2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf you embrace socialism you should embrace both the social safety net as well as the high taxes
Hence I would love to see Bernie embrace both aspects when he points to Denmark. I would love for him to explain this during his great speech on socialism: "under socialism, taxes are going to go up on everybody to pay for a robust social safety net".
Only then can we have a fair debate on policies and issues, which his supporters have been lording over others for months. But far they have been talking about the social benefits without the costs part. It's great to promise free health care, free parental leave, free state college tuition and room & board, expanded social security, extinguishing of student loans, etc, and bash Clinton for not promising all this. But what's the plan to pay? I agree with Clinton that we need a progressive who gets things done (not make promises that can't be funded). It's very unfair to her because she's realistic that she doesn't promise all this benefits when she knows it's not going to get funded. Why didn't Vermont fund single payer? Why was Obama forced to drop his plan to tax college 529 plans to fund free community college for all? These are the perfect examples of when dreams meet reality.
Hence I'm very excited that he's finally starting to talk about the costs part. This shows that finally he is getting serious about thinking of how to pay. His supporters should be as well. However I'm puzzled why many of his supporters are running away from a miserly 0.2% increase in the payroll tax to fund parental leave.
Let's put it to a fair debate on both the costs and the benefits. And let the people decide if they want to pay the costs for the benefits.
Here's the tax rates for Denmark
https://www.cfe-eutax.org/taxation/personal-income-tax/denmark
1 USD is about 6.5 DKK.
0%: Up to 41 000 DKK
37.48%: 41 001 279 800
43.48%: 279 801 335 800
59%: 335 801 and over
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Socialism doesn't have anything to do with taxes.
Socialism is democratic control of resources to meet human needs, instead of for capitalist profit.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)in some way...
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)this makes no sense without clarification. If they have no money what do they contribute? Uncompensated labor? Donating at the blood bank? A promissory note that they will pay back what they have gotten in public funds? Money that they don't have?
jonno99
(2,620 posts)their neighbors? Is the time-frame for receiving assistance open-ended?
hill2016
(1,772 posts)Below a certain amount you don't pay taxes. After that it's a steep increase.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)through all the other money we flush down the drain with privatized public services. Like prisons and schools that should be public.
We pay every week when the bosses pay us less money than we can afford to live on.
We pay an exploitation tax to the corporations on every pay check when they pay us less than our work is worth. Capitalism is organized theft.
enid602
(8,616 posts)In Denmark, according to Wiki:
"All income from employment or self-employment is taxed at 8% before income tax. This tax is termed a "gross tax" (Danish: Arbejdsmarkedsbidrag). Income below DKK 42,800 (USD 7,600) (2014-level, adjusted annually) is income tax-free, but subject to the gross tax.[1]
Interest paid up to DKK 50,000 is tax deductible. Commuting exceeding 24 kilometers/day receives a DKK 2.05 per kilometer tax deduction. For commutes exceeding 100 kilometers per day, the rate is reduced to DKK 1.03 per kilometer.[2] A number of other deductions apply. The general rule is that the taxpayer is able to deduct his/her expenses in acquiring their taxable income, although there are many exceptions to this rule. Employees have very limited possibilities for tax deduction as it is assumed that the employer covers the expenses related to the employee's work. The employer will then be able to deduct most of these expenses from his own taxable income. Furthermore, Union Fees are tax deductible.
The state income tax has two income brackets (base and top). In 2014 income from DKK 42,900 to DKK 421,000 is taxed at 5.83% and income above DKK 422,000 is taxed an additional 15%. Other taxes include Municipal income tax, currently in the range 23% - 28%, though on average 24.09%. A Health contribution of 8% apply on all income above the tax free allowance in year 2014, though from there the health contribution is getting merged with the regular income tax by one percent per year. Under the Danish tax system, it is possible for a high-wage earner to pay up to 51.5% of their total income after gross tax, giving a total of 57% of total income."
