2016 Postmortem

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)

66. Sounds about right.

Reply to pnwmom (Original post)

Sat Feb 6, 2016, 08:15 PM

Feb 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

142 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Chicago Tribune: Bernie's top Federal tax rate: 77%. 85% including state and local. [View all] pnwmom Feb 2016 OP

Sounds good! Now let's start taxing their wealth, too. reformist2 Feb 2016 #1

It won't sound good to the average voter. We've lost twice in the last pnwmom Feb 2016 #3

Taxing the rich is very popular. Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #95

Sure. But he's talking about additional taxes for everyone, including low income. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #96

I'm only aware of a very modest tax for working class people. Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #107

That's because you're not including the 6% payroll tax. But it will come out pnwmom Feb 2016 #109

Do you have a source for your claim? Admiral Loinpresser Feb 2016 #111

There is no 6% payroll tax coming out of paychecks. kristopher Feb 2016 #130

World's Happiest Countries? Social Democracies kristopher Feb 2016 #113

I'll take the taxes please. I will pay a hell lot less in taxes than I pay for an insurance premium, Autumn Feb 2016 #140

It sounds like this Renew Deal Feb 2016 #30

That was 32 years ago. Times have changed. A lot. reformist2 Feb 2016 #49

If you tax me at 85% metroins Feb 2016 #76

The income tax that comes anywhere near that... thesquanderer Feb 2016 #85

The ignorance is absolutely mind boggling, is it not !!! pangaia Feb 2016 #103

Do you take such a simplistic view of everything? DefenseLawyer Feb 2016 #52

Bernie's rate is lower than the top rate from 1936-1964. Fits in with the Sixties. senz Feb 2016 #33

wealth surtax - 3% a year over 20 million - dedicated to nation debt SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #71

This concept worked so well for President Mondale Gothmog Feb 2016 #94

Hey- He won his home state-That's it redstateblues Feb 2016 #110

Vermont has three electoral votes Gothmog Feb 2016 #114

Never mentioned enough harun Feb 2016 #136

Sounds reasonable to me... TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #2

It was doing a lot better if you were white, straight and male dsc Feb 2016 #5

From a balanced budget standpoint... TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #9

In the 1950s, how many people in that top marginal bracket were NOT white, straight and male? Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #14

I have no idea dsc Feb 2016 #22

If the question were solely about the economic landscape of the 50s, sure. But it is not. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #24

I'm tired of hearing this argument Travis_0004 Feb 2016 #18

Life is pretty friggin good right now if you are in the top .01%, too. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #26

I am aware of the inequality TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #29

People often forget the top rate is charged only for income above that level kysrsoze Feb 2016 #90

The Kochs can use these numbers in attack ads Gothmog Feb 2016 #100

K&R! stonecutter357 Feb 2016 #4

Sounds good to me. HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #6

Happy you will be giving your fare share and more! MoonRiver Feb 2016 #82

Huh? libdem4life Feb 2016 #122

I seem to recall a graph going around with 52% for those making $10 million/yr. or more. Gregorian Feb 2016 #7

Here it is. Ooh, look! One bracket gets lower! fwiff Feb 2016 #48

Close, but as post #7 says, brackets below $250k should be increased by 2.2 points. (n/t) thesquanderer Feb 2016 #86

If you're talking about 2.2% for single payer SickOfTheOnePct Feb 2016 #119

This message was self-deleted by its author thesquanderer Feb 2016 #123

No, it is an increase in income tax, not payroll tax. thesquanderer Feb 2016 #125

Thank you for the correction SickOfTheOnePct Feb 2016 #134

Oddly enough, I had remembered the *employer* portion being listed as a payroll tax. thesquanderer Feb 2016 #135

And you're constantly complaining about Bernie supporters using Right Wing cali Feb 2016 #8

Exactly. These aren't Bernie's figures. The source, CFRB, is rightwing. senz Feb 2016 #62

