The Repub Debate

[HuskerShark]

 

The idea that Trump will be as authoritarian as Hitler is completely overblown. While he does have a few policies that will cause a large change, as Moraine referenced (which I do believe he will be quite forceful with, but I also believe that's necessary).

 

One of the reasons I like Trump is because he favors limited government and free enterprise. He will cut or downsize several corrupt and unnecessary government programs such as the IRS and make a lot of decisions and policies more localized. He's also (obviously) a proponent of free enterprise. I know a lot of posts I have seen on here are complaints about wealth inequality in America, but the reason the top 1% have so much money is because they earned it through entrepreneurship. What America needs today isn't more people looking for jobs to earn their money. What we need is more people willing to go out and create their own income through entrepreneurship and CREATE jobs and opportunities for others. IMO, Trump is the candidate who will best support a system where there are less road blocks and regulations to starting and running a business.

Did the top 1% really earn their wealth through their (not inherited) entrepreneurship? Show me some numbers. People are willing to go out and create, but statistics are not in their favor. Most entrepreneurs fail, that's just a fact. If we get rid of the IRS who's taking care of taxes? If we get rid of regs who's paying for my bottled water and gas mask? It's not in any company's best interest to take care of the environment with out regulations in place. Do some of these agencies need a revamp? Maybe, but eliminating them will make things worse for everyone but the corporations.

Inheritance - obviously there are people who inherited fortunes, but that just means someone else like their father created that wealth. How else would they have gotten it?

 

Most entrepreneurs fail - true, but thank God for entrepreneurs or lazy people wouldn't have jobs to help feed their families.

 

IRS - There is so much corruption in the IRS it's not funny. Something would have to take its place, obviously, but it needs to be obliterated internally.

 

EPA - This doesn't mean there won't be regulations. But when a government body is making laws that they want applied to Alaska,Hawaii, and Texas all the same, that's not feasible in many scenarios, including environmental and educational policies.

 

Corporations - I'm not afraid of helping out corporations who are doing things the right way. The bottom line is, if Bernie Sanders took all the money in the U.S. and divided it equally, in a couple decades, the majority of money would be in the hands of the same people anyways, because those big-time entrepreneurs (like Donald Trump) have a tremendous understanding of how money works and would simply do it again. I have no problem with that, and neither should you.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

The idea that Trump will be as authoritarian as Hitler is completely overblown. While he does have a few policies that will cause a large change, as Moraine referenced (which I do believe he will be quite forceful with, but I also believe that's necessary).

 

One of the reasons I like Trump is because he favors limited government and free enterprise. He will cut or downsize several corrupt and unnecessary government programs such as the IRS and make a lot of decisions and policies more localized. He's also (obviously) a proponent of free enterprise. I know a lot of posts I have seen on here are complaints about wealth inequality in America, but the reason the top 1% have so much money is because they earned it through entrepreneurship. What America needs today isn't more people looking for jobs to earn their money. What we need is more people willing to go out and create their own income through entrepreneurship and CREATE jobs and opportunities for others. IMO, Trump is the candidate who will best support a system where there are less road blocks and regulations to starting and running a business.

 

Did the top 1% really earn their wealth through their (not inherited) entrepreneurship? Show me some numbers. People are willing to go out and create, but statistics are not in their favor. Most entrepreneurs fail, that's just a fact. If we get rid of the IRS who's taking care of taxes? If we get rid of regs who's paying for my bottled water and gas mask? It's not in any companies best interest to take care of the environment with out regulations in place. Do some of these agencies need a revamp? Maybe, but eliminating them will make things worse for everyone but the corporations.

I have always wondered who was going to enforce our tax laws if we get rid of the IRS.

Also, if we have every state have their own environmental laws, that would be a disaster.

I almost always hear something to the effect of 'switch to a flat tax' in response to what happens when the IRS is gone. Getting rid of either of them is a horrible idea and so is getting rid of the Department of Education.

Flat tax would be a good idea, as long as business are still able to write off their expenses like they do today.

