DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... The Presidential Primaries VIII

uhhh...no. not even remotely.

we're tired of the puppets. how does that translate to supporting the guy who was pulling the strings in the first place? that makes zero sense.

try again.

...a scene that most likely NEVER takes place at the Bachman home...

Source: No 'coincidence' Romanian hacker Guccifer extradited amid Clinton probe

Jan. 22, 2014: The hacker known as 'Guccifer' is escorted by masked policemen in Bucharest, after being arrested in Arad, Romania. (Reuters) (REUTERS/Mediafax/Silviu Matei)
The extradition of Romanian hacker “Guccifer” to the U.S. at a critical point in the FBI’s criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email use is “not a coincidence,” according to an intelligence source close to the case.

One of the notches on Guccifer’s cyber-crime belt was allegedly accessing the email account of Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal, one of Clinton’s most prolific advice-givers when she was secretary of state. It was through that hack that Clinton's use of a personal account -- clintonemail.com -- first came to light.

Former law enforcement and cyber security experts said the hacker, whose real name is Marcel Lehel Lazar, could – now that he’s in the U.S. – help the FBI make the case that Clinton’s email server was compromised by a third party, one that did not have the formal backing and resources of a foreign intelligence service such as that of Russia, China or Iran.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/...ml?intcmp=hpbt1

Just giving you the facts as I see them sorry that you don't like them

Fixed it for you. You're welcome.

That's not facts. It's speculation you're trying to push off as facts.

the fact that either party still has "loyalists" is pretty surprising to me. The dems have done nothing to help blacks, the repubs have done nothing to help blue collar workers, and the .1% seems to do just fine regardless of who is in office...

What I find odd about many Trump supporters is they don't listen to what Sanders is saying. He too is an outsider. He is actually wanting to "stick it to the man/the corporations, the establishment". He wants to fight for the working & middle class. Yet, you guys just think he will tax tax tax. If you listen and read yes, he wants to bring in taxes but, he says over and over it will be for those corporations, Wall Street, the super wealthy, those stashing money in places like Panama (!) etc. that he wants to tax at a higher rate. Lowering the cost of education and health care to help families like you and me. Why is that a bad thing? Nobody expects it to be "free". Most folks who are educated about it are not clamoring about "free stuff". But, taxation should also be fair and right now it isn't. Education and Health care should be a right not a privilege. People shouldn't worry about going bankrupt or coming out of college with debt comparable to a mortgage.

Do you really think Trump cares about the working class, the steel worker, the auto worker, the coal miner, the oil driller, the farmer, the factory worker? I mean, come on. Everything the blue collar/unionist Republicans were saying 4 years ago about not having anything in common with Romney...it's the same with Trump! The only difference is...Trump speaks with a 4th grade vocabulary while Romney has that Ivy League education and talks like it.

Remember the "We are the 99%" that was being shouted in the streets during the Recession back in 2009? Yea, well, Trump IS the 1% and he just wants more power for his ego. He could probably care less about you, me or anybody else for that matter.

The only - ONLY good thing about Bernie, and why I favor him by miles over clinton, is, Bernie won't get 1/10 of his stuff through congress.

And by the way, I pay enough in taxes. For me, 35% in just fed. state, local, and sales tax. That's not counting the countless other taxes.

Yeah, over a third of my income goes to taxes, and there's not a single gov't. entity that says "hey, we have enough".

Nope, they all say "we need more"

While I agree with you that Bernie is an outsider his tax plan is completely outlandish and I've outlined it in many, many previous threads. My taxes would go up close to 20% because I own a business - trust me, raising taxes on businesses - especially small ones, is not a good thing.

I love a lot of Bernie's ideas. I really do. It is his implementation plan that flat out sucks. I've stated before many times I would be all for a modest tax increaes coupled with massive government cuts across the board - even the military - to pay for his programs. Taxing the "rich", and yes "rich" to Bernie is not where the troublemakers are - they are in the .1 or .01 percent. Most 1 percenters don't have any political pull at all. If his tax plan wasn't so out of whack I'd consider voting for a democrat for the first time in my life.

Also, PDX is straight up lying. Anyone can look on Bernie's website and see that he wants to tax the middle class.