Landslide a coming. Hoyt Feb 2016 #10

WHAT KIND OF COMMUNIST MADMAN WOULD PRESIDE OVER SUCH OUTRAGEOUS TOP MARGINAL RATES?!!? Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #11

lol Jefferson23 Feb 2016 #13

And that makes Reagan an even bigger Commie pinko. Gregorian Feb 2016 #19

OMG avaistheone1 Feb 2016 #105

What a load!! nt Live and Learn Feb 2016 #12

Right wing shit. And the op complains bitterly cali Feb 2016 #16

How many right wing sources endorsed Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012? pnwmom Feb 2016 #39

For fuck's sake. THEY SAY THEY'RE CONSERVATIVE. cali Feb 2016 #41

His hometown newspaper. Shocking. EmperorHasNoClothes Feb 2016 #129

What I would much more prefer is to stop paying tax to the super wealthy GeoWilliam750 Feb 2016 #15

Chicago Tribune is a Far-Right shit-rag. Odin2005 Feb 2016 #17

Why are you posting wild speculation from a right wing rag? cali Feb 2016 #20

The Tribune twice endorsed Obama for President. Is that why you call it a far right rag? n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #34

Lol. They say they are conservative, dear friend. cali Feb 2016 #40

They endorsed Obama, which means they are not a right wing rag. But if those numbers pnwmom Feb 2016 #42

Do try to understand what the word speculation is. cali Feb 2016 #53

That was for the healthcare proposal. But he's proposed other plans that would pnwmom Feb 2016 #57

That rate requires some highly speculative savings that Prof. Krugman doubts Gothmog Feb 2016 #97

Endorsements do not go both ways: Hilter endorsing Hillary does not equal Hillary endorsing Hitler. Kip Humphrey Feb 2016 #127

Good. Matariki Feb 2016 #21

During the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency the top marginal rate was 91% Bluenorthwest Feb 2016 #23

The OP doesn't even know what a fucking marginal tax rate is! pangaia Feb 2016 #104

I think a Marginal rate of 50% for income above $10 million and 75% for income above $50 million DefenseLawyer Feb 2016 #25

Perfect. Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #27

This message was self-deleted by its author cali Feb 2016 #28

This is a joke. And your link doesn't work. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #32

You using a right wing rag as a source when you whinge cali Feb 2016 #35

I am using a Chicago newspaper that endorsed Obama in 2008 and 2012, pnwmom Feb 2016 #37

well, Obama is hardly left wing and the Tribune is KNOWN as a right wing rag. nt m-lekktor Feb 2016 #43

Hah! Another Bernie supporter disparaging Obama. And yet expects pnwmom Feb 2016 #45

Bernie Sanders And Hillary Clinton Are Actually Fighting About Barack Obama Gothmog Feb 2016 #98

I live in CHicago and the Trib has always been a RW rag Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #44

I lived there and it's true that the Sun Times is more liberal. But the Tribune pnwmom Feb 2016 #47

Trib and Sun Times are owned by the same people now Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #50

As a native Chicagoan, I assure you, the Tribune is a right wing rag. Fronkonsteen Feb 2016 #99

Yes they endorsed Obama, and let me quote to you from that endorsement: Bluenorthwest Feb 2016 #46

zackly Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #54

The Trib is using figures from the CRFB, a rightwing anti-tax group. senz Feb 2016 #68

Cali. For your information, that link is suddenly "GONE" elias49 Feb 2016 #36

Ok. So once you get past $10 million net you can start saying ouch. Nanjeanne Feb 2016 #31

Good. and it wont' take too long to explaint Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #38

so a rich guy toothless dragon Feb 2016 #51

That is insane n/t doc03 Feb 2016 #55

Obviously it won't stop the Hillary Supporters from Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #56

Where is the correct information showing the effect of all his tax-raising plans, pnwmom Feb 2016 #58

Believing th Trib on something like this Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #63

That isn't affiliated with the campaign and only covers the Medicare for all. pnwmom Feb 2016 #67

SourceWatch: CRFB attacked "entitlement" programs & partnered with Big Tobacco. senz Feb 2016 #59