So really, the 57% tax is a combination of state tax (which sounds like our Federal income tax, Municipal income tax (like our State income tax) and the Health contribution (Medicare). High wage earners are already paying that (or something close) here. But this is JUST earned income. According to the Wiki article on capital gains taxes around the world:
"Denmark
Share dividends and realized capital gains on shares are charged 27% to individuals of gains up to DKK 48,300 (2013-level, adjusted annually), and at 42% of gains above that.[5] Carryforward of realized losses on shares is allowed.
Individuals' interest income from bank deposits and bonds, realized gains on property and other capital gains are taxed up to 59%, however, several exemptions occur, such as on selling one's principal private residence or on gains on selling bonds. Interest paid on loans is deductible, although in case the net capital income is negative, only approx. 33% tax credit applies.
Companies are taxed at 25%. Share dividends are taxed at 28%."
Our capital gains tax is currently limited to 15% for high income earners.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)on the other thread.
hill2016
(1,772 posts)supporters have we seen who want to talk about the "issues" without a plan to pay?
It's payback time...
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)Sanders supporters already know this. And they know it is going to come in a variety of areas as already outlined by Bernie. And, knowing that, they are still willing to invest in their country and fellow citizens through that increased taxation.
Can't get much clearer than that.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)So I see no problem with it. It's not like we won't be getting anything for our tax money. People are still paying $800 a month for insurance. No more people losing their homes because of medical bills. There is no downside to this.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)You want to guarantee Hillary will never raise taxes?
whathehell
(29,067 posts)a penny tax on stock exchanges.
hill2016
(1,772 posts)how much revenue will these proposals raise?
whathehell
(29,067 posts)get an idea -- If, in fact, you're not just against raising taxes on the wealthy...They're at their lowest
rate in 80 or so years.
let me know when he comes out with the details.
As they say, the devil's always in the details.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)I'll let you keep track of that yourself.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Can't be too concerned if you can't even bother yourself to do a quick google. In fact, I think it shows how disingenuous you are in regards to your requesting information about Senator Sander's detailed positions on taxes.
Capn Sunshine
(14,378 posts)If you eliminate the Oil company subsidies, cut the Defense Budget by 20% and impose a regular income tax on any church choosing to be political, that's hundreds of billions right there.
It doesn't ALL have to come from taxes.
As a side note, those Scandinavian socialist paradises get a pretty large subsidy from us as well.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)The president and defense is upset with and want to get rid of sequestration and that is not near 20 percent. How do you propose this to pass? Hint - it won't.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)By far
randys1
(16,286 posts)Most people here would if they understood what it meant.
But most Americans are dumb when it comes to this, and will react stupidly
most Americans don't believe in paying more taxes for a robust social net?
Why is their viewpoint any less valid than yours (that they are "dumb" ?
randys1
(16,286 posts)what the system would provide.
Now if you are wealthy, I can see why you would be against it.
Because the system makes it more equal for everyone.
But if this is about support for Hillary, I support both
Response to hill2016 (Reply #7)
whatchamacallit This message was self-deleted by its author.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Did someone propose this for the US?
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)Retail education costs we come out ahead in expendable income. Canadians have more than us for the same reason.
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)
The golden era for the middle class in the US. It wasn't bad for the wealthy either, even with the 80-90% tax rate.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)Healthcare - FREE. Just imagine that for a minute. You have cancer and won't have to worry about losing your home or going bankrupt to pay for care. Think about it.
Tuition FREE State University. Your kids can get a higher education without facing a LIFETIME STUDENT LOAN debt. Where was this 5 years ago when my son started college? Do you have any idea how expensive Universities are? I do.
Our taxes could not possibly be higher than what we pay in Healthcare Premiums- even with the ACA, it's RIDICULOUS, for good plans. And don't get me started on what we paid to send our son to an IN STATE University.
Higher taxes will be worth Every feakin' cent. And I'm sure it will be based on income. The more you make, the more taxes you pay. I'm cool with that. I like helping my fellow citizens who are - the least of these...
