Super Tuesday

[sjr]

Originally Posted by RavYak

Which was another point I forgot to mention...

Any Canadian who hopes Trump gets in as president doesn't realize how bad Trump would be for Canada...

Trump would make changes and it would be countries like ours expenses. If Trump gets in expect more issues like BSE, Keystone Pipeline etc that take advantage of us to better their own country.

So what happens to Canada if Hilldabeast gets in ??? her and pretty boy Justin in one big love in , with all the selfies on the CBC new + Radio

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Trochu

Same principle applies though. Has Gates/Buffet/Bezos/Mars/Musk/etc. shut it down and are living in isolation with their billions or are they contributing to the economy and providing jobs for thousands, if not millions, of people?

How much more could be done if their more of their wealth was in circulation?

the goal of socialism is to keep money circulating through the economy so more people have access to it to better their lives. without money circulating through the economy it contracts, the more money circulating through the economy the more it grows and the easier it is to diversify and meet changing needs.

[Matt L.]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

How much more could be done if their more of their wealth was in circulation?

the goal of socialism is to keep money circulating through the economy so more people have access to it to better their lives. without money circulating through the economy it contracts, the more money circulating through the economy the more it grows and the easier it is to diversify and meet changing needs.

Sounds wonderful until the realisation that that means 50%+ of your earnings get taken in taxes kicks in.

[Chuck_Wagon]

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

Sounds wonderful until the realisation that that means 50%+ of your earnings get taken in taxes kicks in.

Under New Deal policies taxes were never that high, but unemployment was low, income mobility was high and earnings across all brackets moved in the same direction at the same time.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

How much more could be done if their more of their wealth was in circulation?

the goal of socialism is to keep money circulating through the economy so more people have access to it to better their lives. without money circulating through the economy it contracts, the more money circulating through the economy the more it grows and the easier it is to diversify and meet changing needs.

Well, if your not going to answer any of my questions, and just ask another.....

So Gates/Buffet/Bezos/Mars/Musk/etc. have they wealth recirculated and likely shut down there respective companies as there is no motivation to keep running them. Thousands, if not millions are now out of work, would you rather those people have kept working or rely on the new social programs?

That's what it basically boils down to for me. I'd rather people earn their living from an organization that is profitable off their hard work/ingenuity/luck/intelligence/etc. than receive handouts from an organization that forces profitable organizations to fund them.

The Florida Panthers generally have had low attendance figures. What seasons tickets holders they did have were loyal however. Over the years, the seasons ticket holders got upset and stopped buying seasons tickets, leading to even less revenue for the team. They were finding out the guys sitting beside them night out/night in, got their tickets for free in the bar across the street. Now they too got their tickets from the bar across the street for free and the team made even less money. The socialist program of providing free tickets to some and not to others was unsustainable for the Panthers (economy) and they soon had to resort to charging for all tickets.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

Sounds wonderful until the realisation that that means 50%+ of your earnings get taken in taxes kicks in.

In Denmark I believe its closer to 80%.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Under New Deal policies taxes were never that high, but unemployment was low, income mobility was high and earnings across all brackets moved in the same direction at the same time.

And the budget balanced?

Or it would lead to a Greece scenario given time?

[fordtruckin]

Originally Posted by RavYak

I can't believe how many people actually think Trump is in this to fix the system... There is only one man that will attempt to correct the flawed and corrupt US political system and his name is Sanders, not Trump...

Trump is a liar and an egotistical moron who has proposed next to nothing to correct the true issues in the US. Build a wall? Block muslims? Make america great again(how???)? Win(must be a Charlie Sheen fan and wannabe...)?

Actually do some research on this and you will see all the lies Trump makes. Most of what comes out of his mouth are lies but the mindless masses eat it up because he is entertaining and "taking on the system"...

Look at how he buys and uses his endorsements, one of the latest his Chris Christie puppet... He uses the same tactics you guys think he is going to get rid... Think Mexico is going to build the US a wall? Ok...

He is crude and playing with the system because he knows how television works and because he knows how to manipulate the mindless masses... Trump would be the US's version of Putin. Most of you probably don't realize the truth behind Putin either though...

All I can say is thank the good lord that you don't have a say in this election!

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Trochu

Well, if your not going to answer any of my questions, and just ask another.....

So Gates/Buffet/Bezos/Mars/Musk/etc. have they wealth recirculated and likely shut down there respective companies as there is no motivation to keep running them. Thousands, if not millions are now out of work, would you rather those people have kept working or rely on the new social programs?

That's what it basically boils down to for me. I'd rather people earn their living from an organization that is profitable off their hard work/ingenuity/luck/intelligence/etc. than receive handouts from an organization that forces profitable organizations to fund them.

