-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 2| Dershowitz says "Quid Pro Quo on the Go?" [See Staff Post]
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
If Bernie picked her as his VP, I would be ecstatic. Tammy is pretty awesome.
At first I was like, well +3 isn't really that inspiring... then I read Texas and I was like ohhhhhhhh...... Here's hoping that whatever unknown person wins Texas Senate gets Generic Dem numbers for lack of people knowing who the fuck they are.
I will never not be stunned that I knew him back when he was this goofball little kid we knew on a video game site and now he's writing for TV shows and Internet famous as fuck.
At least it ain't Bloomberg, can't wait til 21 when his ass is gone though.
Yeah, when the story broke I remembered the name from Mu Alpha Theta competitions in high school.
Yeah, this would be the thing you'd do.
Maxing out a 401k is great if you can afford to do so! But if you need to get to that money before you retire, it's actually not easy at all-actually, it's quite difficult, because you essentially have to qualify for a loan against yourself! Then there is a 10% penalty and payments you have to make back into the 401k to repay the "loan" you took out even though you took it out because you need money (and are less likely to be able to make timely payments).
You make it deficit neutral by raising taxes on other activities of high-income earners/companies that serve high-end owners that aren't really all that positive to our economy, such as fin transaction taxes to go after arbitrage seekers/fintech leeches and short-term capital gains taxes to discourage fast return on investments vs. actual research and development and longer-term capital investment.
Lower incomes right now don't have great access to 401ks either, and don't benefit all that much from pre-tax savings (where as wealth savers benefit a LOT from hiding income by maxing out their 401ks). Shifting some of the 401k cap to something like this would be another way to pay for this in a way that mostly impacts higher earners.
Please don't discount how messy it is to pull money out of a 401k or IRA and how often people actually have to do it. I'm not saying that this idea is perfect, and any GOP-driven version of it will probably have some ridiculous giveaways and try to pay for it with kids' lunch money. But if you look back at the last 30 years the current bank-provided savings mechanism have abysmal returns, and encouraging long-term savings through tax advntages into assets with better returns over the long haul is probably a good idea for savings above and beyond emergency funds or your month to month checking account.
I think a contested convention is reasonably likely, but I have a hard time seeing how Bloomberg would come out of it. Like, if Sanders has a plurality and Bloomberg is close behind him, Bloomberg still doesn't have a strong claim to the rest of the delegates and I feel like it'd be pretty natural for them to go for not-Bloomberg if they're willing to reject Sanders in the first place.
I've been saying Duckworth would be a great VP for a while.
Which would (a) net us about three House seats in TX and (b) imply a 3-4 point nationwide swing left from 2016 - more than enough to beat Trump.
I'll take it!
We don't know yet what sort of withdrawal restrictions this would have, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the GOP to impose taxes on higher earners for any reason. The main motivation for this plan is not to help the middle class and certainly not those near min wage, its goal is to help win the election and make the rich richer (including Trump himself). The timing of it is all the evidence needed, plus he tried something similar in the midterms, promising middle class tax cuts around that time which never materialized.
Transaction and short term taxes would hit some hedge fund places and the algos, but most of the wealthiest would just sit on their assets and enjoy the price appreciation fueled by retail investors buying in at near all-time highs.
I realize you're talking about the benefits for some of the middle class. I'm focused more on this blatant attempt to manipulate the election and probably ever higher deficits, plus the wealth inequality angle.
I mean, he may as well be a twink if we're going to be comparing ages here.
Only 32% of americans are actually saving in 401ks and the average contributions are pathetically low. Trump's fans are barely getting any of these benefits.
Does the Average American Have a 401(k)? | The Motley Fool
The answer might surprise you.
www.fool.com
Moderate Dems "leaders": Sanders would be a disaster in the GE!
Moderate Dem voters: I agree (even if I might like Sanders as a person)! So who should we vote for?
Moderate Dems "leaders":
Moderate Dem voters: ...
Damn Formt.
Fundraising email from Tom Winter.
I'm about to empty my bank account.
Fundraising email from Tom Winter.
I'm about to empty my bank account.
Represent me in Congress, Daddy.
I think that Bernie loses the general.
But it's stupid to say that he's a non-starter because he can't be elected and then you go on and endorse a nobody like Klobuchar.
"We think Sanders is trash" is justification enough for your endorsement. You don't have to try to dress it up with bullshit.
But it's stupid to say that he's a non-starter because he can't be elected and then you go on and endorse a nobody like Klobuchar.
"We think Sanders is trash" is justification enough for your endorsement. You don't have to try to dress it up with bullshit.
Dual endorsement almost seems like a sabotage of both of the candidates you're endorsing, tbh.
I keep seeing this idea floating around here too when there's a mountain of data showing Sanders beating Trump and winning independents by the widest margins of any other candidate.
But sure, Bernie is a non-starter.
dual endorsement is dumb.
I wonder if it would be less dumb if it was like "progressive lane endorsement x, centrist lane y"
I wonder if it would be less dumb if it was like "progressive lane endorsement x, centrist lane y"
You can be skeptical of Bernie's numbers.
You can think that the socialism label may hurt him in the GE.
You cannot say, right now, that Sanders "guarantees" a second term for Trump. There is no data to support your point. You are simply substituting your own assumptions as data.
Just say you don't like his policies. At least that's in good faith.
That's essentially what the endorsement is, telling people to jump on the moderate lane. Only difference is that they're kicking Pete in the balls because he has like 5% minority support.
It's still just as dumb because it's the same vote splitting situation since you're still in essence endorsing two (or even three) candidates. That leads to a split where some choose Klobb because her mental faculties are still sharp and some choose Biden because they still remember him being Obama's VP.
If it was just "not Bernie" that moderate people wanted, the smart play would be to rally behind Warren because she can draw from his pool of support by being the more "reasonable/pragmatic" progressive candidate. Going as far right as possible with Bloomberg and such is not going to weaken him in any significant way.
This is the right answer but they're too stupid to realize this.
Pretty much, when there's such a contrast in political stances such endorsements aren't going to do much. If you like Bernie for what he's saying/proposing, these endorsements aren't going to change shit really.
If anything, it's producing a "us vs. them" mentality. And I sort of can't blame them, some of the content on MSNBC and CNN has just been embarrassing.
I'd like to get things done with Tom at the helm
Fundraising email from Tom Winter.
I'm about to empty my bank account.
- Status