She seems to be about the only D candidate (so far) putting out ACTUAL policy proposals...
"Due to the vagaries of American corporate accounting, companies routinely tell investors on conference calls that they made billions in profit over the previous quarter, then turn around and tell the IRS that, actually, they made no money at all, so don’t owe any taxes. Warren’s plan would tax those companies on the profits they claim publicly.
The proposal, called the “Real Corporate Profits Tax,” would only apply to companies that report more than $100 million in worldwide profits, and every dollar above $100 million would be taxed at 7 percent."
WHY DO DEMOCRATS PREFER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO AMERICANS AND BABIES?
Good Sir,
You have posted your query in the form of a leading question. On that basis you have violated forum rules of decorum. For the future, kindly refrain from doing so. Now please re-phrase your question into a more objective or open ended form.
Respectfully yours ....
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:45 am
by CU77
An essay by Ray Dalio, billionaire founder of Bridgewater Associates, which "has delivered the biggest net profit of any hedge fund firm ever", according to Barrons: https://www.barrons.com/articles/ray-da ... 1548701213
I was fortunate enough to be raised in a middle-class family by parents who took good care of me, to go to good public schools, and to come into a job market that offered me equal opportunity. I was raised with the belief that having equal opportunity to have basic care, good education, and employment is what is fair and best for our collective well-being. To have these things and use them to build a great life is what was meant by living the American Dream.
At age 12 one might say that I became a capitalist because that’s when I took the money I earned doing various jobs, like delivering newspapers, mowing lawns, and caddying and put it in the stock market when the stock market was hot. That got me hooked on the economic investing game which I’ve played for most of the last 50 years. To succeed at this game I needed to gain a practical understanding of how economies and markets work. My exposure to most economic systems in most countries over many years taught me that the ability to make money, save it, and put it into capital (i.e., capitalism) is the most effective motivator of people and allocator of resources to raise people’s living standards. Over these many years I have also seen capitalism evolve in a way that it is not working well for the majority of Americans because it's producing self-reinforcing spirals up for the haves and down for the have-nots. This is creating widening income/wealth/opportunity gaps that pose existential threats to the United States because these gaps are bringing about damaging domestic and international conflicts and weakening America’s condition.
I think that most capitalists don’t know how to divide the economic pie well and most socialists don’t know how to grow it well, yet we are now at a juncture in which either a) people of different ideological inclinations will work together to skillfully re-engineer the system so that the pie is both divided and grown well or b) we will have great conflict and some form of revolution that will hurt most everyone and will shrink the pie.
I believe that all good things taken to an extreme can be self-destructive and that everything must evolve or die. This is now true for capitalism.
CU77 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:45 am
An essay by Ray Dalio, billionaire founder of Bridgewater Associates, which "has delivered the biggest net profit of any hedge fund firm ever", according to Barrons: https://www.barrons.com/articles/ray-da ... 1548701213
I was fortunate enough to be raised in a middle-class family by parents who took good care of me, to go to good public schools, and to come into a job market that offered me equal opportunity. I was raised with the belief that having equal opportunity to have basic care, good education, and employment is what is fair and best for our collective well-being. To have these things and use them to build a great life is what was meant by living the American Dream.
At age 12 one might say that I became a capitalist because that’s when I took the money I earned doing various jobs, like delivering newspapers, mowing lawns, and caddying and put it in the stock market when the stock market was hot. That got me hooked on the economic investing game which I’ve played for most of the last 50 years. To succeed at this game I needed to gain a practical understanding of how economies and markets work. My exposure to most economic systems in most countries over many years taught me that the ability to make money, save it, and put it into capital (i.e., capitalism) is the most effective motivator of people and allocator of resources to raise people’s living standards. Over these many years I have also seen capitalism evolve in a way that it is not working well for the majority of Americans because it's producing self-reinforcing spirals up for the haves and down for the have-nots. This is creating widening income/wealth/opportunity gaps that pose existential threats to the United States because these gaps are bringing about damaging domestic and international conflicts and weakening America’s condition.
I think that most capitalists don’t know how to divide the economic pie well and most socialists don’t know how to grow it well, yet we are now at a juncture in which either a) people of different ideological inclinations will work together to skillfully re-engineer the system so that the pie is both divided and grown well or b) we will have great conflict and some form of revolution that will hurt most everyone and will shrink the pie.
I believe that all good things taken to an extreme can be self-destructive and that everything must evolve or die. This is now true for capitalism.
WHY DO DEMOCRATS PREFER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO AMERICANS AND BABIES?
Good Sir,
You have posted your query in the form of a leading question. On that basis you have violated forum rules of decorum. For the future, kindly refrain from doing so. Now please re-phrase your question into a more objective or open ended form.
Respectfully yours ....
Here - I will help him. "Why do the Republicans always try to paint things as binary choices?"