The Florida Panthers generally have had low attendance figures. What seasons tickets holders they did have were loyal however. Over the years, the seasons ticket holders got upset and stopped buying seasons tickets, leading to even less revenue for the team. They were finding out the guys sitting beside them night out/night in, got their tickets for free in the bar across the street. Now they too got their tickets from the bar across the street for free and the team made even less money. The socialist program of providing free tickets to some and not to others was unsustainable for the Panthers (economy) and they soon had to resort to charging for all tickets.

There's a slight flaw in your logic. I never said that there would be no profits, so there would still be motivation to run these enterprises. People still got rich in socialist countries in Europe and under the New Deal era in the US they just had to work harder for it, be more innovative, and intelligent enough to adapt and capture new markets. Also just like in the labor market, in the free market if there is a demand someone will move into to fill it eventually regardless of the earnings. Servers in many parts of the US earn $2.13/hr, and people still do the job.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Trochu

And the budget balanced?

Or it would lead to a Greece scenario given time?

Greece was quiet fine before the Euro. It had a strong internal economy, but the Euro which Greece cannot create for itself like it did the Drachma was unsuitable for how the Greek people had built their society.

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Trochu

In Denmark I believe its closer to 80%.

And you would be horribly wrong so should maybe do some research before posting horrible false information...

Originally Posted by Trochu

Well, if your not going to answer any of my questions, and just ask another.....

So Gates/Buffet/Bezos/Mars/Musk/etc. have they wealth recirculated and likely shut down there respective companies as there is no motivation to keep running them. Thousands, if not millions are now out of work, would you rather those people have kept working or rely on the new social programs?

That's what it basically boils down to for me. I'd rather people earn their living from an organization that is profitable off their hard work/ingenuity/luck/intelligence/etc. than receive handouts from an organization that forces profitable organizations to fund them.

There are ways to have social programs and promote people work. That is why Denmark has a lower unemployment rate then both the Canada and US even though they also have a very good unemployment program...

You set up these programs to help the people when they need it. Healthcare for when they get sick. University to educate the masses so they can compete in todays technically skilled world. Unemployment to help when one loses their job at no fault to them.

Then you set up the initiatives for the people to use those programs properly to create a decent life for themselves. Like how Denmark has a 8% tax no matter how much income you make(need to work more to make more money), programs so that people can't abuse the unemployment programs, limitations on how much free tuition a person can have, exceptions to provide extra schooling if deemed necessary to get into a more successful field. Their are lots of ways to still promote growth while having social programs in place.

The problem is that you like many others do not realize that socialism and communism are very different things. Your comments are more in line with communism where it is impossible to get ahead. In socialist countries(of which Canada is one to some extent...) if you work hard you can still set aside a very good life for yourself. There are still millionaires and billionaires in Denmark, the only difference is that they support their country more then say the US millionaires and billionaires that evade taxes and send all their money offshore so that they can continue to make as much as possible with no regard to their own nation or peoples growth and prosperity...

[HatchMatcher]

Originally Posted by RavYak

And you would be horribly wrong so should maybe do some research before posting horrible false information...



There are ways to have social programs and promote people work. That is why Denmark has a lower unemployment rate then both the Canada and US even though they also have a very good unemployment program...

You set up these programs to help the people when they need it. Healthcare for when they get sick. University to educate the masses so they can compete in todays technically skilled world. Unemployment to help when one loses their job at no fault to them.

Then you set up the initiatives for the people to use those programs properly to create a decent life for themselves. Like how Denmark has a 8% tax no matter how much income you make(need to work more to make more money), programs so that people can't abuse the unemployment programs, limitations on how much free tuition a person can have, exceptions to provide extra schooling if deemed necessary to get into a more successful field. Their are lots of ways to still promote growth while having social programs in place.

The problem is that you like many others do not realize that socialism and communism are very different things. Your comments are more in line with communism where it is impossible to get ahead. In socialist countries(of which Canada is one to some extent...) if you work hard you can still set aside a very good life for yourself. There are still millionaires and billionaires in Denmark, the only difference is that they support their country more then say the US millionaires and billionaires that evade taxes and send all their money offshore so that they can continue to make as much as possible with no regard to their own nation or peoples growth and prosperity...

I like seeing this logic and reason in here for once. Will fall on deaf ears though, of that I am sure.

[SBE2]

Forget your pill this morning? Did I once mention politically-correct anything? One does not have to be a rude SOB to say what one thinks, politically "correct" or not. And why would you think I voted Liberal or NDP?
Have a nice day.

