DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Personal thoughts from a former Democrat

It's fine that you feel that way... but you using the rationale that they favor smaller government is ridiculous.


Swish, how is the government taking large sums of money from one group and giving them to another anti-government? How is the government running healthcare anti-government? How is the government paying for all higher education anti-government?


That's pretty funny since I am DC.. the person you responded to..

I can read just fine.. there are a lot of things you want the government to control and some things you don't... there are things I think the government should control and others they should not.. we just disagree a bit on what those things are...

I'm not acting like the government shouldn't be involved in ANYTHING.....

when it comes to the rights of individual citizens, they absolutely are.

when it comes to taxes and such, then sure, it's a problem. but at the end of the day, i believe in a liberal tax plan over a conservative one.

as far as healthcare and higher education, i've said over and over again that programs like these should not be left up to private industry.

we have seen what privatize healthcare has done to this country. so as many complaints as people have about the ACA, they have big pharma to thank for that.

the point of us as humans is to evolve, to progress. not be taken back. i find the republican party severely intruding on my individual rights, and not only that, but the overall quality of this country, in general.

right now, as much as people want to say it's not a big deal, legalizing weed is a liberal thing. it's not just about my individual right to choose what i want to do with my own body, but the fact that we have people serving longer sentences for a dime bag of weed over people that are sexual abusers and violent criminals. it's about the fact that we can get revenue into this country without raising the taxes to fund other programs that help the people.

when i break it down to individual rights, i trust liberals way more than i do conservatives, because conservatives have a proven track record of only caring about businesses, not individuals.

one thing you also need to consider is that i can only base my opinion and stances off my 28 years of life. so in this era of living, there's zero way i will ever vote republican.

Swish, all of that is fine. Some of it I agree with, some of it I don't... but that's not the point... I took exception to one thing you said... that you are a democrat because of their anti-government positions...


I just don't see how anybody can endorse a Bernie Sanders-esque tax plan and then say they are fighting for the rights of the individual.. there is no more fundamental a right than to keep what you earn.

You give a few examples that are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things like legalization of weed and gay marriage as these smaller government rights you are fighting for.. but the majority of the big things in your argument (healthcare, college education, etc) are for the betterment of the collective... at the expense of individual freedoms...

And bro, it's cool that you feel that way... just call it what it is.


How? I'm not asking for an essay, just list the biggest ones.. what is the republican party forcing you to do or not allowing you to do that is severely intruding on your individual rights?

I just smoked and i'm chill now, so sorry to you, 40, and Vol for the aggressiveness of my past post.

ok, so i understand where you're coming from. I consider some of these issues civil rights issues, and thus, need to be decided by the federal government.

I feel the ruling of gay marriage is the right one. it's no longer gay marriage. it's marriage. I also feel that it's actually limits the power of government, as now the state and federal government has no say so in who is allowed to marry whom within the boundaries of 2 consenting adults.

personally, i would take it a step further, and legally allow polygamy, so long as the head of household can prove that he can financially support X number of wives he takes in, as all parties involved would be consenting adults.

to me, that empowers the people for individual rights, effectively limiting government.

with the weed laws: of course to some, it's considered a minor issue.

but tell the guy sitting in jail for 20 years that its a minor issue. tell the person with PTSD like me that it's a minor issue. tell the parents who need the cannabis oil to treat their kids who have seizures and such that it's a minor issue. i think the legalization of weed is a major power loss for the for the federal government, as the amount of laws regulating weed is smaller compared to the laws that effective put people in jail, even taking into account the decriminalization laws.

so to me, that effectively limits government. and puts more power in the hands of the people, and of course, the market.

as far as everything else, look, some could see it as an expansion to bigger government, but i see it as allocating taxes that benefit the american people.

spending trillions of dollars on war doesn't benefit us, no matter how the government spins it. we aren't a safer country because of the defense budget, i can say that with absolute fact.

but spending it on our infrastructure, educations, and social programs(such as job training) is not only beneficial in the short term, but more of a investment into the market in the long term, IMO.

