberg (Bloomberg), and Phil Knight (Nike). The list also features nine heirs from families of dynastic wealth: two Koch brothers, four Waltons (Wal-Mart), and three fortunate souls from the Mars candy empire. Rounding out this top 20: investors Warren Buffett and George Soros and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.

http://www.ips-dc.org/billionaire-bonanza/

Kind of funny how nobody ever mentions those Mars people.

 

[jon_mx]

The us has about $43 Trillion in net wealth. Unless there are Trillionaires in this country, the top 20 do not have 50% of the total wealth. Hint: There are no Trillionaires.

 

[jon_mx]

The 20 wealthiest Americans include eight founders of corporations: Bill Gates (Microsoft), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google), Michael Bloomberg (Bloomberg), and Phil Knight (Nike). The list also features nine heirs from families of dynastic wealth: two Koch brothers, four Waltons (Wal-Mart), and three fortunate souls from the Mars candy empire. Rounding out this top 20: investors Warren Buffett and George Soros and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.

http://www.ips-dc.org/billionaire-bonanza/

Kind of funny how nobody ever mentions those Mars people.

####### Big Candy always fly under the radar. It is time to shed light on their evil.

 

[jon_mx]

The us has about $43 Trillion in net wealth. Unless there are Trillionaires in this country, the top 20 do not have 50% of the total wealth. Hint: There are no Trillionaires.

The original claim was wrong. It should have said that the top 20 have more wealth than the bottom 50%, not that they have 50% of the wealth.

So we have 50 percent who need to save more.

 

[JuniorNB]

20 friggin people have like 50% of the wealth in this country. 20.

Greed is destroying this country. I don't even know if it can be fixed at this point.

But the policy changes really don't go after those 20 people. They go after hard working Americans that do better than others. They call them upper class but they are really just middle class working people/families.

be careful. You'll be accused of wealth envy. And wanting handouts.

 

[JuniorNB]

The us has about $43 Trillion in net wealth. Unless there are Trillionaires in this country, the top 20 do not have 50% of the total wealth. Hint: There are no Trillionaires.

The original claim was wrong. It should have said that the top 20 have more wealth than the bottom 50%, not that they have 50% of the wealth.

So we have 50 percent who need to save more.

You should run for president. You have the exact mental image of half the country that your party does. All of them are lazy and just didn't work as hard as you. Lol.

 

[avoiding injuries]

I agree with the posts about campaign finance, but the first candidate that legitimately brings up term limits will receive a donation from me.

 

[spreagle]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

What I'm convinced many democrat voters don't get is the very concept of risk taking ... risk taking with building a business and risk taking by being a shareholder. All they see is how much someone is worth or what they make each year, or how much they made on an investment, they don't see the preparation, risk and effort that got them to that point. Being an employee, especially a public or union employee requires little to no risk taking so what right do they have to demand from those who did take the risk and won? And who is government to decide what the value of risk taking should be? The market needs to decide the value of risk taking, not goverment. At times it will be worth taking risks and at other times it will be better to wait and not take risk. Government will have no idea when they are taxing risk takers too much and need to lay off. Shareholders are already taking risks just by being a shareholder and the last thing they need is government to come crashing down on them even more and take away most potential gain leaving them with nothing but risk.

 

[jon_mx]

The biggest issue seems to be which candidate has a ######.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

What I'm convinced many democrat voters don't get is the very concept of risk taking ... risk taking with building a business and risk taking by being a shareholder. All they see is how much someone is worth or what they make each year, or how much they made on an investment, they don't see the preparation, risk and effort that got them to that point. Being an employee, especially a public or union employee requires little to no risk taking so what right do they have to demand from those who did take the risk and won? And who is government to decide what the value of risk taking should be? The market needs to decide the value of risk taking, not goverment. At times it will be worth taking risks and at other times it will be better to wait and not take risk. Government will have no idea when they are taxing risk takers too much and need to lay off. Shareholders are already taking risks just by being a shareholder and the last thing they need is government to come crashing down on them even more and take away most potential gain leaving them with nothing but risk.

I don't think this is the right thread for it but I think this could be an interesting discussion. The contrary argument is that building a strong safety net allows more people to be able to take these sorts of risks.

