Topic: In 2015, I was a Bernie bro. Four years later, I'm no longer a Bernie bro. Here's my story:
Anonymous A started this discussion 6 years ago #93,823
I'm still voting for Bernie, I just realized I'm transgender, so I'm not a bro anymore.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #1,061,680
Bernie wants a 100% tax on billionaires who provide most of the jobs in this country.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 30 seconds later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,681
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,682
This is a very minichan post tbh.
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 31 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,687
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,691
Anonymous B double-posted this 6 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,694
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 6 years ago, 43 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,695
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 17 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,696
@1,061,691 (B)
For companies with over $100million in revenue:
> 20 percent of a company's stock would be set aside in an employee-controlled fund and pay dividends to workers, which they campaign estimates would come to $5,000 a year
> permanently banning stock buybacks, when a company repurchases its shares—a common practice when businesses are flush with excess cash that helps them consolidate ownership or maintain stock prices
> 45 percent of the company's board would have to be employee-elected.
Awesome.
> estimates that if the tax plan were in place last year, Amazon would have paid $3.8 billion in income tax rather than nothing.
> under the Trump administration, the 400 highest income earners in the country pay an effective tax rate of 23 percent, making this the first time in 100 years that the richest people in the country pay a lower tax rate than everyone else.
Why do you support rich people paying less taxes than poor people?
> Sanders's [plan] starts with [a] one percent [wealth tax] at $32 million and climbing to eight percent at $10 billion
That seems more than reasonable. You think they'd really miss one percent of $32 million?
According to your source, only the 400 richest Americans in the US would see this effective tax rate of 97.5%. According to Forbes, the combined net worth of the 400 richest Americans is $2.9 trillion. That's up from $2.7 trillion in 2017. That's an increase of $100'000'000'000 annually. Even with a 97.5% tax rate, that's an increase of $2'500'000'000 annually, or $6'250'000 per person per year. Hardly destitute.
> That money would go to fund Sanders's housing plan, as well as universal childcare and Medicare for All.
Good plan!
For companies with over $100million in revenue:
> 20 percent of a company's stock would be set aside in an employee-controlled fund and pay dividends to workers, which they campaign estimates would come to $5,000 a year
> permanently banning stock buybacks, when a company repurchases its shares—a common practice when businesses are flush with excess cash that helps them consolidate ownership or maintain stock prices
> 45 percent of the company's board would have to be employee-elected.
Awesome.
> estimates that if the tax plan were in place last year, Amazon would have paid $3.8 billion in income tax rather than nothing.
> under the Trump administration, the 400 highest income earners in the country pay an effective tax rate of 23 percent, making this the first time in 100 years that the richest people in the country pay a lower tax rate than everyone else.
Why do you support rich people paying less taxes than poor people?
> Sanders's [plan] starts with [a] one percent [wealth tax] at $32 million and climbing to eight percent at $10 billion
That seems more than reasonable. You think they'd really miss one percent of $32 million?
According to your source, only the 400 richest Americans in the US would see this effective tax rate of 97.5%. According to Forbes, the combined net worth of the 400 richest Americans is $2.9 trillion. That's up from $2.7 trillion in 2017. That's an increase of $100'000'000'000 annually. Even with a 97.5% tax rate, that's an increase of $2'500'000'000 annually, or $6'250'000 per person per year. Hardly destitute.
> That money would go to fund Sanders's housing plan, as well as universal childcare and Medicare for All.
Good plan!
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 51 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,697
Look...its Triptych...the expert on everything in a country that she spent two weeks in..
(Edited 37 seconds later.)
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,699
@previous (B)
I briefly lived in the us actually. Either way that's irrelevant to basic financial concepts.
I briefly lived in the us actually. Either way that's irrelevant to basic financial concepts.
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL double-posted this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,700
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,705
> Why do you support rich people paying less taxes than poor people?
Uhhhhh...those rich folks are the real the middle class have jobs?
If you tax 97% of their yearly gross do you think they will continue to bust their humps to continue to do that or say fuck it and kick back on the beach on a permanent vacation?
What if that happens...what is the result for the common folk then?
Tell us Ms Brilliant ass..
Uhhhhh...those rich folks are the real the middle class have jobs?
If you tax 97% of their yearly gross do you think they will continue to bust their humps to continue to do that or say fuck it and kick back on the beach on a permanent vacation?
What if that happens...what is the result for the common folk then?
Tell us Ms Brilliant ass..
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,709
@previous (B)
> >Why do you support rich people paying less taxes than poor people?
>
> Uhhhhh...those rich folks are the real the middle class have jobs?
Did you have a stroke while typing that?
> If you tax 97% of their yearly gross do you think they will continue to bust their humps to continue to do that or say fuck it and kick back on the beach on a permanent vacation?
Uhhh at that level you don't work for that money. It's largely passive income from investments. They've already said fuck it and kick back on the beach on permanent vacations.
> >Why do you support rich people paying less taxes than poor people?
>
> Uhhhhh...those rich folks are the real the middle class have jobs?
Did you have a stroke while typing that?
> If you tax 97% of their yearly gross do you think they will continue to bust their humps to continue to do that or say fuck it and kick back on the beach on a permanent vacation?
Uhhh at that level you don't work for that money. It's largely passive income from investments. They've already said fuck it and kick back on the beach on permanent vacations.
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 58 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,735
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,738
jodi !ariasXXmaE joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,746
@previous (chill dog !!81dzJNNYL)
they bust their humps, hacking and grinding away at rocks filled with more money using Golden pickaxes and such
they bust their humps, hacking and grinding away at rocks filled with more money using Golden pickaxes and such
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 14 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,753
@previous (jodi !ariasXXmaE)
Golden pickaxes sounds inefficient since gold is super soft. One wonders how they manage to be so successful with such awful tools. It must be sheer hard work!
Golden pickaxes sounds inefficient since gold is super soft. One wonders how they manage to be so successful with such awful tools. It must be sheer hard work!
jodi !ariasXXmaE replied with this 6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,756
@previous (chill dog !!81dzJNNYL)
it's back breaking! it's a wonder they ever get any of the money. it's amazing that they let some of it trickle down when they do. so gracious
it's back breaking! it's a wonder they ever get any of the money. it's amazing that they let some of it trickle down when they do. so gracious
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 17 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,762
@previous (jodi !ariasXXmaE)
So kind. We should all remember that people are only poor because they're lazy.
So kind. We should all remember that people are only poor because they're lazy.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 3 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,807
This wasn't funny. I don't mean in the sense that it was inappropriate or transphobic or whatever but just, like, I didn't even chuckle.
It's too plausible. Too realistic. I can't tell if this real or not. ?
It's too plausible. Too realistic. I can't tell if this real or not. ?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 6 years ago, 35 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,061,821
me w/bernie