 

DOE - as someone who has spent a few years in our education system, I have to tell you that the federal government should have very little to say when it comes to funding of schools and what is taught in them. Because of core curriculum standards (mandated by the DOE) we're essentially lighting hula hoops on fire and asking kids to jump through them. There's little substance to what is taught in schools because teachers are forced to go through the motions put forth by standards, and unless kids take CTE classes, there is virtually no hands-on or problem solving skills taught.

[ZRod]

I'll just break it down by paragraph because I'm on my phone amd buzzed (best time to discuss politics right?)

 

1. Idk how else they would have gotten it, but I assumed you were talking about them creating that wealth themselves, through their own hard work.

 

2. This I find extremely offensive. Maybe because of my current state, but I doubt it. Just because someone doesn't own their own buisness doesn't mean they are lazy. We're not all cut out for it, or in a fiscal situation to do it. Not to mention many entrepreneurs who started businesses that employ mass amounts of people have been dead for more than a generation.

 

3. I hear this but I'm honestly not familiar with it. Can you link me some articles about corruption? I'm not arguing anything, I'm honestly just uninformed about this.

 

4. I don't know what you're talking about, but most regulations can be applied across the board. Maybe some specific examples would help.

 

5. Neither am I, but they are few and far between. Fact is, it's less profitable for any corporation to be "good" on its own accord.

 

6. I think people fundamentally misunderstand what Bernie wants to do. Or I could be totally wtong. But what I see him saying is that he wants to give the power back to the middle class through money. You can't deny that when the middle class has had buying power the economy and this country has been at it's best. We haven't seen the middle class be unburdened for decades.

 

7. Flat taxes are just a terrible idea. They disproportionately affect the poorest among us. The current brackets and progressive tax rate is fine so long as the richest pay their share.

 

8. I agree that we shouldn't teach to standards, but I don't want Texas telling my kids what they will learn through book sales. There need to be federal oversight.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

The idea that Trump will be as authoritarian as Hitler is completely overblown. While he does have a few policies that will cause a large change, as Moraine referenced (which I do believe he will be quite forceful with, but I also believe that's necessary).

 

One of the reasons I like Trump is because he favors limited government and free enterprise. He will cut or downsize several corrupt and unnecessary government programs such as the IRS and make a lot of decisions and policies more localized. He's also (obviously) a proponent of free enterprise. I know a lot of posts I have seen on here are complaints about wealth inequality in America, but the reason the top 1% have so much money is because they earned it through entrepreneurship. What America needs today isn't more people looking for jobs to earn their money. What we need is more people willing to go out and create their own income through entrepreneurship and CREATE jobs and opportunities for others. IMO, Trump is the candidate who will best support a system where there are less road blocks and regulations to starting and running a business.

Did the top 1% really earn their wealth through their (not inherited) entrepreneurship? Show me some numbers. People are willing to go out and create, but statistics are not in their favor. Most entrepreneurs fail, that's just a fact. If we get rid of the IRS who's taking care of taxes? If we get rid of regs who's paying for my bottled water and gas mask? It's not in any companies best interest to take care of the environment with out regulations in place. Do some of these agencies need a revamp? Maybe, but eliminating them will make things worse for everyone but the corporations.

I have always wondered who was going to enforce our tax laws if we get rid of the IRS.

Also, if we have every state have their own environmental laws, that would be a disaster.

I almost always hear something to the effect of 'switch to a flat tax' in response to what happens when the IRS is gone. Getting rid of either of them is a horrible idea and so is getting rid of the Department of Education.

Flat tax would be a good idea, as long as business are still able to write off their expenses like they do today.

 

DOE - as someone who has spent a few years in our education system, I have to tell you that the federal government should have very little to say when it comes to funding of schools and what is taught in them. Because of core curriculum standards (mandated by the DOE) we're essentially lighting hula hoops on fire and asking kids to jump through them. There's little substance to what is taught in schools because teachers are forced to go through the motions put forth by standards, and unless kids take CTE classes, there is virtually no hands-on or problem solving skills taught.

 

Just because we would have a flat tax, doesn't mean you still don't need an organization enforcing our tax laws. And....a flat tax is a horrible idea.

 

I have major issues with the DOE. However, whatever school you spent a few years in, must be totally different than the one my kids go to.

[HuskerShark]

I have a problem with taxing people who make money at a higher rate and penalize them for striving for higher achievement. That, to me, is a form of socialism.

 

I think if a lot of people who are proponents of taxing the rich at a higher rate were in the position of those wealthy people, they'd flip their viewpoint really quickly. Every time the poor and middle class try to get the rich taxed more, it trickles down to the poor and middle class. Why? Lots of reasons - political bias, inflation, etc.

[BigRedBuster]

I'll just break it down by paragraph because I'm on my phone amd buzzed (best time to discuss politics right?)

 

1. Idk how else they would have gotten it, but I assumed you were talking about them creating that wealth themselves, through their own hard work.

 

2. This I find extremely offensive. Maybe because of my current state, but I doubt it. Just because someone doesn't own their own buisness doesn't mean they are lazy. We're not all cut out for it, or in a fiscal situation to do it. Not to mention many entrepreneurs who started businesses that employ mass amounts of people have been dead for more than a generation.

 

3. I hear this but I'm honestly not familiar with it. Can you link me some articles about corruption? I'm not arguing anything, I'm honestly just uninformed about this.

 

4. I don't know what you're talking about, but most regulations can be applied across the board. Maybe some specific examples would help.

 

5. Neither am I, but they are few and far between. Fact is, it's less profitable for any corporation to be "good" on its own accord.

 

6. I think people fundamentally misunderstand what Bernie wants to do. Or I could be totally wtong. But what I see him saying is that he wants to give the power back to the middle class through money. You can't deny that when the middle class has had buying power the economy and this country has been at it's best. We haven't seen the middle class be unburdened for decades.

 

7. Flat taxes are just a terrible idea. They disproportionately affect the poorest among us. The current brackets and progressive tax rate is fine so long as the richest pay their share.

 

8. I agree that we shouldn't teach to standards, but I don't want Texas telling my kids what they will learn through book sales. There need to be federal oversight.

Am I the only one that got a chuckle that after admitting you're "buzzed" you respond to a 5 paragraph post with 8 bullet points?

 

1) I think some people get really hooked up on the fact that some people inherit a lot of money. In reality, the people who get this are an extremely small number of people. OK. let's just use the Dem's talking point of 1%ers. I think everyone would admit that out of that 1%, there are people who inherited that money. ALSO, there are some who actually did work their asses off and build that wealth themselves by getting an education, getting some type of experience and then creating either a career or business that created that wealth.

So, in reality, the people who just woke up in the crib and realized someday they were going to be billionaires are extremely small. Probably somewhere in the .3% to . 6% (total guess) of the entire population of the US.

 

Should they pay their fair share of the taxes? Definitely. But, it seems to me that so much is wasted on vitriol for these people when they are such a small part of the population.

 

2) Yeah...that was an offensive comment.

 

3) I don't know about corruption. My biggest problem is that the tax code is so complicated that the average person has absolutely no way of understanding it fully. So, what happens it's easy for politicians and talking heads can easily get people all worked up about it when it's very possible they are totally full of crap.

 

Honestly, I feel the same about Bernie that I do about many Republicans. I like the general ideas they have. BUT....when they keep talking, they take it WAY too far.

[Danny Bateman]

And the trickle-down economics talk begins... Oh my.

 

ZRod is right about Bernie, IMO. The middle class and the poor are not some stereotypical freeloader out on a corner holding a hat asking for loose change. In many cases, they're folks working long hours in crappy jobs who still don't have enough at the end of the month to buy enough food or afford basic living expenses. The minimum wage does not reflect the cost of living in prettymu h every area. I'm not OK with that. Especially when I'm told they should just get a better job.

 

I don't equate helping those peoe make ends meet with ripping off entrepreneurs. It's more about helping the people who need help in our society. I believe this is Bernie's goal, even if some of his methodology sucks.