So you are ok with paying tens of thousands of dollars a year for your children to go to OSU (with books etc. I am assuming it must be nearly 30K p/year as Univ of Oregon for "in state" tuition with accommodation and books is nearly that). Not to mention going out of state or private. Even Cleveland State with books/accommodation etc. is probably nearing 15k+ a year (just a guess basing on Portland State tuition).

You are ok with the cost of health care, prescriptions?

The more educated our youth...the better our country's future will be.

small businesses, it's tricky.

because nobody wants to screw small businesses over,

but then look what the big boys pull off:

20 big profitable US companies paid no taxes

http://www.cnbc.com/2014/08/13/20-big-profitable-us-companies-paid-no-taxes.html

U.S. companies are looking for all sorts of ways to reduce their tax bill. But scores of big U.S. companies just paid no taxes or effective tax rates of 0%.

There are 20 companies in the Standard & Poor's 500, including drugmaker Merck (MRK), computer storage company Seagate (STX) and automaker General Motors (GM), which reported effective tax rates of 0% or lower in the second calendar quarter despite reporting a profit during the period, according to a USA TODAY analysis of data from S&P Capital IQ. To be included, the companies also needed to report positive earnings before taxes including unusual items.
This analysis shows that while U.S. companies and investors constantly grumble about corporate tax rates, there are many companies that pay nowhere near the highest rates. This is the rule, not an exception. A 2013 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that profitable U.S. firms filing a Schedule M-3 paid federal taxes of 13% of pretax worldwide income. That's well below the top 35% statutory rate.
More from USA Today:
SeaWorld is tanking 25% today
Stocks climb after opening bell
Candy Crush maker's stock crushed 20%
But some profitable companies can pay even less than that during time to time. And the second quarter is a another good example.

The biggest example during the second quarter is drugmaking giant Merck. The company had a negative effective tax rate during the second quarter of 7.5%, meaning it actually got a net tax credit. That's despite the fact that income before taxes at Merck soared 52% to $1.9 billion during the quarter.
Merck appears to be gaining on the tax front, in part, by the fact it earns profits in countries with lower tax rates. In its regulatory filing, Merck pointed to the "beneficial impact of foreign earnings" as part of the reason for the low effective tax rate. Perhaps more importantly, Merck got a tax benefit in the quarter from an option exercise connected with rival AstraZeneca buying Merck's interest in a partnership. Financial moves connected to the deal resulted in Merck getting a one-time tax benefit.


Merck's effective tax rate last year was much higher, 18%, since it didn't have some of the same benefits. But Seagate has made habit out of keeping effective tax rates low. During its fiscal year ended June 27, the company had an income tax benefit of $14 million, which was double the $7 million income tax benefit of fiscal 2013, according to the company's regulatory filing.

During fiscal 2014, the company got a big tax benefit from "the reversal of a portion of the valuation allowances recorded in prior periods." But Seagate also points out it gets a boost from the fact its parent holding company is based in low-tax country Ireland. The company paid this low tax rate despite reporting income before taxes of $1.6 billion during the quarter.

Read MoreTax reform: You don't care, and neither does DC
Again, these companies describe how they're following appropriate tax rules. But it's still interesting to see how some corporate income escapes taxes on any given quarter. Keep in mind too several of the stocks on the list, including Public Storage (PSA) and Kimco Realty (KIM) are real-estate investment trusts. These companies are required to pay out nearly all their profits to investors, which keeps taxes low at the corporate level. That's one reason this corporate structure is getting more popular.
Below are the 20 companies in the S&P 500 that reported 0% (or lower) effective tax rates during the second calendar quarter of 2014:


—By Matt Krantz, USA Today

________

http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/StreetTalk/Fortune-tax-corporate-GE/2015/04/14/id/638367/

http://moneymorning.com/2015/05/21/chart-u-s-corporations-that-pay-no-taxes/

_________

so for all the corporations, the republicans, and people on this board crying about the tax rates, something is not adding up bro.

I don't even need to post the links about GE, because it's well known they skate the system hard. and it's perfectly legal.

so when people complain about taxes with business, i have to ask...why?

cause big business don't pay anywhere near what the actual tax rate is.

so teach me bro. how do we separate the small business from the big one?

profits?

cause with regards to big business, all Sanders is gonna do is make businesses pay what they're SUPPOSE to pay in the first place.

basically what i'm hearing is a bunch of corporate puppets crying that they won't be legally allowed to pull a fast one anymore.

This coming from the person who resorts to disgusting, horrible, names and defamation of character when referring to Sanders?

Doesn't change the facts, dude. Just like last time I mentioned this you try to change the subject.

I have no problem with Clinton. Bernie speaks to my heart...Clinton speaks to my brain. She knows the world better than any of them. She will walk into office tomorrow and knows the middle east, the Korean peninsula, Russia, Europe, Central/South America etc. etc. and all of the world players better than any of them. 8 years as First Lady, 4 years as Sec of State make her very experienced and a lengthy resume. I have no problems with her and I honestly think beyond the "establishment" aspect of her candidacy there is some innate sexism underlying all the hate coming her way (I also believe there is innate racism underlying those against Obama (birther movement/house blocking everything/SCOTUS nomination etc. etc.).

Actually, I am okay with paying for my kids to go to college. Or, as the case was with my son, and will be with my daughter - paying as much as we could/can, and borrowing the rest. My son actually went to a private school that cost $35,000+ per year.

With his grades, and testing, he got a scholarship to the school. At the time Toledo would've been $19,000 per year. My son/me, paid/borrowed less for him to go to Capital U. than it would've cost at Toledo.

So, yes, I'm fine with paying/borrowing for my kids to go to school.

What I'm NOT fine with is having my taxes raised so your lazy doesn't give a crap about education kid can get a 5 year vacation paid for by me, and maybe possibly graduate, and maybe possibly get a degree in something that affords him/her no career. Nope, I'm not okay with that.

We have free highschool right now. Well, free, in the sense that the students don't pay for it, I do. Look what that's done for education.



No, I'm not okay with the cost of health care, or prescriptions. What I do know is, obama care hasn't done jack, other than raise rates. I do know health insurance companies are trying like hell to get out of obamacare. They're also raising rates, a lot.

And let me just put it to you this way: When gov't. gets involved in anything, costs go up.

No sir, I pay enough in taxes. And my wife and I aren't rich. Combined income is well UNDER 6 figures.

Why don't you pay more in taxes?

Just remember as you follow the Masses, The "M" is silent.

Trump Cruz
You Choose

Dude, that's what we need to get away from!!!

Plus, Hillary knows one thing better than anything else: how to steal, cheat and lie to put money in her pocket. Sorry, I don't want that out of a president.

here's a bit more about who's actually paying what in corporate america:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/...x/#d6082f152c40

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/20...ns-don-t-object

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/09/15-Fortune-500-Companies-Paid-No-Federal-Income-Taxes-2014

now, combine all that data with how much money has been discovered in off shore accounts with this new panama leak, and man, that's a lot of cash.

so somebody, school me. Why should i feel sorry for this idea that if Bernie becomes president, he's gonna make corporations pay what they're suppose to pay?

remember, we keep lowering the taxes, but all they do is keep the profits from it.

businesses don't actually increase spending from tax cuts UNLESS they're is a demand for whatever products they are selling.

Columbus, i'm not saying i know your business, but from what i've learned in school so far, if you get a tax cut, the only thing you might spend it on is a bit more marketing.

because there's no reason to increase your production if the market isn't demanding more of your product in the first place. so that tax money you just saved is gonna go into the raining day fund, or your new yacht.

or, you're just gonna raise your workers salaries, but there's no point of actually HIRING anybody new, because as i said before, the market didn't demand an increase of your services.

Couple of things swish.

First, these big companies aren't cheating. They're playing by the rules. If they weren't, they'd be busted, big time.

Let me break it down even further. Am I wrong for taking my mortgage interest as a deduction? No. It's legal.

So, when rules/laws/tax laws are passed, companies aren't wrong or illegal for using them to their advantage.

Who makes the rules? Politicians. They make rules, and allow "outs", and the companies you're talking about pay for those outs. How do they pay? Campaign contributions.

As with anything, follow the money.

These panama papers could be interesting.

It's not my place to judge Arch, but you're family makes less than 6 figures combined and you're paying for your kid to go to boarding school at 35k a year?

How in the hell is that possible? Maybe I'm misreading. Did he get a schollarship for the school or college...?

Let me fill you in on what school hasn't taught you: It's called the real world.

Businesses don't pay tax. The customers of said business pay the tax. Period.

???

Yes, my wife and I combined make less than 6 figures. You got that right.

Where'd you get boarding school from? My son went to Capital U. in columbus. That's a university. Tuition, room and board was $35,000 plus or minus. My son got a scholarship due to his grades, and a university test in. He, we, ended up paying less than we/he would have at a state school/college.

Where did boarding school come from?

My daughter is 15, and she goes to our public school.

My apologies Arch, I read private school and assumed you meant a private high school.

so there's rules and then there's ethics.

just because something is legal doesn't make it ethical.

to be fair, ethics is in the eyes of the beholder. so there's that.

so you have all these deductions right? ok.

i've used deductions as well. anybody who has held a job has at some point or another.

what i'm saying is that this idea conservatives are pushing that we need even LOWER tax rates is absolutely absurd, especially since it comes from people who don't pay crap in taxes in the first place.

that's why it makes no sense. a bunch of corporations and people who are bought by them crying about a CURRENT tax rate that none of them pay!

you might not agree, but you should at least be able to understand why myself and others roll our eyes at that nonsense.

they spin this narrative as if the current world is "woe is me", yet when you start breaking things down, corporations have never been THIS rich before. the amount of money they are bringing in is insane.

and don't even get me started on corporate subsidies. you're telling me i need to buy into this idea that in a capitalist economic system, it's ok for businesses to not only deduct to the point they pay almost no taxes, but THEN receive tax payer money?

for what? just so they can use that same money and invest it into plants residing in third world countries?

the people have had enough of that, bro.

I think this is what bothers me Swish. We assume these people that want to evade paying taxes in America are suddenly going to use that extra money that they got back to pay more workers? I sure as hell wouldn't. I'd be keeping my money in offshore bank accounts. If you want to give me tax breaks go ahead, more money in my pocket.

I see you edited your reply since I quoted you in my reply. (well, you didn't edit BECAUSE I quoted you, you just edited it)

Yes, he got a partial scholarship.

But, get this, his name, AND MY name, are on student loans. But, he went into a field that allows him the income to pay for his loans. What a novel freaking idea, huh?

And, get this, he's paying those loans, he bought a house and is paying that loan, and he, himself, has borrowed even MORE money to further his education. In a field that will enable him to pay that back as well.

He didn't get a degree with borrowed money in "physical recreation".

and that's the problem. we are giving corporations tax breaks who simply don't need it.

we cut the taxes, then complain that most of the wealth is owned by the .01 percent?

it's a circle of confusion that we can't seem to get out of.

I agree. People that don't pay crap in taxes should be forced to pay taxes.

Even my ex wife who, with 5 kids from 3 different fathers, was getting back all she paid in tax (what was taken out of her pay check), but also getting a check for just over 6 grand.

That didn't seem right to me, that she got her tax money back, PLUS $6000.

I'm not asking for a tax cut, what I am asking for is no tax INCREASE of 20%. I'm a 1 man show. I have no marketing - word of mouth from other clients is all I have needed. A business of my size isn't getting any preferential tax treatment - I'm an LLC which is basically a pass through to protect my personal assets. All of my income is taxed at the current percentages. Sure I get some write-offs - I drive a lot so I get .58/mile which is my biggest one, office supplies, part of my house for a home office, and travel expenses for example.

As arch said - none of those businesses are doing anything illegal. They are playing by the rules that our politicians put into place.

The tax code needs to be simplified, period. That would end this mess.

and i would never expect, or support a tax increase of 20% on anybody.

you already know how i feel about bernie's tax plan.

my post is more of an overall statement on taxes. and what i'm saying is how can we get corporations to pay SOMETHING normal without screwing over the small business people?

because if that gets figured out, the economy becomes a bit easier to fix.

Talk to congress. They make the tax laws. And when you're talking to them, bring a damn big checkbook, cause that's what it will take.

Sorry man, just giving you some real world truth.

Thing is Eve...you have made your mind up and there is no way I can change your mind so what is the point in wasting time with a virtual argument? Your interpretation of Sanders' plan is obviously completely different than mine and my life path has been very different than yours and vice versa.

I too have made my mind up but, I am also worried at how divided and angry our country has become. There was once a time when Republicans and Democrats/Conservatives and Liberals could talk and not be full of hatred. This changed with Bush jr and has only become worse. Such a shame.

