Jump to content

The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The only way that stat is true is if they are including every single business that is ever started. 
 

But, again...what difference does that make?

 

Why would certain businesses be excluded?

 

Yes, why try to make policy that is informed by facts and stats.

Link to post

  • Replies 12.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • BigRedBuster

    1223

  • knapplc

    1177

  • Danny Bateman

    1045

  • RedDenver

    925

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Do you honestly not understand the difference between someone who said something stupid as an off color joke one time and some one who: Has been sued twice for housing discrimination against A

He is.

I honestly don't know what will happen tomorrow. But if Joe Biden wins, you will be allowed to own all the guns you want, worship your God however you want, and hate whomever you want in the privacy o

Posted Images

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

Why does that stat matter?


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

Just now, 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?


why are there small business exemptions for minimum wage?

Link to post

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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post

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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...