Armstead
(47,803 posts)More like paying it for it as you do with Medicare and invest in SS.
Not splitting hairs, but that "free stuff" meme from opponents has tainted the debate
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)And it's a hell of a lot better than we have now. I should stop using"free" from now on. Plays right into their greedy little paws.
hill2016
(1,772 posts)all I'm saying is, let's have a real debate on this. Let all Americans weight the pros and cons and make their decision in the voting booth.
I do doubt though that you would be paying less overall. As you pointed out with ACA: lots of people with perfectly good plans are paying more precisely because the system now has to pay for those who didn't have insurance before.
Think of what happens if you have free college (and room and board). Now more students will want to have the 4 - 6 year experience and you'll have to pay for them in addition to your own kids.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)...I pay for their highways. I think we had no business going into Iraq but I'm still paying for that little mishap.
So you want to gripe about extending the right to public education to a level that is currently what used to be the equivalent of high school?
The tax system is skewed badly towards the wealthy and Big Money Corporations. The burden gets tossed on the backs of those with more moderate incomes.
First start out with a fairer tax system,instead of starting with the conservative "Oh they want to raise your taxes to the roof" GOP talk.
lots of people complain about their property taxes which are used to fund K-12.
Can you imagine if you tell them now they have to pay for college for everyone as well.
Why did Obama kill his plan to tax 529 accounts to pay for free community college?
My point is: show the American people both what you get and what you pay (the bill) and let them decide. Do you disagree?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)And there wil always be people fer it and against it....And not necessarily on principle. A guy who is usually anti taxes may very well say "Public college at no tuition? Sure. I've got three kids. I'll pony up a little but for that."
If people were given a choice between sky-high private health insurance premiums or paying an affordable percentage of income in exchange for universal health care a lot of them will say. "Sounds like good deal." Some won't on principle, but that's what democracy and elections are all about.
hill2016
(1,772 posts)it's not just one or the other (college, health insurance)
the whole bill for everything comes all at once.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)A new program would not be any different.
What, you think Sanders would walk into the WH and immediately institute FREE HEALTHCARE, FREE COLLEGE, FREE PONIES and at the same time say "Oh bybthe way your taxes are going up 90 percent?
Anything he proposed would go through the same wrangling as everything else. You are implying some Brave New World of Socialism in which the normal rules don't apply, which aint the case.
Shouldn't he lay out his vision all at once?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)But I assume you are smart enough to recognize that he is not suggesting that we elimanate the system of checks and balances.
I assume you are intelligent enough to realuze thst he is trying to reverse the swing of the pendulum to the right started around 1980. That does not mean that the vision he espouses would instantly transform everything. We'd keep slogging in fits and starts, as always. But we'd be slogging in a better, more liberal direction.
redwitch
(14,944 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)And Bernie's gonna go riding around in a tank!
hill2016
(1,772 posts)let the American people weight the pros and cons of a socialist system, including both the costs and benefits.
Do you agree with that?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)in an hinest way, without exaggerating and distorting what are basically traditional liberal ideas that the Democratic Party used to support.
Sanders is not trying to turn the US into Denmark, Russia or anywhere else. He is simply saying they have good ideas that we should look at.
It's difficult enough having to contend with the familiar GOP distortions against liberalism (i.e democratic socialism). It's a little annoying when Democrats engage in the same conservative message.
and I'm presuming that one of these issues that's important to Americans is the cost as well?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)As has always been the case.
(Except we forgot to mention it when we invaded Iraq.)
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)nauseating. Imagine tacking on state income taxes and SS on top of that.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)where in Bernie Sanders plan that "59% over 51K" is called for. Thanks in advance!
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)One of Bernie's favorite countries when it comes to modeling policy.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)American tax policy. As I said before, could you show me where in BERNIE'S plan that is called for?
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)And it's embarrassing. Do you think he understands he isn't running for election in Denmark? I somehow doubt it.
frylock
(34,825 posts)It's your sincere belief that Sanders thinks is running for President of Denmark?