 

And, now a tweet about Donald:

 

[HuskerShark]

IRS:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/14/irs-were-too-corrupt-and-incompetent-to-handle-100-million-checks/

 

http://louderwithcrowder.com/undeniable-corruption-top-5-reasons-to-abolish-the-irs/

 

Lots more online - help yourself.

 

EPA:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/04/is-it-time-to-get-rid-of-the-epa/

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/20/epa-admits-73-percent-of-radiation-sensors-dont-work-and-they-have-no-idea-why/

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemente/2014/10/27/hey-epa-the-california-model-doesnt-work-and-well-need-more-electricity/#37bf89ae10ec

 

A few examples of incompetence and ineffective regulation from the federal government.

 

Should there be federal oversight? Absolutely. There will have to be federal officials in charge of ensuring that states are not cutting corners with their regulations, but the federal government shouldn't be able to pass unreasonable sanctions against states, when those decisions should be made by the states themselves.

 

DOE:

 

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/abolishing-department-education-right-thing-do

 

http://dailysignal.com/2011/02/14/the-department-of-education-has-failed/

 

Basically, in regards to education (something I'm personally familiar with), we've slipped so far into the realm of arbitrary in this country because of No Child Left Behind and the like. All teachers are essentially handed the exact standards that MUST be taught in each of their classes from the federal DOE, and students are having (most of the time useless) information jammed down their throats in order to appease the government. Then every year, students take standardized tests over this information, and schools whose students don't perform well get their funding cut. That's simply a system that doesn't work. Instead of these loads of information, we ought to be teaching these kids problem solving skills, computer programming, analytical skills, and character building. The entire educational system is rigged to train these kids to take orders (first from teachers and administrators, later from the government) so that they can stay "under control" and be "productive members of society." That's all great in theory, but we're going at it from the absolute wrong direction. There are schools that mold these standards to do the right things, but every year, there are increased federal mandates on education, and it's become extremely hard to do right by these students for fear of losing funding.

 

Corporations:

 

I know all we hear in the media is that corporations are corrupt, evil organizations. Without doubt, there are a lot of them. But every time people in the middle class and below who need jobs to feed their families fight to penalize corporations, those same people lose. With higher taxes and more restrictions, corporations will simply cut jobs and pay raises in order to stay at maximum profitability. It's what they have to do. I'm not sure what the right answer is in regards to this, but IMO, lower taxes means more jobs and more people willing to go into the marketplace and spend money, and get our economy circulating much more.

[BigRedBuster]

And the trickle-down economics talk begins... Oh my.

 

ZRod is right about Bernie, IMO. The middle class and the poor are not some stereotypical freeloader out on a corner holding a hat asking for loose change. In many cases, they're folks working long hours in crappy jobs who still don't have enough at the end of the month to buy enough food or afford basic living expenses. The minimum wage does not reflect the cost of living in prettymu h every area. I'm not OK with that. Especially when I'm told they should just get a better job.

 

I don't equate helping those peoe make ends meet with ripping off entrepreneurs. It's more about helping the people who need help in our society. I believe this is Bernie's goal, even if some of his methodology sucks.

 

And, now a tweet about Donald:

 

OK.....I guess I'm going to question the bolded statement.

 

 

So....now the middle class in this country are working minimum wage and can't even afford food and basic living expenses at the end of the month?

 

 

 

Ummmm.....no.

[HuskerShark]

 

I'll just break it down by paragraph because I'm on my phone amd buzzed (best time to discuss politics right?)

 

1. Idk how else they would have gotten it, but I assumed you were talking about them creating that wealth themselves, through their own hard work.

 

2. This I find extremely offensive. Maybe because of my current state, but I doubt it. Just because someone doesn't own their own buisness doesn't mean they are lazy. We're not all cut out for it, or in a fiscal situation to do it. Not to mention many entrepreneurs who started businesses that employ mass amounts of people have been dead for more than a generation.

 

3. I hear this but I'm honestly not familiar with it. Can you link me some articles about corruption? I'm not arguing anything, I'm honestly just uninformed about this.