Everyone who's in Bernies top tax bracket, raise your hand. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2016 #60

I sit up nights, sometimes, just worrying about multimillionaires' taxes. ALL NIGHT, guys! Romulox Feb 2016 #61

There is absolutely no chance if Sanders would get elected he will get any of his doc03 Feb 2016 #64

There is absolutely no chance if Clinton would get elected she will get any of her EmperorHasNoClothes Feb 2016 #131

Clinton is not promising ridiculous stuff that nobody can deliver. Why don't you doc03 Feb 2016 #133

Hill fans using a rightwing tactic: "top marginal tax bracket" is EVERYONE! senz Feb 2016 #65

Sounds about right. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2016 #66

It's amazing you would post this shit here... AOR Feb 2016 #69

Adding in State and Local Taxes??? Tom Rinaldo Feb 2016 #70

Then what about the 77%? Without state and local? But you obviously pnwmom Feb 2016 #72

I live in New York n/t Tom Rinaldo Feb 2016 #116

re: "do you know what the real numbers are?" Here you go... thesquanderer Feb 2016 #73

No. That is the top rate for his Medicare- for-All plan alone. But it doesn't include pnwmom Feb 2016 #75

Those are the rates, period. thesquanderer Feb 2016 #84

No, he's also calling for a payroll tax to pay for the Family Leave, pnwmom Feb 2016 #87

I covered that in my post #73. thesquanderer Feb 2016 #88

Thank you. I still think HE needs to address this on his website. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #89

Where's Hillary's tax plan page, that you think Bernie should have an equivalent of? (n/t) thesquanderer Feb 2016 #112

There isn't a high income tax bracket SickOfTheOnePct Feb 2016 #120

No, there is no change in payroll tax for single payer... thesquanderer Feb 2016 #126

On short term capital gains, it is a good idea. Dawson Leery Feb 2016 #74

"Sanders at least acknowledges that his "Medicare for All" would force huge tax increases." bkkyosemite Feb 2016 #77

Common knowledge in the Chicago area Bjornsdotter Feb 2016 #78

Sounds good! N/t californiabernin Feb 2016 #79

I doubt this will happen overnight Red Knight Feb 2016 #80

"Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget" -- Hell Hath No Fury Feb 2016 #81

Thank you. But we need to see the figures from Bernie to counter it. pnwmom Feb 2016 #83

That claptrap does not need to be countered. senz Feb 2016 #91

The Chicago Tribune has never endorsed a Dem before Obama Arazi Feb 2016 #93

Those are the numbers Nanjeanne Feb 2016 #115

Those numbers will make great attack ads Gothmog Feb 2016 #92

Tax rises are very difficult to explain to people who don't understand how marginal rates work Spider Jerusalem Feb 2016 #101

Notice that this is an 'opinion' piece.... TheProgressive Feb 2016 #102

Post removed Post removed Feb 2016 #106

I think you're on the wrong site. FreeRepublic is that way.. white_wolf Feb 2016 #117

I'm a Democrat. What I don't recognize are the neosocialists Kang Colby Feb 2016 #118

The "Third Way" of Clinton turned the democratic part into nicer neo-cons white_wolf Feb 2016 #121

Oh My, Wonder What Dwight Eisenhower Would Say ChiciB1 Feb 2016 #108

This will be red meat for the republicans workinclasszero Feb 2016 #124

WRONG!!!!! 54.2% amborin Feb 2016 #128

Nice post. And 85% of American voters will say "hell no" to this amount on taxation. K & R nt Persondem Feb 2016 #132

Chicago Tribune is a right wing paper (I do have a suggestion, though) Bradical79 Feb 2016 #137

Chicago Tribune endorsed Obama both in 2008 and in 2012. pnwmom Feb 2016 #138

Sure they are Bradical79 Feb 2016 #142

Bernie Sanders's Problem With Democrats Gothmog Feb 2016 #139

Right where JFK had the top rate. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #141