Socialism for beginners

@averagejoe1 said
It is boring for posts to say' "even he USA has socialism.." we all know that. The old fire department, roads, sewer system , traffic directors, OSHA, DEA, FAA gambit......yeah, we all know that. Can we not stipulate to that and get on with it? We also have 380 choices of cereals on the shelf, Cuba has one. Geez. You libs have grabbed for straws lately, settle down....be somebody!!!!

"It is boring for posts to say' "even he USA has socialism.." we all know that."
Yet you constantly say "leftists want the US to be like Venezuela and Cuba"

"The old fire department, roads, sewer system , traffic directors, OSHA, DEA, FAA gambit......yeah, we all know that."
Do you?

"We also have 380 choices of cereals on the shelf, Cuba has one."
So much stupid in this. First of all, choice doesn't matter if you can't afford it. Sure, there are Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bugattis to buy but if you can't afford them, your choice is still the beat up third hand Ford from 2001 with 300 000 km on board.

Second of all, there is Cuba again. How about you ask how many cereal choices (what a dumb example btw) Sweeden has? Or Norway? Or Canada? How about you ask if the number of cereal choices has ANYTHING to do with having socialized healthcare? Does being able to visit a doctor for free stop Kellog from importing bloody cereals in one country?

Third of all, and this is another history fact you don't bother with because you're ignorant and proudly so: Cuba failed more because of US sanctions than because it is a communist regime.

@soothfast said
In other words you do not want to bother with facts. You want emotion-driven screaming matches. Small wonder, I suppose, seeing as the facts are rarely on your side.

I am asking Phranny, at Starbucks, what he thinks. He can interlace his comment with factual observations but what does HE think we should do, next week, regarding the exorbitant wealth owned by the rich.
IF you just HAVE to have a link, see this, Phranny...
If All of the money of the billionaires were confiscated, it would run the govt for 8 months. THEN, there would be no more money.
Phranny, who is your son going to get a job from? The government?

Here is MY link. Please tell us how you will be successful cutting the knees off of the rich.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/nov/02/viral-image/confiscating-us-billionaires-wealth-would-run-us-g/

Emotion?

@soothfast said
In other words you do not want to bother with facts. You want emotion-driven screaming matches. Small wonder, I suppose, seeing as the facts are rarely on your side.

maybe you can tell us which socialist country you would like to live in if you had a choice…go!

@averagejoe1 said
A LINK?!?!?!?
We are sitting at Starbucks after a morning run
“ Hey, Phranny. What do you think about corporate officers making so much money. 150’times more than we do.”
What would you say?

Links?

I would reply that we need strong labor unions and a progressive tax code so extremely wealthy individuals and profitable corporations treat workers fairly and do not end up paying very low taxes and sometimes, even zero in taxes. I am not opposed to people being wealthy. Even China has a growing middle class and some very wealthy people. Social democracies in Europe also have billionaires but through taxes they contribute to the infrastructure that enabled them to acquire that wealth.
Unfortunately, you are not very thoughtful. You are simply obsessed with some fantasy idea of what Democrats desire. It's one reason so many Republicans now call themselves independents. Idiots like you are destroying the GOP. I bet Liz Cheney runs as an independent. She might win but even if she didn't, her running would destroy the GOP.

@averagejoe1 said
I am asking Phranny, at Starbucks, what he thinks. He can interlace his comment with factual observations but what does HE think we should do, next week, regarding the exorbitant wealth owned by the rich.
IF you just HAVE to have a link, see this, Phranny...
If All of the money of the billionaires were confiscated, it would run the govt for 8 months. THEN, there w ...[text shortened]... m/factchecks/2021/nov/02/viral-image/confiscating-us-billionaires-wealth-would-run-us-g/

Emotion?

I am not suggesting billionaires be taxed 100%. I am suggesting we have a tax code similar to the one that existed under Republicans like Eisenhower, that fairly taxes the wealthy so that the country can maintain its infrastructure and modernize infrastructure, ensure that citizens have easy access to high quality education via publicly funded institutions. I also believe we need to revamp health care so that everyone has access to basic health care and medications. The nation was not well prepared to deal with the Covid pandemic. It is not the last pandemic we will confront yet little has been done to make sure we are prepared for the next one.
Unfortunately, you seem unable or unwilling to comprehend, grasp basic economics or the actual definition of social democracies as they exist in Europe and Canada. You are not alone. First, it is easy for people like you to get sucked into the misinformation sound bites spewed via the Internet and the likes of Fox News. Next, U.S. culture has been deeply affected by the nation's history of slavery and racism and the idea that everyone is an independent island and if you simply work hard, you can make millions, if not billions. The wealth of the U.S. is primarily based on the abundance of natural resources which were not significantly tapped until the 1800's with the railroads. Europe had already destroyed and used much of its resources by then. Plus the U.S. had slave labor and after Emancipation, cheap labor.
I do not expect you to comprehend any of this as it requires a level of thought you either cannot or will not pursue. You have a simplistic (or simpleton's) view of politics and economics.

@phranny said
I am not suggesting billionaires be taxed 100%. I am suggesting we have a tax code similar to the one that existed under Republicans like Eisenhower, that fairly taxes the wealthy so that the country can maintain its infrastructure and modernize infrastructure, ensure that citizens have easy access to high quality education via publicly funded institutions. I also believe we ...[text shortened]... er cannot or will not pursue. You have a simplistic (or simpleton's) view of politics and economics.

do you think there was a time the rich paid 90% income tax?

@mott-the-hoople said
do you think there was a time the rich paid 90% income tax?

While the highest tax rate was 90% under Eisenhower, there were exemptions. However, the super rich did not get get away with paying zero in taxes.
https://www.thestreet.com/investing/30-biggest-companies-that-paid-zero-taxes#gid=ci0297af9e200025ef&pid=salesforce-tower
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/taxes/richest-americans-pay-almost-no-income-taxes-report-finds-n1270069
https://www.gobankingrates.com/taxes/tax-laws/millionaires-who-avoided-taxes/
https://itep.org/55-profitable-corporations-zero-corporate-tax/

@averagejoe1 said
I would say Cuba, where everyone is exactly the same.

Exactly the same ... 95% are poverty stricken and watching 5% elite Cuban political sycophants eat, drink and travel like a middle class American.

@phranny said
While the highest tax rate was 90% under Eisenhower, there were exemptions. However, the super rich did not get get away with paying zero in taxes.
https://www.thestreet.com/investing/30-biggest-companies-that-paid-zero-taxes#gid=ci0297af9e200025ef&pid=salesforce-tower
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/taxes/richest-americans-pay-almost-no-income-taxes-report-finds-n1270069 ...[text shortened]... aws/millionaires-who-avoided-taxes/
https://itep.org/55-profitable-corporations-zero-corporate-tax/

you need to understand how politicians use slight of hand to control you.

There is little difference in taxes on the wealthy in 1950 than there is today.

https://taxfoundation.org/income-taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/

@phranny said
I am not suggesting billionaires be taxed 100%. I am suggesting we have a tax code similar to the one that existed under Republicans like Eisenhower, that fairly taxes the wealthy so that the country can maintain its infrastructure and modernize infrastructure, ensure that citizens have easy access to high quality education via publicly funded institutions. I also believe we ...[text shortened]... er cannot or will not pursue. You have a simplistic (or simpleton's) view of politics and economics.

This was a very good response, thank you. I get that you want to fairly tax the rich, which has always been an agreeable idea. But, we never get what fair is. We have asked Bernie himself what 'fair share' is, so can you give us some idea of both of these concepts?
Revamping health care would be a separate thread. I do assume you mean free health care, where people dependent on government have care. I agree with that, of course, but I think you and I would have different definitions of who would be able to take advantage of such healthcare other than those in need that cannot afford health insurance. If some can be shown to be able to afford health insurance premiums, they should receive nothing for free. You have to agree with that, with your same logic that 'the rich can pay more in taxes'. Well, people who have money should be able to 'pay for health insurance'. This is an example where the logic of libs is never applied in a rational manner. You think the rich should pay more in tax, but the able bodied people economically below them should not pay into insurance premiums. We just don't get it.
So, what is your take and your answers to just these couple of points. And yes, I know Castro lives high on the hill and has lots of money, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the equal people down below. This is an example of libs reaching for any morsel to cloudy up a thread.

@mott-the-hoople said
you need to understand how politicians use slight of hand to control you.

There is little difference in taxes on the wealthy in 1950 than there is today.

https://taxfoundation.org/income-taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/

From your article (which doesn't include the effects of the Trump tax cut):

"While the average rates for total taxes on the top 0.1 percent have fallen 10.8 percentage points from the 1950s ....................."

@phranny said
I would reply that we need strong labor unions and a progressive tax code so extremely wealthy individuals and profitable corporations treat workers fairly and do not end up paying very low taxes and sometimes, even zero in taxes. I am not opposed to people being wealthy. Even China has a growing middle class and some very wealthy people. Social democracies in Europe also hav ...[text shortened]... ney runs as an independent. She might win but even if she didn't, her running would destroy the GOP.

Social democracies in Europe also have billionaires but through taxes they contribute to the infrastructure that enabled them to acquire that wealth

Nicely stated. Politicians in the US have too much monied interest in keeping billionaires taxes low. Eliminating political campaign donations would fix it.

@no1marauder said
From your article (which doesn't include the effects of the Trump tax cut):

"While the average rates for total taxes on the top 0.1 percent have fallen 10.8 percentage points from the 1950s ....................."

you might want to check the date on the article and the graph before you make stupid statements.

since you brought up Trumps tax cuts…the left and biden lied about that too.

https://www.atr.org/irs-data-middle-class-americans-saw-significant-tax-reduction-from-trump-tax-cuts/

@mott-the-hoople said
you might want to check the date on the article and the graph before you make stupid statements.

since you brought up Trumps tax cuts…the left and biden lied about that too.

https://www.atr.org/irs-data-middle-class-americans-saw-significant-tax-reduction-from-trump-tax-cuts/

That "stupid statement" is a direct quote from the article you cited!

@mott-the-hoople said
you might want to check the date on the article and the graph before you make stupid statements.

since you brought up Trumps tax cuts…the left and biden lied about that too.

https://www.atr.org/irs-data-middle-class-americans-saw-significant-tax-reduction-from-trump-tax-cuts/

Trump's tax cuts blew up the deficit while failing to deliver any growth:

"CBO released its regular update to the economic and budget outlook on January 28. The new estimates show a deficit of $1 trillion for 2020. This is the equivalent of 4.6% of gross domestic product. The federal budget deficit will grow to 5.4% of GDP by 2030, according to GDP.

This is a much worse outlook for the current deficit than CBO showed just before Congress passed the Trump tax cuts. In June 2017, CBO anticipated a deficit of 3.6% of GDP for 2020. The current deficit is thus 27.8% greater than CBO projected before the tax cuts. Moreover, this one percentage point difference in the current projected deficit and the prior projection equals $221 billion for 2020. This is a substantial gap that follows in large part from the tax cuts, especially since the economy continued to grow during this time."

"Economic growth increased briefly in early 2018 but quickly fell back to or even below the modest levels that persisted before the 2017 tax cuts "

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christianweller/2020/01/29/trumps-wasteful-tax-cuts-lead-to-continued-trillion-dollar-deficits-in-expanding-economy/?sh=2651b32566c4