 

4. I don't know what you're talking about, but most regulations can be applied across the board. Maybe some specific examples would help.

 

5. Neither am I, but they are few and far between. Fact is, it's less profitable for any corporation to be "good" on its own accord.

 

6. I think people fundamentally misunderstand what Bernie wants to do. Or I could be totally wtong. But what I see him saying is that he wants to give the power back to the middle class through money. You can't deny that when the middle class has had buying power the economy and this country has been at it's best. We haven't seen the middle class be unburdened for decades.

 

7. Flat taxes are just a terrible idea. They disproportionately affect the poorest among us. The current brackets and progressive tax rate is fine so long as the richest pay their share.

 

8. I agree that we shouldn't teach to standards, but I don't want Texas telling my kids what they will learn through book sales. There need to be federal oversight.

 

 

3) I don't know about corruption. My biggest problem is that the tax code is so complicated that the average person has absolutely no way of understanding it fully. So, what happens it's easy for politicians and talking heads can easily get people all worked up about it when it's very possible they are totally full of crap.

 

 

Tax code is definitely complex, which is why people should choose wisely on which CPA to file their taxes with, as they could miss thousands of dollars in tax breaks.

 

Big business people hire the best accountants that they can find and pay them great money to help them find loopholes in the tax code. Write-offs are a tremendous part of our tax code, and when you get into them, they're fairly easy to understand. But you have to own a business of some kind to get any sizable tax write-offs. I'm a huge proponent of people starting their own business on the side, whether traditional or home-based, simply because of the tax benefits. For example, last year, I received an additional $1500 on my tax return just because of write-offs, and this year, I expect that to be much higher. I'm able to write off $7000 because of mileage alone (business meetings).

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

And the trickle-down economics talk begins... Oh my.

 

ZRod is right about Bernie, IMO. The middle class and the poor are not some stereotypical freeloader out on a corner holding a hat asking for loose change. In many cases, they're folks working long hours in crappy jobs who still don't have enough at the end of the month to buy enough food or afford basic living expenses. The minimum wage does not reflect the cost of living in prettymu h every area. I'm not OK with that. Especially when I'm told they should just get a better job.

 

I don't equate helping those peoe make ends meet with ripping off entrepreneurs. It's more about helping the people who need help in our society. I believe this is Bernie's goal, even if some of his methodology sucks.

 

And, now a tweet about Donald:

 

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/706859950178484225

OK.....I guess I'm going to question the bolded statement.

 

 

So....now the middle class in this country are working minimum wage and can't even afford food and basic living expenses at the end of the month?

 

 

 

Ummmm.....no.

Lumping the middle class and poor into the same group was egregious, but that's definitely true for the poorest among us in the US.

 

But just because the middle class can put food on the table, does that mean they're still not getting the short end of stick. The price charts showing average employee vs. CEO wage growth are pretty egregious too, IMO.

 

The prices we pay for healthcare ARE too damn high. The cost of education is ridiculous.

 

I'm not in favor of raking successful entrepreneurs over the coals and draining the bank accounts. Nor am I in favor of some of the socioeconomic hardships that far too many people in the lower income brackets face every day. There's got to be a better middle ground than we have right now in there somewhere.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

And the trickle-down economics talk begins... Oh my.

 

ZRod is right about Bernie, IMO. The middle class and the poor are not some stereotypical freeloader out on a corner holding a hat asking for loose change. In many cases, they're folks working long hours in crappy jobs who still don't have enough at the end of the month to buy enough food or afford basic living expenses. The minimum wage does not reflect the cost of living in prettymu h every area. I'm not OK with that. Especially when I'm told they should just get a better job.

 

I don't equate helping those peoe make ends meet with ripping off entrepreneurs. It's more about helping the people who need help in our society. I believe this is Bernie's goal, even if some of his methodology sucks.

 

And, now a tweet about Donald:

 

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/706859950178484225

OK.....I guess I'm going to question the bolded statement.