I will explain, the things that you are concerned with or complain about are all to do with political correctness. You said he was offensive, that he was offensive to the ethnics, that he might yell at people (heavin forbid when dealing with serious world issues as security, war, economics. Shiny Pony would **** his pants if this guy yelled at him). Then you went on to mention it would be bad of the first lady had done nude modeling, like that has anything to do with how this guy would run a country. Absolutely irrelevant and has nothing to do with the campaign or the job. Or is it just standard that the first lady has to be a haggard looking raisin that serves no other purpose but to waive and blow hot air for the politically correct cause of the day. But I'm a rude SOB because I spoke my mind and gave my opinion? Too funny, so you just want people to agree with you and talk softly to you then? Good luck in that reality. You sound liberal, as you resorted to name calling early and didn't like being spoken to in a direct manner. Just an observation. Did this reply fully answer your question?

[Fisherpeak]

This is the most insanely stupid ~Mercan election I have seen, going all the way back to the Kennedy-Nixon debate that Nixon lost because he had 5 o`clock shadow and looked like hell on T.V.
Trump is a blowhard buffoon, Sanders is like Monty Burns but way left, Hillary is..well..Clintons PO`d wife trying to prove she`s better ,Cruz is a dead loss. Maybe Rubio but he`s all big donated money.
No matter who wins we are in for some interesting times. BTW, news papers in Europe have some fun headlines after Tuesday about Trump.They thought he was funny at first but now Europeans are getting scared.
They all make George W look better. And he was a dolt.

[Dakota369]

Originally Posted by RavYak

Is this your definition of democracy?

Democracy: Lying to the people to make them think you are going to do what they want so you get elected based on lies and false promises.

It sure is here in Canada.......that's exactly what the Liberals just did.......

[chasingtail]

Gates/Buffet/Bezos/Mars/Musk/. All Democrat big Liberal Globalists that want higher taxes for the middle class while they are tax exempt. Hopefully Trump will tax these criminals.

[Dakota369]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

How much more could be done if their more of their wealth was in circulation?

the goal of socialism is to keep money circulating through the economy so more people have access to it to better their lives. without money circulating through the economy it contracts, the more money circulating through the economy the more it grows and the easier it is to diversify and meet changing needs.

Socialism always forgets one fatal thing........the tendency for humans to be corrupt, power hungry and money hungry. Socialism in a pure form is great (on paper) but never works in real life.

D

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by RavYak

And you would be horribly wrong so should maybe do some research before posting horrible false information...

Well why not correct me instead of just saying I'm wrong? Everything I've looked at indicates its high. Maybe not 80% but 55% to 65%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Denmark

"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."

http://www.taxindenmark.com/article.65.html

"The employee will look at his net income after PIT and social contributions, which will in principle be approx. 52-65 % of the salary."

https://www.cfe-eutax.org/taxation/p...me-tax/denmark

"In Denmark are local tax and state tax. The tax rate is from 0% to 59%"

So, 80% was a bit high but your stated "8% tax no matter how much income you make" is likely more of a transgression than what you lambasted me for. Unless every single source I looked at was incorrect. And of course, if you are a low income earner, your taxes are obviously lower. If we had there tax brackets, its likely most of us would be paying north of 50% in taxes.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Dakota369

Socialism always forgets one fatal thing........the tendency for humans to be corrupt, power hungry and money hungry. Socialism in a pure form is great (on paper) but never works in real life.

D

Capitalism in it's pure form is just as corrupt. I am not advocating for a pure form of either, but a blend of the two.

[Dakota369]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Capitalism in it's pure form is just as corrupt. I am not advocating for a pure form of either, but a blend of the two.

Capitalism is the pinnacle of corruption. But at least it is honest....... socialism is all about altruistic BS. More good has been done in this world due to capitalism and capitalistic driven profits, then any socialist driven directive. And you gotta know that capitalism cannot or will not ever exist in it's pure form either, as one if the first tenants is no government controls or involvement with business......................

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by Dakota369

Capitalism is the pinnacle of corruption. But at least it is honest....... socialism is all about altruistic BS. More good has been done in this world due to capitalism and capitalistic driven profits, then any socialist driven directive. And you gotta know that capitalism cannot or will not ever exist in it's pure form either, as one if the first tenants is no government controls or involvement with business......................

It seems to me that this past period of deregulation has lead to greater volatility in the economy. Capitalism is not a bad system, it just requires some checks and balances to smooth the peaks and valleys all economy's face over time. Take the internet, first developed to share(sharing is socialist), then capitalized to provide wider access and more functionality. Of course, there is a drive to further capitalize the internet which is threatening its ability to widely share information.

