Al Sharpton Defends Bernie Sanders From ‘Socialist’ Attack:

blu3bird said:

Ok thanks for a better link. I did read read that one.

I'm still not sold in Bernie's "idea". There's things about it I don't like or believe.

70% tax on people with over $10,000,000? That itax is only going to happen one time, you've just taken almost 3/4 of their wealth and now there's nothing left to tax. So who's going to get taxed when the wealthy don't have any money left? Me and you are going to end up being taxed

No out of pocket costs?
Bernie's going to tax my pay check, so instead of paying "out of pocket", my pay check gets raped more than it already is and I bring home less money. Yeah I'll have to pass on that.

Eliminate private health insurance completely?
My health insurance is a benefit from my job that I work hard as fuck for. I pull 70 hours every single week for the last two years and that's not going to change. I have a high stress demanding job and Bernie wants to take away one of my benefits? Then I'll be bringing home less money due to another payroll tax. That's a big hell no.

Raising the estate tax?
I don't have kids or family (I do have a brother and nieces and nephew, but we are not close at all), but I know you do londonfog, so do a lot of other Americans. So you've worked hard your entire life to have things like savings, house and a business and you want your family and kids to have that when you're gone. Now Bernie is going to swoop in and tax it again after you've worked tirelessly and already paid taxes on it your entire life. Now your family is left with a fraction of what you want them to have. That's not right and makes no sense to me.

I don't know what the answer is to what America's problems are, but taxing anything and everything under the sun isn't the solution


The way I see it right now is things aren't broken, nothing needs fixed (at least in my situation). There's absolutely no chance I'll vote in favor for someone that wants to take away my work related benefits and make it so I bring home less money. I'd be a fool to do that, that is opposite of my best interest.

Click to expand...

doublejj said:

Yeah but your great health insurance is only good if you are employed. Change or lose your job and "poof" it all goes away. With M4A you won't have to worry if you will have health care if you change jobs. If your union/job is no longer funding your health care then they should give you a big raise in pay to cover the taxes....

Click to expand...

londonfog said:

sad. he even tried to bet 10,000 dollars. You know that would have never been paid. UB is lame as hell. Took me awhile to see it. Shame on me

Click to expand...

blu3bird said:

I believe the law says I can keep my insurance for up to 18 months if I quit or lose my job, now I may be wrong or have a misunderstanding so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

I have a class A CDL with tank endorsement. Truck driving is a high demand job, if I walked into work Monday morning at 8am and told my boss, "here's the keys to your truck , I'm quitting", I could get another job driving truck by 9am. I'm not worrying ever again about finding work. I know not everyone has that ability though, so I'm very fortunate, but that's the reality of my industry. Truck drivers are needed everywhere.

You make a good point doublejj, an employer should give me a raise if they're not paying for my healthcare anymore......key word - should. They're not required to give their savings to me as far as I know. In my opinion, I don't think many if any employer will pass those savings to an employee.

Bernie is still going to tax employers for healthcare though....employers are taxed at a higher rate than the employee. I'm pretty sure that's what I read, I may be wrong or have a misunderstanding, again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.


Also, I will vote all Republicans out, I just won't vote for Bernie

Click to expand...

schuylaar said:

wow..you're really that concerned about the wealthy and how they'll make ends meet?

we had this tax back in the 50s and it was 90%..something happens when the wealthy stop contributing their fair share here- they use our roads, bridges and infrastructures all to pay $0 ala Amazon..IT ALL FALLS APART.

your union would jump at the chance to not bargain over health; your employer will be happy to not pay 50%+ for their portion of your benefits.

the answer is that EVERYONE pay taxes in sliding scale up or down.

here's a chart to assist you in determining your savings..easy peasy, you just look on the left what you gross and the follow that line across to the savings amount..let's say you make $80k, you'll save $2040 annually; it even tells you on the bottom what's included:

View attachment 4493088

Click to expand...

blu3bird said:

I am leaving right now to clean out my work truck, it is trashed and muddy inside and it's driving me nuts, I hate a filthy truck. I will respond to this later tonight when I get back home and relax

Click to expand...

schuylaar said:

wow..you're really that concerned about the wealthy and how they'll make ends meet?

we had this tax back in the 50s and it was 90%..something happens when the wealthy stop contributing their fair share here- they use our roads, bridges and infrastructures all to pay $0 ala Amazon..IT ALL FALLS APART.

your union would jump at the chance to not bargain over health; your employer will be happy to not pay 50%+ for their portion of your benefits.

the answer is that EVERYONE pay taxes in sliding scale up or down.