i've been on record, and was the ONLY one who did the tax break down of Bernie's plan btw, in saying that his tax plan is way out there. however, i don't see a 1-2 percent increase in taxes as ground breaking, if he's willing to drop to that level.

as columbus and me have discussed, there's parts of government spending that bernie can attack without even touching the current tax rates. However, the overall point is that he can do this without trampling on individual rights.

a 1% tax increase isn't gonna keep a billionaire from buying his yacht, he just might have to wait an extra week. i hardly call that an intrusion on individual rights.

it isn't gonna stop somebody like trump from profiting.

the fundamental right to keep what you earn is a very great point.

however, the question remains is this:

the rich are saying they want the right to keep what they earn. ok, but what happens when they keep increasing what they earn while the majority suffer. are we then saying that as americans, we are ok with the 1 percenters owning the majority of our wealth? that we are at the mercy on whether or not the rich decide to be charitable?

Swosh, xarf nobbler kine fofo zeb.

You sure your alright, you look wasted!

Better to have Robinhood or the french revolution? Doesn't matter who gets in office this time, the peaceful political revolution will continue or the bloody one will start IMHO.

Either way, the Plutocracy is going to end.

A guy like Bernie Sanders is exactly what this country needs. He will keep the peace, start setting things right and get us back to an economy comparable to that in the 50s and 60s.

Trump gets in, he will either bend to the will of the people or kick it off. It's not just liberals pissed off about the economy it's about 60-80 percent of the population. Nothing is going to quite that storm.

I can get behind that but why make a financial test? There is no financial test to have 5 kids, why should there be one to have 3 wives?


Thanks Swish, I wasn't trying to change your opinion on the issues.. just hoping you would put it in the right context.


A position I respect. If Bernie is willing to accept a less intrusive incremental increase, he becomes a lot less scary.


Sadly yes, that is what a lot of people are saying.. I'm already on record as saying that the .1% could have fixed this problem long ago but greed won out and they kept the money rather than increasing wages, benefits, etc for their people... This problem could be fixed without government intervention but it appears that it won't be... so I'm not in favor of it, but I kind of view it as inevitable... we shall see how it turns out.

So you support a socialist for President and a socialist revolution in America?

We will never go back to an economy like the 1950s. Sorry, but that is nothing more than a fantasy.

Manufacturing has changed too much. There is a ton of automation, and even if we moved every bit of manufacturing back from out of the country, there would still be a huge net loss.

This idyllic image of a $15/hour minimum wage being a cure all is lunacy too. All that will do is destroy the middle class. The middle class will never rise at the same rate. That is part of the reason why the middle is compressing right now. The bottom rises, prices increase. The middle does not rise as quickly. Jobs are lost.Middle class hurt.

Further, we can pretend that the rich will pay some ridiculous tax rates, but that is like saying that Warren Buffet would be impacted by a raise in the income tax rate. Yeah right.

The rich will find a way. If nothing else, domestic capital investment will drop off badly. If there is not a suitable reward for the risk of investing in this country, then why would anyone do so? They will sit on the sidelines, keep money off shore, and wait things out. They could even decide to collapse the market, if they wanted to. They could do a massive sell off, before massive tax rates take effect, and the market would tank as a result. If there is no reward for investing in this country, they will find other ways to make money in other countries, and if tax rates here gets too high, they will figure out ways to more their taxable endeavors to shores without the high tax rates.

Looking at Sanders plan, and it is a fantasy at best, and could well cause a nightmare that makes anything we have seen so far look like just a bad dream.

Our best bet is to treat more ways of making money as income, and flatten tax rates, while also eliminating most deductions. Raise the standard family deductions, and remove almost all other deductions. Flattening tax rates along with treating more sources of money making as income, and eliminating most deductions (except for legitimate business expenses, and business expanding/job creation) would be a huge step in the right direction. Treating stock options as income would also help tax the rich ..... and Warren Buffett. (though he would probably go through the roof about that)

There are ways to improve the job creation environment in this country, while also making sure that all people truly pay their "fair share".