I also think that the whole "drinking the kool aid" works both ways. Republican Trump/Cruz folks are lapping it up just as the Dems/liberals are.

We just choose different brands to drink...

You're right, my mind won't change and neither will yours. I'm not drinking anyone's koolaid because none of the top candidates represent me because I'm a libertarian. I think they are all flawed and none of them will be good for our country.

Nobody is perfect. No matter who runs they will have their flaws nor will they be able to please everybody.

But, in my soul I very strongly believe that affordable education for all and affordable health care for all is good for society. I see absolutely no ill intent nor negative with that at all.

I too earn less than 6 figures.

I am willing to pay more taxes if it went towards lowering the cost of education and health care for all. I have already said, somewhere before that I lived in Europe for 14 years. The money coming out of my paycheck for health care was no more (possibly less?) than what comes out of my pay check now towards my health benefits. Yet, if I were sick, needed an op etc. I knew I could get quality care without going bankrupt. Same with dentistry/orthodontics etc. University/College too is available and wont put a kid into debt up to their eyeballs nor be comparable to a mortgage.

I think your assumption of some kid being "lazy" so they can have a free ride studying something "that affords them no career" is way off. Also, who determines or judges what is a useless degree and what isn't?

TL;DR - I go into detail but the bottom line is, this nations middle class was built on education funding. To continue to take that funding away hurts our economy in the long run.

The earning difference alone between a high school graduate and a college graduate is enough to prioritize post secondary education. Median income with a bachelors is 50k a year. High school about 30k:

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77

Interesting/sad about this graph is that all median wages have gone down since 2009 it seems. The big problem with college these days is the disproportionate inflation. To put it in perspective, a college education in 1974 cost roughly $10.3k a year for a private institution and 2.5k for a public one. Median family income in 1974 in todays dollars would be 62k. In todays real dollars, median family income is a smidge higher at 64k, but college is 31k for private and 9k for public. Roughly a 3x factor increase. Since the 1980s we've decreased per student govt spending a great deal, and in that time frame the cost of a student to go to school has gone up a great deal. There is a direct correlation here.

The government should invest in education. Notice I said INVEST, not spend. The flaw in the logic of slashing education spending is that we treat it like repaving roads where the money just disappears forever. Here's why it's an investment: someone with a bachelor degree earns about a million dollars in their lifetime more than someone with a high school diploma. That extra money is then taxed by the state. To simplify the concept, lets assume the state will give full rides to all student candidates. That would be the state spending 31k/yr, or 124k total for the bachelors program. That leaves 876k as taxable post-graduation additional income. At a 25% rate, the state would collect 219k. So even if the state FULLY FUNDED education, you nearly double your money over the run. That's why it's an investment and not an expenditure.

I didn't even include additional sales tax income or vehicle registration taxes etc. Just straight up income tax. So once you factor in all the taxes, the return could well be more than double...

Oh, I think that time is coming, arch. Really soon.

AND... folks won't be talking to their congressmen on the phone, in e-mails or on twitter. They'll be talking at the ballot box.

If Bernie Sanders' candidacy has done one good thing, it's been to put these issues front-and-center on the national dialogue. Before this election cycle, it was the Tea Party and Occupy Wall St movements: two seemingly polar opposites, griping about the same rigged system. Both groups came from different demographics, but had (at their cores) a common adversary which has polarized and monopolized the Average Joe Voter for 2 generations.

Both groups were treated in the press as 'lunatic fringe elements'... but BOTH had a bead on what's wrong with today's USA's political landscape.

If my dream scenario were to come true, we'd see a groundswell of fresh new congressional candidates who'd stump to their constituents on these 3 issues:

1. sensible/equitable tax reform
2. re-investment into this country's infrastructure (education, transportation, revamping/replacing the ACA, upgrading our aging water/sewer/electrical grids, etc... initiatives that benefit ALL Americans)
3. an immediate repeal of campaign finance policies that allow dark, gray and black money to influence Capitol Hill policy... starting with a deep revisit of the Supreme Court's 'Citizens United' ruling.

And, in my humble opinion, #3 is perhaps the most important of these stump positions- at least in the initial phase of governmental change... and here's why:

Money is not equivalent to Speech. Money is a tool for the exercise of capitalism. Speech can be debated, dissected, refuted, contested. Speech must stand on its own, subject to public scrutiny, open discourse and direct opposition by other ideas. As the system stands today, Money can influence national Public Policy, without ever being examined/debated/opposed in the 'open court of public discourse or scrutiny.'