here's a chart to assist you in determining your savings..easy peasy, you just look on the left what you gross and the follow that line across to the savings amount..let's say you make $80k, you'll save $2040 annually; it even tells you on the bottom what's included:

View attachment 4493088

Click to expand...

schuylaar said:

wow..you're really that concerned about the wealthy and how they'll make ends meet?

we had this tax back in the 50s and it was 90%..something happens when the wealthy stop contributing their fair share here- they use our roads, bridges and infrastructures all to pay $0 ala Amazon..IT ALL FALLS APART.

your union would jump at the chance to not bargain over health; your employer will be happy to not pay 50%+ for their portion of your benefits.

the answer is that EVERYONE pay taxes in sliding scale up or down.

here's a chart to assist you in determining your savings..easy peasy, you just look on the left what you gross and the follow that line across to the savings amount..let's say you make $80k, you'll save $2040 annually; it even tells you on the bottom what's included:

View attachment 4493088

Click to expand...

Fogdog said:

Some asshole south of me near Medford, Oregon, lost big time in court for impounding water he had no right to collect. He made an artificial lake without the necessary water rights. Right wingers are still whining about him losing in court. I think he did some time for that but maybe its wishful thinking. Here in the west, we take water rights seriously.

Click to expand...

blu3bird said:

I believe the law says I can keep my insurance for up to 18 months if I quit or lose my job, now I may be wrong or have a misunderstanding so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

I have a class A CDL with tank endorsement. Truck driving is a high demand job, if I walked into work Monday morning at 8am and told my boss, "here's the keys to your truck , I'm quitting", I could get another job driving truck by 9am. I'm not worrying ever again about finding work. I know not everyone has that ability though, so I'm very fortunate, but that's the reality of my industry. Truck drivers are needed everywhere.

You make a good point doublejj, an employer should give me a raise if they're not paying for my healthcare anymore......key word - should. They're not required to give their savings to me as far as I know. In my opinion, I don't think many if any employer will pass those savings to an employee.

Bernie is still going to tax employers for healthcare though....employers are taxed at a higher rate than the employee. I'm pretty sure that's what I read, I may be wrong or have a misunderstanding, again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.


Also, I will vote all Republicans out, I just won't vote for Bernie

Click to expand...

Fogdog said:

"My land, My water" is what right wingers say. In Oregon, that's what they say.

When their own legal water rights aren't violated, that is.

Click to expand...

Buss Relville said:

Bahahahaha

Let me fix that for you. Here in the West, we take property rights seriously.

Sounds like a shit judge, much like the gov of Oregon.

Click to expand...

UncleBuck said:

there it is

Bitter right winger in a blue state pretending to be a bernout

Click to expand...

Buss Relville said:

Real leftists don't support unnecessary overbearing government bullshit. You have been brainwashed, and misinformed. This is why "moderates" are so pathetic.

AK-47's for everyone, every American should own an assault rifle.

Click to expand...

schuylaar said:

wow..you're really that concerned about the wealthy and how they'll make ends meet?

we had this tax back in the 50s and it was 90%..something happens when the wealthy stop contributing their fair share here- they use our roads, bridges and infrastructures all to pay $0 ala Amazon..IT ALL FALLS APART.

your union would jump at the chance to not bargain over health; your employer will be happy to not pay 50%+ for their portion of your benefits.

the answer is that EVERYONE pay taxes in sliding scale up or down.

here's a chart to assist you in determining your savings..easy peasy, you just look on the left what you gross and the follow that line across to the savings amount..let's say you make $80k, you'll save $2040 annually; it even tells you on the bottom what's included:

View attachment 4493088

Click to expand...

Buss Relville said:

You literally represent all the worst aspects from both parties.

Amazing.

Click to expand...

Fogdog said:

Water rights are important to everybody and worth defending. Salmon runs, farmers, salmon fishermen and other stakeholders come together to work out how this finite resource is distributed in order to meet a range of uses. A landholder doesn't own the water that falls on their land, it is a public resource. If a land-owner want rights to that water, then they should gain ownership of it through legal means.

You remind me of the Bundy clan. They are assholes too.

Click to expand...

Buss Relville said:

Did you seriously just conflate collecting rainwater with diverting rivers?

The Bundy clan is great.

Fuck the BLM and all federal agencies.

Click to expand...

Fogdog said:

Where do you think water in those rivers comes from?

Click to expand...

Buss Relville said:

Please show me 1 article where rainwater collection was impeding Salmon ability to survive & thrive.

Click to expand...