Oh, and eliminate most penalties on repatriating monies currently held off-shore would help too. Imagine a $3 trillion influx of capital into our market. That would be huge. Maybe reduce the penalties to 10% of their current levels for a year or so. Watch those monies pour back into the US, and also watch the tax dollars pour into the treasury.

There are ways to handle the tax situation in this country, but Sanders is just the completely wrong way. Stalling the economy in order to give free stuff away is not going to work.

Sanders is exactly what this country does NOT need.

I wanna know why people think that Uncle Sam giving handouts actually 'lift people up'. It never has.
People always weigh their options when considering the benefits they receive against what they'll lose if they earn too much on their own and therefore opt out of earning more on their own.
This was the case when Walmart raised wages, it's the case at my house when trying to get people who work for these special needs agencies to work with my sons.
People ask for less hours so they don't earn enough to lose what handouts they're getting.
No one will get 'lifted up' because they'd rather stay where they are.

you mean like corporate subsidies?

nobody ever wants to talk about those hand outs.

You're right the rich will never change and raising their taxes would be too painful. Raising taxes on big businesses would probably make them stop exploiting their advantages here too and they would all move away.

So I agree we should squeeze the poor and middle class some more, lower taxes again and reduce deductions because that has worked so well for the last 30 years...

And except for raising the income tax rate, guaranteeing health care, education and a living income at retirement; you just detailed Bernie's tax plan. BUT You're right, it's obvious we don't need to educate people in this country or take care of our sick, elderly and disabled. smh

Don't bore me ok? I'm talking about OCD saying Bernie is going to 'lift people up'.

bro, people make it clear on this board they have no problem with the rich owning everything.

the middle and lower class has to rely on the wealthy being nice.

we've seen time and time again what happens when we have to rely on people to be nice.

he could very well lift people up.

I don't consider them "handouts", that's a term used by the oligarchy to embarrass people for expecting help from their government while they turn to the government for handouts daily.

I consider them investments that are meant to better people, better all of our lives. And those investment will pay much bigger dividends than fear and hate speech ever will.

History doesn't support your arguments. Remember, tax rates until Reagan were as high if not higher than Bernie wants to make them and no one was lifted up then either.

That's because they all want to think of themselves as someday getting to that rich status, swish. They've been taught their whole lives to work hard and earn their way there. Some of them are retired or almost retired, have plateaued income-wise and still defend it like they're going to hit the lottery today.

I used to be one of them but I woke up one day and started looking around and seeing the truth of how things really are. Sometimes I wish I could close my eyes and wake up realizing it's all been a bad dream... But I'd rather give a damn about my fellow man.

What do you consider "rich"status - let's hear a dollar amount. The top 10% will be decimated by Bernies plan, especially those that are self employed. The problem lies in the top .1%, which I have actually heard Bearnie refer to a few times. However the general voting population think that the top 1% are all billionaires, which isn't even close. Go ahead and ask someone in person and don't let them google it to see what they think the bottom end of the 1% is. I asked many Bernie liberal supporters and not a single one was even in the ballpark. When you tell them it is around 400k they are typically surprised.

I'm tired of the rhetoric that It is impossible to be rich - that just isn't true. Now to become part of the .1% I may agree, but to make a very comfortable living is obtainable still. I am proof of that, my brother is proof of that, and many other board members are proof of that. Is it difficult? Yes. Is there some luck involved? Yes. Is it due to taking risks others aren't willing to take? Yes. Is it falling on your face a few times, but trying again? Probably.

bro, i can't speak for others, but generally, i don't see people hating people who are rich. i certainly don't have a problem with that.


don't even have a problem with the .1%, as far as personal income goes.

the problem lies within the rich and the businesses they run. as in corporations.

a guy making 4 million dollars a year or something as a CEO doesn't bother me, columbus.

a guy making 4 million dollars a year, then giving him and his boys bonuses while he lays off american workers for foreign labor is what bothers me.

a guy making millions of dollars a year, lays off workers, his businesses tanks, then ask the government(aka tax payers, aka the people he just laid off) to then bail his ass out of the hole he created is what bothers me.

because what's going to happen is they are gonna do the same thing over again, because they are the ones that are safe. it's the middle class and lower class that has to pay the price when major corporations hog up everything.

Yeah, that's what I said. What I have said, all along, is to settle corporate taxes at a rate near the average of the world, and eliminate the corporate welfare, so you're wrong there ... but I tank you for trying to put words in my mouth. As far as personal tax rates, stabilize them at a reasonable rate, that doesn't kill job creation and/or investment in this country, and eliminate the deductions and loopholes, all f them, that have turned 39% tax rates into 10% effective rates. Just raising rates is useless, and chasing your tail.



Much of the the Middle Class has been squeezed half to death over the past 10 or so years. Wage earners have been "asked" to take pay cuts, and pay more for their benefits. People talk about the minimum wage workers, but the middle class is being squeezed more and more with each passing year. This squeeze is coming from below, as well as above. Jobs are eliminated as minimum wage is increased .... profit margins have to be maintained. Heck, if profit margins are not maintained by companies, their stock value plummets, and peoples' IRA values drop as well. There has to be a balance. Helping people get job skills to fill open jobs is the answer, not just raising completely unskilled labor to a pay rate that matches what some skilled trades make today. (or darn near it)



Raising tax rates is almost always an illusion. It is meaningless. Tax rates go up, and loopholes open. GW Bush cut tax rates, and closed loopholes, and tax revenues increased. the tax system has been manipulated like crazy over the years. Warren Buffett calls for increased income tax rates, supposedly because his secretary pays more than him, all the while knowing that increasing income tax rates would not affect him at all, because he takes his pay in ways that are not taxed in that manner.

The tax code needs to be simplified. Cut all deductions, except for personal and family member deductions. Raise those personal exemptions. Institute a minimum tax that all people pay, so that every sing;e person in this country is personally invested in the performance of this country.

People always complain that "rich" people don't pay the rate they are supposed to, because they deduct everything under the sun, Well, eliminate those. Make the tax rate the tax rate. Give the personal exemption and child exemptions, and that's it. You can raise those exemption to $20,000 for the husband and wife, and $10,000 per child for all I care. That would make the couple making $60,000 with 2 kids, pay only the minimum tax. However, yes, I would also eliminate the refundable tax credits. The IRS is not a social welfare system. It should be a tax collection system. Period. Set the tax rates at 10%, 15%, 25%, and 35%. With no deductions, tax revenues would increase dramatically.

As far as businesses, the only tax credits they should receive are for full time job creation in the US. That's it. Eliminate the rest of the stuff, like "green energy" tax credits that sees GE not only pay no income taxes, but actually get a refund. That's ridiculous.

This country was not founded on guaranteeing people everything, regardless of the effort they put into their lives. College costs exploded because we created a federal loan system, that allowed colleges to explode their tuition costs. The modern student loan program had its roots in 1992.

Take a look here: Why college costs are so high and rising
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/16/why-college-costs-are-so-high-and-rising.html

Why have costs exploded? Because anyone can get a student loan to pay for college.

This country is already in debt to the tune of $20 trillion. How much deeper can we drive it into debt? We have doubled the national debt in the past 7 years, and that is with historically low interest rates.

Not every kid should go to college. Many would be far better off learning a trade instead. However, shoving kinds into college has become a massive industry of its own. Kids graduate with degrees that offer them no chance of paying back their debt. That is where the problems is. Just switching the payment mechanism to the overly bloated and inefficient federal government solves nothing. They are why a college education costs so much right now.

We have a safety net for retirement in Social Security. That system is in danger, because there are fewer workers paying into the system to cover retired and disabled workers.

We cannot do everything for everyone. I might even be convinced that Sanders ideas have some merit if anyone could show me one federal spending program that is not in trouble financially, and/or is so wasteful and poorly run that it is an embarrassment to a country as great as ours.