We all know what that is, my friend:
"Backroom deals made in smoke-filled rooms."

Trump's making waves without SuperPACS.
Bernie's making waves without SuperPACS.

BOTH of these guys are tapping a vein of anger and disaffection that has been simmering just beneath the surface of American culture for decades.

The People are getting hip to the slime and sleaze that has dominated Wash DC politics for 3-4 generations or more. (Perhaps that's one of the rare GOOD things to come from the 'internet age'...)

Since the dawn of recorded time, there's one undeniable truth that has come 'round, time and time again:

When the rank & file 'peasant population' rises up, the oligarchs go down.

There truly IS strength in numbers. History bears this truth out. The Bolshevik Revolution, The French Revolution... let's go back in time all the way to the fall of the Roman Empire to see what happens when once-great and all-powerful societies reach 'the tipping point.' It always turns out the same.

Always.

______________

In other posts, I've mentioned 'pitchforks and pyres' when we Dawgs get deep into politics. I don't do this lightly, or with a sense of irony. I've studied enough current, recent and ancient history to see a trend that this country has emulated. The only difference between now and those quaint 'days of yore'... is a radically accelerated timeline.

And the immediacy of the 21st century 'information age' has exploded that timeline- exponentially.

If we want to avoid the same catastrophic fates that befell those other dynasties, radical fixes must be installed... and with a real sense of urgency.

The Kochs, Soros, private interest lobbyists, MegaBusinesses, and other 'Big Shady Money' backroom dealers MUST be swept out of our current system, or we'll suffer the same fate as those corrupt oligarchies that came before.

______________

Human Nature hasn't changed since Human Beings began populating the planet. Each of us is subject to the 'Seven Deadlies,' and at present, The United States of America is now being run by a small cabal of 'chunks of 98.6' who believe that they know what's best for all of us... and that "best" ...is whatever is best for them.

Let's limit our focus to just two: "Greed" and "Pride."

I don't believe that these people are better-equipped to know what's good for all of us than You or I. I don't believe that they should have more of a voice in determining what's good for us than Arch or Clem.... and yet, 'Citizens United' gives them inroads to the seats of political power that simply don't exist for a small business owner in Archbold, Ohio... or his music-making friend, just 1 hour away, In Toledo.

The game is rigged.
The deck is stacked.
You and I are f*kked (...along with Columbus, DC, 40, Swish, Rocket, CHS, Devil, [insert name of Browns fan here, other than Jimmy Haslam]... as long as this 40-year 'trend' is allowed to perpetuate.

And as much as we might disagree on the details of what's best for all of us... I can't imagine a world in which You and I aren't totally in-line, as peasants... outside the gated communities of folks like Soros and The Kochs... choosing between a pitchfork and a torch, when we mount our assault.... when the crap gets spread about by the fan that we all can see spinning at a breakneck speed.

I pray that Our Society doesn't take us to that point.
'My Dream' might just head us off from that fate.

...And if it ever gets REALLY close to that point... I just might run for office myself. I truly do care that much about the county that I call my home. Because I still believe in what we're supposed to be, as a nation.

So... I guess the choice kinda sucks for you, as my friend, my fellow Browns fan, and fellow countryman:

1. Vote for a friend who'd actually enact some Democratic Socialist policies (that you dislike) to save Our Beloved Country...
or...
2 Stand with that same American Citizen... as we fight together to save Our Beloved Country from people who would try to make it into what THEY think it should be.


Damn, Dawg.
I'd HATE to have to make such a choice. If I were you.

For me, the choice is plain to see: ANYTHING WE CHOOSE IS BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW...

...Because 'Now' is truly a sh***y place to be.


To coin your own expression: "Sorry man, just giving you some real world truth."

I'm liberal, and even I take a little issue with what Bernie wants. I'm cool with paying more in taxes as his plans help everyone, but I get the concern of those who hate the idea. I find what he wants is an admirable goal, but I wonder if the American populace is ready for it.

I think this issue is much like how the same-sex marriage debate unfolded. I think things need to hit a bit more rock bottom before we realize how Bernie's ideas could help every single American.



This only happens if money gets taken out of politics.