It's a see-saw between promoting development and promoting stable societies. Of course some will argue a completely free market with full acceptance of the non aggression principle will promote the most stable society; however, the non aggression principle in a competitive environment is as much of a pipe dream as equal sharing for all found in pure communism.

[Dakota369]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

It seems to me that this past period of deregulation has lead to greater volatility in the economy. Capitalism is not a bad system, it just requires some checks and balances to smooth the peaks and valleys all economy's face over time. Take the internet, first developed to share(sharing is socialist), then capitalized to provide wider access and more functionality. Of course, there is a drive to further capitalize the internet which is threatening its ability to widely share information.

It's a see-saw between promoting development and promoting stable societies. Of course some will argue a completely free market with full acceptance of the non aggression principle will promote the most stable society; however, the non aggression principle in a competitive environment is as much of a pipe dream as equal sharing for all found in pure communism.

Excellent post, I agree.

D

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Trochu

Well why not correct me instead of just saying I'm wrong? Everything I've looked at indicates its high. Maybe not 80% but 55% to 65%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Denmark

"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."

http://www.taxindenmark.com/article.65.html

"The employee will look at his net income after PIT and social contributions, which will in principle be approx. 52-65 % of the salary."

https://www.cfe-eutax.org/taxation/p...me-tax/denmark

"In Denmark are local tax and state tax. The tax rate is from 0% to 59%"

So, 80% was a bit high but your stated "8% tax no matter how much income you make" is likely more of a transgression than what you lambasted me for. Unless every single source I looked at was incorrect. And of course, if you are a low income earner, your taxes are obviously lower. If we had there tax brackets, its likely most of us would be paying north of 50% in taxes.

It's not my job to educate you, but if you go Donald Trump on us expect me to call you out on it...

Maximum tax rate is 59% not 80... Big difference... Like Canada Denmark has a progressive tax system so you have to make a fair bit of money to pay that maximum 59%. Did you know maximum tax rate in Canada is near 55%(New Brunswick)?

For the average person the income tax is much higher in Denmark. But Denmark is also an extreme case and neither Canada nor the US need to go as far as they have.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by RavYak

It's not my job to educate you, but if you go Donald Trump on us expect me to call you out on it...

Maximum tax rate is 59% not 80... Big difference... Like Canada Denmark has a progressive tax system so you have to make a fair bit of money to pay that maximum 59%. Did you know maximum tax rate in Canada is near 55%(New Brunswick)?

For the average person the income tax is much higher in Denmark. But Denmark is also an extreme case and neither Canada nor the US need to go as far as they have.

I guess members contribute to the community in different ways.

So far you've stated:

"Like how Denmark has a 8% tax no matter how much income you make(need to work more to make more money)," and,

"Maximum tax rate is 59% not 80... Big difference... Like Canada Denmark has a progressive tax system so you have to make a fair bit of money to pay that maximum 59%"

So first its a flat tax, then its a progressive tax, then its 8% now its 59%.

What did someone tell me on here not to long ago.... "maybe do some research before posting horrible false information...".

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Trochu

I guess members contribute to the community in different ways.

So far you've stated:

"Like how Denmark has a 8% tax no matter how much income you make(need to work more to make more money)," and,

"Maximum tax rate is 59% not 80... Big difference... Like Canada Denmark has a progressive tax system so you have to make a fair bit of money to pay that maximum 59%"

So first its a flat tax, then its a progressive tax, then its 8% now its 59%.

What did someone tell me on here not to long ago.... "maybe do some research before posting horrible false information...".

Bud you need to learn how to read both what I say and the link/information you posted...

Everyone in Denmark pays a flat rate 8% tax on income no matter how much or how little they make. In the wikipedia link they refer to it as gross tax. This means everyone no matter how much they make is contributing to the system and there is no free ride unlike here in Canada. The remaining 92% is treated as their taxable income.

The rest of their system is very complex with many different taxes and deductions. The basics are that it is a progressive system in which you pay higher taxes for portions exceeding certain amounts(same system used here in Canada). People making under ~10k CAD taxable income(so ~11k before any taxes) pay no income taxes other then the original 8% tax. Then on next 50k ish they pay municipal tax, federal tax, health tax and a couple other things coming out to around 37%. Then if they make more then ~80k CAD they pay another 15% federal tax.

After all is said and done their maximum tax including the 8% is 59%. I am not sure how much a person would have to earn to make that much though as it is a very complicated calculation with way too many deductions and taxes etc. I believe someone making around 100k pays around 45% taxes based on one thing I read, perhaps less if married and with kids as they have income sharing rules as well.

[Chuck_Wagon]