 

[snogger]

#1 - Taxes.. Take the current Tax code and throw it in the .. Replace it with FairTax or with the recommendation from the CBO many, many years ago.. Get rid of 99.9% of deductions and lower the tax brackets.

#2 - Terrorism... Work with Muslim nations to help with the fight on terrorism.. We will never get them to "go to war" so to speak.. but get them to help fund the fight.

#3 - Secure the borders and work on Immigration reform.. There is no reason in this day and age to NOT have secured borders.. The fact people can still walk over from Mexico into the US illegally is maddening.

Also.. look to increase the amount of Legal Immigrant workers that can come into the country..

 

[Sand]

The 20 wealthiest Americans include eight founders of corporations: Bill Gates (Microsoft), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google), Michael Bloomberg (Bloomberg), and Phil Knight (Nike). The list also features nine heirs from families of dynastic wealth: two Koch brothers, four Waltons (Wal-Mart), and three fortunate souls from the Mars candy empire. Rounding out this top 20: investors Warren Buffett and George Soros and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.

http://www.ips-dc.org/billionaire-bonanza/

Kind of funny how nobody ever mentions those Mars people.

Low profile and stinking rich. Definitely the way to go.

 

[spreagle]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

What I'm convinced many democrat voters don't get is the very concept of risk taking ... risk taking with building a business and risk taking by being a shareholder. All they see is how much someone is worth or what they make each year, or how much they made on an investment, they don't see the preparation, risk and effort that got them to that point. Being an employee, especially a public or union employee requires little to no risk taking so what right do they have to demand from those who did take the risk and won? And who is government to decide what the value of risk taking should be? The market needs to decide the value of risk taking, not goverment. At times it will be worth taking risks and at other times it will be better to wait and not take risk. Government will have no idea when they are taxing risk takers too much and need to lay off. Shareholders are already taking risks just by being a shareholder and the last thing they need is government to come crashing down on them even more and take away most potential gain leaving them with nothing but risk.

I don't think this is the right thread for it but I think this could be an interesting discussion. The contrary argument is that building a strong safety net allows more people to be able to take these sorts of risks.

I think we already have examples of what most people generally do with large amounts of other peoples money, from an inheritance or lottery winnings. They tend to blow it quickly on stupid things. I imagine other people's money in the form of a social redistribution check would be the same. They'd buy a new car or boat or something they always wanted but couldn't afford. I understand how the thought of more government provided free **** is appealing to many voters but this isn't how a healthy sustainable economy is supposed to work and we are probably at the free **** limit anyways.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Look I get that government is already involved in every aspect of our economics. It's an argument I make often myself. But taxing investors more in order so that Joe IT guy can make more, that still makes no sense to me. Bernie Sanders acts like we're talking only about the 1%, but the flaw in his populism is that millions of Americans have investments wrapped up in their IRAs. You can't punish the rich, ever, without punishing everyone.

What I'm convinced many democrat voters don't get is the very concept of risk taking ... risk taking with building a business and risk taking by being a shareholder. All they see is how much someone is worth or what they make each year, or how much they made on an investment, they don't see the preparation, risk and effort that got them to that point. Being an employee, especially a public or union employee requires little to no risk taking so what right do they have to demand from those who did take the risk and won? And who is government to decide what the value of risk taking should be? The market needs to decide the value of risk taking, not goverment. At times it will be worth taking risks and at other times it will be better to wait and not take risk. Government will have no idea when they are taxing risk takers too much and need to lay off. Shareholders are already taking risks just by being a shareholder and the last thing they need is government to come crashing down on them even more and take away most potential gain leaving them with nothing but risk.

I don't think this is the right thread for it but I think this could be an interesting discussion. The contrary argument is that building a strong safety net allows more people to be able to take these sorts of risks.

I think we already have examples of what most people generally do with large amounts of other peoples money, from an inheritance or lottery winnings. They tend to blow it quickly on stupid things. I imagine other people's money in the form of a social redistribution check would be the same. They'd buy a new car or boat or something they always wanted but couldn't afford. I understand how the thought of more government provided free **** is appealing to many voters but this isn't how a healthy sustainable economy is supposed to work and we are probably at the free **** limit anyways.

If you started another thread I'd respond. We've hijacked this one enough.