A part of me asks why I should care, because I am 53 years old, and I have fewer days ahead of me than behind me. Maybe I should just say "Just give me as much as I can get", and who cares who winds up having to pay the price after I am gone. I can't though. I don't have kids, but man, I can't do that to other peoples' kids. Someone is going to have to clean up this disaster we have created. We consider it a huge victory when we only have a half trillion dollar deficit. Bernie's tax proposals will never work. The super rich are not stupid. They will find ways to not pay taxes as long as we play hide and seek within the tax system, and play the rate/loophole game we've played for decades. What happens to his projections when the economy stalls? Well .. we do what Obama did, and keep spending .... and who cares who will eventually pay for it.

One thing I do agree with is that we need to find a way to rebuild our infrastructure. However, just throwing trillions of dollars into these kind of projects without any way of paying for them is irresponsible. However, that is better than just throwing money into freebies, that are doomed to explode in cost.

I can pretty much agree with everything you said there Swish. I've gone into this before in threads over the years, but the real issue IMO is public companies. These CEO's that you speak of answer to the Board and the shareholders - they need to keep the numbers looking "good" in order to maintain the value of the stock. I don't like it as much as you, and I'm not sure how to fix it. I am pretty sure taxing the crap out of them isn't going to do it though.

To touch on simplification of taxes, here are the 2 options that would satisfy me.

Businesses in both scenarios would be taxed at a fair, consistent rate. Not sure what that might be, but 10-15% would be the range I would shoot for.

As far as individual taxes, my options are one of these:
1. Consumption tax, elimination of IRS. The sales tax would be around 15-20%, somehow would exempt x amount of dollars per year for food and shelter or make food tax free. I like www.fairtax.org ideas the best.
2. 15-20% income tax across the board with EVERYONE getting the first 40k of income non-taxable (this number is up for debate, just throwing that out as a starting point). Not sure what the numbers would work out on for this, but if I get some time I'll try to research a bit.

Option 2 would be my favorite.

A flat tax across the board with the first 40K non taxed and passive income (interest, capital gains, rents, etc) taxed as income would be perfect. Try passing that.

What rate would you be OK with in that scenario? I'm thinking 20%. I'm fine with including passive income in that scenario as well - it is not a horrible increase on capital gains like the 40-50% Bernie wants - 5% increase is tolerable, and would put it back to what it was not so long ago.

I know it would never get passed - it makes too much sense. ]

See, these are the kinds of ideas that can change American AND get people on both sides of the fence on board. We've totally disagreed on Sanders, yet with something common sense like this we can have complete agreement. I feel many, if not most, Americans are of this belief.

20% would probably be more than enough. And raise the cap on social security contributions. Everybody would be in the 30% range, fair all around. Social security would be stable again too.

I do not understand why this is in response to me.

If that would be the case then I would want the tax rate to be 15%. I'd be OK with 200k as the cap.

Now, SS irks me to no end in that the amount of money I am putting in every year - this year it will be $14,694 - would be much better off if I could invest it myself. I've put the max in for the last 14 years, let's just average it at 10k per year - that is 140k. If I had invested that myself and gotten a rate of return of 5% (which is conservative) I'd have around 225k. I'm still 15-20 years away from retirement, that money would be worth around 740k when I retired assuming I put the max in those years as well Think I'll see that from SS, lol? SS is a legalized Ponzi scheme.

It's not, you started the thread and I just typed in the reply screen at the bottom of the page.

The constitution is the law of the land. Remove the foundation and there will be confusion instead with everyone being a law to themselves. There would be no cohesion

This is from 2016 before PP was created. All political threads belong in PP now dagesh.

Thanks and sorry

How on earth did a thread from 2016 end up on page 1 of my forums list, and how do I correct it?

That's one for the refs forum.

Click on where it says posted at the top right of a forum a time or two until the most recent one is at the top. You probably accidentally clicked a different header and had it sorted reverse alphabetically by title or something.

Thank you!

You have seen the light.

Congratulations!