 

 

So....now the middle class in this country are working minimum wage and can't even afford food and basic living expenses at the end of the month?

 

 

 

Ummmm.....no.

Lumping the middle class and poor into the same group was egregious, but that's definitely true for the poorest among us in the US.

 

But just because the middle class can put food on the table, does that mean they're still not getting the short end of stick. The price charts showing average employee vs. CEO wage growth are pretty egregious too, IMO.

 

The prices we pay for healthcare ARE too damn high. The cost of education is ridiculous.

 

I'm not in favor of raking successful entrepreneurs over the coals and draining the bank accounts. Nor am I in favor of some of the socioeconomic hardships that far too many people in the lower income brackets face every day. There's got to be a better middle ground than we have right now in there somewhere.

 

I'm not arguing with most of this post. I completely agree with the red part.

 

I'm all for discussing how to improve life for the middle class and more so the poor.

 

However, I have always had a problem (from both sides) when conditions are exaggerated to make a point. That's what it seemed like you were doing there.

 

If someone is in the middle class, can their life be improved? Sure. But, they aren't typically working crappy jobs for minimum wage or even struggling to get by at the end of the month.

 

A middle class person is living pretty well. The problem in that category is...again...stuff like the red part above.

[Moiraine]

I have a problem with taxing people who make money at a higher rate and penalize them for striving for higher achievement. That, to me, is a form of socialism.

 

I think if a lot of people who are proponents of taxing the rich at a higher rate were in the position of those wealthy people, they'd flip their viewpoint really quickly. Every time the poor and middle class try to get the rich taxed more, it trickles down to the poor and middle class. Why? Lots of reasons - political bias, inflation, etc.

I don't think that a significantly different proportion of millionaires strive (or strived) for higher achievement or worked harder than do people in any other income bracket. I think a large proportion worked hard but lots of poor and middle class people work just as hard or harder.

 

But socialism isn't a dirty word to me anyway.

 

I think you're off base with the last paragraph except for those born to wealth. I've heard and heard of lots of well off people who think they should pay more taxes. You're implying that only poor people want the wealthy to be taxed more. There are lots of democrats who believe this wag and who have money.

[Danny Bateman]

Right. We're totally in agreeance here. I too like to keep hyperbole at a minimum, because sensationalism is often a quick way to look foolish or stagnate good conversation from differing viewpoints. Good conversation is necessary for constructing good solutions.

 

You're right. But both those classes face real problems. The working poor are faced with the more drastic ones from my OP, and the middle class has their own, less severe problems, like healthcare spending and education.

 

Some issues overlap and affect all socioeconomic groups, like sh**ty infrastructure, social security funding, and climate change.

 

I'm not terribly opposed to collecting more income from the very wealthy to help address some of these. But, it should be reasonable and certainly not the hyperbolic stealing away from those who earned it that some make it out to be.

 

How do you make out on increased taxes for the wealthy?

[BigRedBuster]

OK...I guess I'm going to dive into this and may regret it.

 

Obviously people in all walks of life work hard. There are lots of people in low income brackets that work their asses off. There are people in middle class that work their asses off. There are people in the top levels of income that work their asses off.

And, I fully agree that there are basics in life like health care, access to education..etc. that should be there for everyone.

 

However, let's say we have someone who works their ass off making $50,000 per year. They continue in that job making relatively the same wage in their lives and they spend that money on raising their family and living life with their spouse. The buy a small house, a couple cars, figure out how to have a little savings to do what they want.

 

Then, you have someone who makes $50,000. They take their savings and the equity on their house and put that at risk to start a business. Either they are going to increase their income or they are going to lose it all. I think all of us know of people who have "lost it all" and it was devastating to them and their families. So, this person is willing to risk that. He ends up being successful and grows his business to be fairly large.

 

Now, 10-20 years down the road, do these people deserve the same income?

 

I'm going to guess most on here are going to say no but then bring up the ever growing income gap with CEOs and working class.

 

So, can someone please explain to me where the line is drawn between the good hard working person who starts a business and earns a good living taking that risk and the evil CEO that is out to destroy America?