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)15 seconds to comb his hair in the morning is thinking. Hillary also had to remind him that the United States "isn't Denmark"...so there is that.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)neverforget
(9,436 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)in English class where they discussed analogies and metaphors.
Denmark is being used as an example. An analogy if you will of what higher taxes and socialist support could look like.
But for christ's sake, no one including him is suggesting we do EXACTLY what they do in Denmark. We are much larger. We have a different foundational government system. We have a different economic setup from the start.
But we could raise taxes on the wealthiest 10% back to 1980's Reagan era levels and pay for one thing. We could implement the FT Tax and pay for one other thing. We could then repatriate Apple's and other corporations off shore tax holdings and pay for another. We could cut military spending by a measly 10% and have enough to strengthen food stamps for a decade.
Taxes used to be ok with Democratic progressives until the neoliberals took over. You and the OP are on the wrong fucking site with conservative libertarian "I don't want to pay for someone else's stuff" bullshit.
Go away!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)ˈfediSH/
noun
an inanimate object worshiped for its supposed magical powers or because it is considered to be inhabited by a spirit.
a course of action to which one has an excessive and irrational commitment.
"he had a fetish for writing more opinions each year than any other justice"
a form of sexual desire in which gratification is linked to an abnormal degree to a particular object, item of clothing, part of the body, etc.
"Victorian men developed fetishes focusing on feet, shoes, and boots"
And since mentioning Denmark "all the time" makes it a "fetish", does his "fetish" for Denmark resemble your "fetish" for guns?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/~Kang%20Colby
Tia!
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)That is just one of the many reasons that he isn't a viable candidate. Look, this isn't just my opinion. HRC had to step in and remind Bernie that the U.S. isn't Denmark during the last debate. How embarrassing is that?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And which is more embarrassing, in your opinion?
Wanting the US to be more like Denmark or wanting more people to own guns in Amurka?
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)I make no apologies for being a proud gun rights activist. In fact, the one area I agree with Bernie on is his support for the PLCAA. Excellent attempt at deflection though on your part.
But what does my 2A activism have to do with Bernie's suggested belief that Denmark should serve as the public policy model for the United States?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And to me having a fetish for guns is far more embarrassing than wanting the US to be more like a socialist country.
Btw, Hillary frequently mentions Australia as a model we should follow when it comes to gun control, does she have a "fetish" for Australia?
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)is something that I'm proud of. Nevertheless, it's always the same with the Sanders supporters, deflect and change topics ASAP without discussing the merits (or more realistically the lack thereof ) of Bernie's candidacy.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And thanks to finding a subject you obviously understand (guns) and a candidate you support (Hillary), I've completed my mission.
My work here is done!
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)Sanders supporters can never stay on topic.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Everyone has fetishes, yours seem to be guns and not seeing the point as it flies over your head at Mach 1.
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)Of course, all of his prospective American supporters will need to leave their parents' basements to vote for him abroad.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I've heard it gets cold under those bridges at night.
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)Best of luck with the Bernie support come March.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Same to you, the important thing is keeping the white house.
Kang Colby
(1,941 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)are not paying their share of the taxes, not the working people. Social Security/Medicare the obvious example with the cap so low it misses the professional class and above, that has been so since 1981.
Capn Sunshine
(14,378 posts)Actively dedicated to sowing dissent among the Democrats. Karl Roves money put to use.
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)think she may ave joined tribe of subversive lefty libertarians.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)and an unregulated war industry at the same time.
The problem is that Hillary is on the wrong side - so she could never understand.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)i lived in Germany for a decade among it's citizens.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Taxing people who are on some kind of benefit program not so much. Taxing the middle class more not so much there either by middle class I mean people making less than 75k but more than 50k for their household. We have suffered enough with regressive taxes, fines, and fees.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)I agree with you, the middle class has suffered enough. But if we were to follow the Danish model, those making 50-75K would be taxed at the highest tax bracket, at 59%. And that does not count the 25% sales tax in Denmark. I am not saying that model does not make sense, but do you think Bernie could convince the middle class to agree to such a tax increase?
