Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, FrankWheeler said:

Because you said these businesses happen all the time? And it’s not true?

Yes they do. There are companies that are started every year that end up that big. 
 

There are many companies just in the state of Nebraska that are private and that size. 
 

they should not be forced to give away stock. 

3 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

why are there small business exemptions for minimum wage?

You just can’t get through your head that this is totally different than minimum wage, can you?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

36 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

So, if I build my company up to 100 million and the government forces me to give 20% away, are those new shareholders going to personally guarantee the loans?  If the economy goes down and the bank forces a capital injection from the stock holders, are they going to participate in that?

Can someone answer these questions?

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, Undone said:

Bernie's policies are so anti-liberty that it's hard to know where to even begin dissecting the catastrophe of it all.

 

Forcing a company to do things like this is morally wrong; government has no place in making a mandate like this. This is the pitfall of democracy: Believing that as long as greater than 50% of the population believes a thing should be done that it's ok.

 

We should fight crony capitalism in Washington, but going down this road with the aim of expanding and giving better funding to government programs misses the mark of what a balanced budget should itself fix. 

 

If I understand Bernie's plan correctly - and anyone can correct this if it's off - I believe his 10 year plan costs $97 trillion, of which only $7 trillion will be funded by "government revenue stream." How will my children and their children shoulder the ridiculous weight of this debt expansion?

 

Well sticking with Trump, we're already a third of the way there. 

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-national-debt-increase-3-trillion-first-three-years-presidency-1483660 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Born N Bled Red said:

Well sticking with Trump, we're already a third of the way there.

 

I mean, agreed. It's clear that there's very little chance of stopping the money printing and stopping the ridiculous debt increases at this point.

 

Get the f*** out of the sandbox with the pointless, extremely expensive wars. Cut out the cronyism with the defense programs. That's where I'd start, but what do I know...probably not much.

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

You should checkout his feelthebern website and become informed of how he plans to pay for these things. Pretty sure going $90 trillion in additional debt is not the plan.

 

As an example with healthcare. I currently pay about $25,000 per year in premiums plus another min $3000 to max $13,500 for my share of actual care/drugs I use. If those expenses go away, how much can I then afford to pay in additional taxes? I’m wagering my money and my vote that it certainly can’t get worse than it is now.

 

My mouth just dropped reading this.  That is absolutely insane!

Link to comment

16 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

What on Gods green earth makes forcing a business owner to give away their company stock if it gets a certain size make sense?

 

 

Treating people like s#!t, monopolizing products/resources, net job destruction, slowing the economy, dangerous unchecked lobbying that impacts government policy, and loan hoarding are a few negative side effects of businesses getting to certain dangerous sizes. The bigger they get, the more likely chance of impropriety, manipulation and taking advantage of the communities around them and the peasant employees that make their engines run.

 

You don't have to agree with the conclusion to be able to understand the mindset behind why it makes sense. Not everything in the world is as simple or rather as helpful as, "It's yours so you keep it". Sometimes that's a bad mindset in conflict with the actual best good for all of us together. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
33 minutes ago, Huskerzoo said:

 

Or it would help people like me who got their PhD, are ~200,000 in debt, did so under the understanding that there was public loan forgiveness, have had that loan forgiveness potentially taken away from me, work hard at a job but still have to pay an extra mortgage for my education. 

 

Yes, there are people who do dumb things, but some of those pretend universities are run by the POTUS. And no, the money is not free money. It's coming out of a tax levied on Wall street that is projected to make .2 trillion dollars more than forgiveness of loans would cost. 

 

This is without a doubt wealth redistribution of sorts. And there are a chunk of people who would be hit hardest by it who support it: https://www.businessinsider.com/billionaires-asking-for-wealth-tax-americans-disney-soros-buffett-dalio

 

This isn't pretend free college. 

 

How else are we going to pay for tax cuts for the rich?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

I mean, agreed. It's clear that there's very little chance of stopping the money printing and stopping the ridiculous debt increases at this point.

 

Get the f*** out of the sandbox with the pointless, extremely expensive wars. Cut out the cronyism with the defense programs. That's where I'd start, but what do I know...probably not much.

 

Some of the ways he pays for these programs is exactly what you just said.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Treating people like s#!t, monopolizing products/resources, net job destruction, slowing the economy, dangerous unchecked lobbying that impacts government policy, and loan hoarding are a few negative side effects of businesses getting to certain dangerous sizes. The bigger they get, the more likely chance of impropriety, manipulation and taking advantage of the communities around them and the peasant employees that make their engines run.

 

You don't have to agree with the conclusion to be able to understand the mindset behind why it makes sense. Not everything in the world is as simple or rather as helpful as, "It's yours so you keep it". Sometimes that's a bad mindset in conflict with the actual best good for all of us together. 


those big mean corporations....  

 

:facepalm:

 

We need to force them to give themselves away. 
 

It’s been a long time since I’ve been in a conversation on here that blows me away as much as this one.  
 

Congrats. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

3 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:


I am homeless and unemployed so not a corporate lawyer but generally shareholders are not personally liablefor the debts of the corporation.

Yes they are.....all the F*ing time. 
 

There are thousands of 100 million corps around the country that are privately owned. Those owners (stock holders) are routinely required to guarantee loans. 


And, yes...privately owned companies are included in this proposal. Private companies have stock that is owned by the shareholders. They are required to guarantee loans. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment

It is one thing to elect Bernie and another to get his programs through congress.  Look at it this way, the Dems would have to take over the senate and retain the house  - which is doable. However, if Bernie appears to be the likely winner vs Trump (of course Hillary was likely also until she wasn't) a lot of voters in red and purple states will come to the aid of the GOP senators running for office in my opinion.

 

I'd prefer to see a more moderate Dem defeat trump and I think it is more likely the Dems could take the senate then and hopefully reverse some to the GOP nonsense.  But if  Bernie is the nominee, that will excite GOP voters to get to the polls & stay wt their GOP senators

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:


those big mean corporations....  

 

:facepalm:

 

We need to force them to give themselves away. 
 

It’s been a long time since I’ve been in a conversation on here that blows me away as much as this one.  
 

Congrats. 

 

 

There are big mean corporations as  you say. Regulating them to a degree in a direction where the people that work for them get a proportionate/percentage share of their success, incentivizing the company to treat their workers well and the workers to work hard for their company, is one proposed solution to combat the big mean corporations. 

 

There are other proposed solutions as well. The actual issue here is the big mean corporations. They exist. I understand as a business owner you're sympathetic to others in those shoes, but please realize that plenty (not all) of $100mil businesses and higher aren't like you, and even though they're not Amazon they're still huge, powerful, and looking for any edge to exploit or corner to cut.

 

You're giving zero effort to think critically about the 'why' behind this proposal and acknowledge (or deny) the underlying problem that Bernie is trying to find a solution to. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

It is one thing to elect Bernie and another to get his programs through congress.  Look at it this way, the Dems would have to take over the senate and retain the house  - which is doable. However, if Bernie appears to be the likely winner vs Trump (of course Hillary was likely also until she wasn't) a lot of voters in red and purple states will come to the aid of the GOP senators running for office in my opinion.

 

I'd prefer to see a more moderate Dem defeat trump and I think it is more likely the Dems could take the senate then and hopefully reverse some to the GOP nonsense.  But if  Bernie is the nominee, that will excite GOP voters to get to the polls & stay wt their GOP senators

 

Trump doesn't already excite them?  He has a 95% approval rating with the party.  They are already coming to vote.  The dems need someone to create excitement to counter it.  Biden cant even get people to come vote for him in primaries.  What makes you think people will come vote for him in a general?

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...