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I doubt he would even use their model even if he adopts what the government pays for. Most what is proposed can be paid for by reducing military spending and that is on the table. If at some point far far far into the future we have as robust a middle class as most of Europe, then we can talk about raising taxes on the middle class then. But, for now let's have some breathing room first.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)from my sister who has lived in the UK for over thirty years. Several years ago we did a 'back of the envelope' calculation and determined we are paying relatively the same in taxes.
BUT, they can avail themselves of 'free' care from the NHS and tuition at university is quite a bit lower than it is in the US, even after the latest rate increase.
Pay more in taxes and less to the "for profit establishments?"
Count me in.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)We spend $1 Trillion dollars on a weapons program we don't need...and yet we have NO MONEY for anything unless we pass crippling taxes?
We have the lowest tax rates on the 1% possible, and they talk about going to zero...while you try to boogieman us about the scary "socialist" who isn't?
Can we leave wonderland yet? I thought only the Bush Family thought it was awesome.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Taxes! Taxes!
The Roux Comes First
(1,299 posts)Perhaps validating Carl Sagan's deep concern about the appalling US discomfort with math and science.
Here's my quick take:
tax % Income Range
0 up to $6,308
37.5 $6,308 $43,000
43.5 $43,000 $52,000
59 $52,000 and above
Now that wasn't so tough, was it?
Others, who find math unthreatening, please weigh in!
A little shocking to take a third from those I or just above poverty wages. And I admit that would be a major tax increase and stinger for me, being in the top category. On the other hand, if we would truly collect that 59% from the folks earning huge sums I could live with that. No off-shore hiding. No gargantuan subsidies (hi there corporate-farm scofflaws!). I suspect we could fund an amazing amount of improvements to the infrastructure that the billionaires have been exploiting for profit for many decades now without actually having to pay anything for it! I believe that is called corporate welfare.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)First off, it's not socialism, let's get that straight right now. American's are the only people on the face of the earth who have a problem with this word and it's incredibly sad and ignorant. The reason? In the rest of the world, political parties like Germany's SPD are the norm, "Social Party Democrats", we don't exactly have that here, instead we have the Democratic Party. Here's some info for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Democratic_Party_of_Germany and they usually forge alliances with the Green Party.
Do I embrace higher taxes? Yes I do. I never used to but having lived in Germany after marrying a German, there's no question I do. In fact, how their country and society functions is far superior than ours. Is there caveats? Yes.For instance, it's hard to own property and it's expensive as heck but that being said, people who live under social democracies are also the happiest people on earth & Denmark is one of those very countries http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/23/travel/feat-world-happiest-countries-2015/
2. Iceland
3. Denmark
4. Norway
5. Canada
6. Finland
7. Holland
8. Sweden
9. New Zealand
10. Australia
Also keep in mind that Denmark is continuously one of the best places to live as are many Nordic and European countries. Do you know who isn't? The United States. We often rank towards the bottom or every once in a blue moon, the middle of the list. We're never in the top 10% however.
"American exceptionalism" is a lie and nothing but. People are finding this out that the bullshit flavored Kool-Aid that they've been fed for decades is nothing short of cheerleading and it's all because of the internet. Younger generations are realizing this, from Gen Xers to millennials. They can literally get on the internet and talk with someone in under 2 seconds who lives in Japan or Sweden, they have friends from these countries and they talk. They learn. They exchange ideas. They spend time with these people, often hours a day, playing online games and in doing so, they learn all about their country and where they're from.
In doing so their opinions change and they start to learn and see that everything they've been told is utter lies. This election isn't just about policy, it's about a gap in generations. Many Hillary supporters on here for instance say they don't use twitter and/or facebook. Younger generations do and they're talking to people in these countries.
I got a shock when I lived in Germany. I saw lies melted away like butter in front of my eyes. Socialized healthcare? It's incredibly far superior to our system. Never once did I see some mythical wait time that has been forced fed to me like a IV. Doctors, yes doctors, show up to the scene of accidents. Actual doctors! The real deal! "Notarzt" as they're called. Literally translated it means "emergency physician". This doesn't even exist in America where doctors show up to accident scenes.
They take care of their own and we don't. It's truly that simple.
*30 days PAID vacation a year.
*Doctors who make house calls and show up to the scenes of accidents.
*Free college. My kiddo won't pay a damn cent for his education.
*An entrenched social system for when you retire. Seniors aren't scraping to survive.
*A vastly superior healthcare system
*No sales tax on food. What you see is what you pay.
*"Kindergeld", everyone is entitled to this. It's money the government gives you to help raise kids.
*Free day care.
*Paid maternal leave. In Germany women often don't work, only 1 parents does.
*No homeless problem. None. I lived in cities as big as Chicago, Dusseldorf, Koeln, Dortmund. It doesn't exist because of the entrenched social system.
*Emergency rooms don't even have a waiting room. You literally walk into a hospital room because people don't go to the ER when they have the flu due to the healthcare system.
*Everything is closed on Sundays. It's law, thus giving people who work in say our minimum wage jobs, off, so they can spend time with family.
*Lunch? Try a 2 hour break that you go home for.
*Wages are living wages. In Denmark and much of Europe, fast food workers as example are unionized and they are paid a living wage.
See, this is what people are finding out. While our "Democrats" say things like this, such as Hillary, actions speak louder than words. She also isn't a progressive and I truly wish people would stop saying that about her. FDR was a progressive. Teddy in many ways was a progressive. Sanders is a progressive. Hillary isn't a progressive. Her stances show and prove that. She's a blue collar Dem who in many ways leans conservative.
People are waking up. They're sick of the establishment and they're sick of the bullshit when it comes to politics and politicians. They're sick of the money and they're sick of dishonesty. They're sick of us being thrown under the bus. In many ways, Ike was more progressive than many Dems today however Dems won't admit that and those Ike Republicans will be voting for Bernie.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)TBF
(32,056 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)As the old saying goes, you get what you pay for.
We're all in this together, or should be at least.
Sanders has put himself on the line while there still may be time to turn around
the Corporatist take-over of our government & our democracy. We have to get
rid of Citizens United and deal with climate change, NOW. We can't kick these
cans down the road any further, it's literally now or never on these two things.
The American people are massively waking up to having been sold down the
river by the Billionaire Class, and are in open revolt; and Bernie's campaign
is just in time to catch this wave of justifiable resentment and turn it into something
positive, something our kids and grandkids will thank us for later.
TM99
(8,352 posts)I was an exchange student to West Germany in the 1980's. I had the misfortune of having my wisdom teeth come in. Even as a non-citizen living with a host family, my dental care was covered no questions asked. My host father was a Notarzt MD. I lived with them in a tiny village in the Oberpfalz between Regensburg and Nuremburg. Yes, he made house calls. His home had an underground walkthrough to his small medical practice. He would join us for lunch every day! When I returned to America, I was so disenfranchised and disgusting.
If only this country could grow up! We need to leave this adolescent arrogance and exceptionalism behind and become like the rest of the civilized world. We must take care of our own whether they are seniors, students, or every day people who need work, healthcare, and yes, leisure.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences as well on the topic.
geardaddy
(24,926 posts)Excellent rebuttal!
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)There is a LOT of blathering going on but most don't know what the hell they're talking about OR they do but they are just using "socialism" as a tool against all that don't support their Big Money, Bankster, Billionaire, War Machine, NO Change, Capitalist/Corprotist candidate.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)Trajan
(19,089 posts)Meet ignore list ....
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Labels belong on cans.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)But if we pay high taxes and get awesome benefits from them, that's actually a good thing.
Wages need to be higher, too. Thank the union-busting RW for that, as well.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)the attempted smear continue. We get it you, like hillary, love capitalism and hate taxes and the poor......what else is new