Always reminds my of William Perry and the intellectual developmental stages achieved by learners: dualism->multiplicity->relativism->commitment
Characteristic of the first stage (common in young children) - everything is black/white, there is one and only one correct answer, knowledge is received, etc. That seems to be the choice of politics here...
Here - I will help him. "Why do the Republicans always try to paint things as binary choices?"
Always reminds my of William Perry and the intellectual developmental stages achieved by learners: dualism->multiplicity->relativism->commitment
Characteristic of the first stage (common in young children) - everything is black/white, there is one and only one correct answer, knowledge is received, etc. That seems to be the choice of politics here...
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:08 pm
by runrussellrun
The Great Divide, by Joseph Stiglitz. (do I not look calm to you? )
Great summary of his articles in publications. How the elite policy wonks and arrogant economists gleafully ignored the income disparity
U of Chicago Robert Lucas, "Of the tendencies that are harmful to sound economics, the most destructive and .....poisonous is to focus on questions of distribution"
Someone posted something on the TAATS thread, and the 600 to 1 ratio the Bank of America CEO gets paid vs the lowest of the low. Please, someone come back with "the deserve it b/c know one else can do their job". The wallstreet banksters make tRump look like a genious and choir boy.
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:15 pm
by Typical Lax Dad
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:08 pm
The Great Divide, by Joseph Stiglitz. (do I not look calm to you? )
Great summary of his articles in publications. How the elite policy wonks and arrogant economists gleafully ignored the income disparity
U of Chicago Robert Lucas, "Of the tendencies that are harmful to sound economics, the most deductive and .....poisonous is to focus on questions of distribution"
Someone posted something on the TAATS thread, and the 600 to 1 ratio the Bank of America CEO gets paid vs the lowest of the low. Please, someone come back with "the deserve it b/c know one else can do their job". The wallstreet banksters make tRump look like a genious and choir boy.
.....as I have been saying, we have a modern day feudal system. Ruling class, gentry class and peasant class.
"There is no doubt that policing is a dangerous profession. But is it safer to be a cop today than it was 50 years ago? Yes, according to a study that analyzed police officer deaths (felonious and non-felonious) in the United States from 1970 to 2016. The study represents one of the most comprehensive assessments of the “dangerousness” of policing to date and provides an important historical context on the ongoing dialogue over a perceived “war on cops” in recent years."
WHY DO DEMOCRATS PREFER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO AMERICANS AND BABIES?
Good Sir,
You have posted your query in the form of a leading question. On that basis you have violated forum rules of decorum. For the future, kindly refrain from doing so. Now please re-phrase your question into a more objective or open ended form.
Respectfully yours ....
Here - I will help him. "Why do the Republicans always try to paint things as binary choices?"
Always reminds my of William Perry and the intellectual developmental stages achieved by learners: dualism->multiplicity->relativism->commitment
Characteristic of the first stage (common in young children) - everything is black/white, there is one and only one correct answer, knowledge is received, etc. That seems to be the choice of politics here...
Can't get any of you to address the question asked specifically regarding the NY assembly vote. NY state will fund illegal immigrants tuitions but not do the same for GoldStar families in the state. That looks like the liberal democrats running NY state favor illegals over veterans.
Why is that a good idea? Simple question.
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:36 am
by foreverlax
It's not....that should be offered by DoD. But they spend that money on other stuff...like a wall.
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:57 am
by OCanada
What benefits do veterans receive for education?
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:12 am
by HooDat
I can't get my head around the notion of a legislative body actually writing a law the specifically benefits a group of people who (by the intentional language of the law) have broken the law.
I guess, I just don't "get it", I am clearly not WOKE enough......
I would much rather see that money going to inner-city kids or kids from poor rural areas who would never consider going to college simply because they don't think it is their reality. Instead a bunch of politicians have decided that they would rather give money to a group of people who, by definition, their first act in our country was to BREAK A LAW.
Despite what our policians seem to think, government spending is a zero sum game. You choose to spend money helping law breakers, you are taking money away from poor kids in our cities and poverty stricken small towns.
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:52 am
by holmes435
6ft is of course misrepresenting the bills.
NY already has funds set up for Gold Star families. The bill was to extend it to anyone killed or disabled outside of combat (and was unfunded). Democrats say they're waiting to hear back from the DoD on just how many families this would include before considering it for the budget and figuring out how to pay for it.
And you've already got federal GI Bill funds available for those families.
As for the immigrants, they didn't set aside any funds specifically for undocumented children, they just now allow them to apply for various state scholarships.
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:42 pm
by HooDat
the twisting of language to suit a political purpose leads to people talking past eachother.
not to de-humanize people, and we can all agree that "undocumented children" sounds far more benign than "illegal immigrant". And far better than "free-pass for a drug smuggler". Which is why each side of this issue uses the words that they use. But the fact of the matter is these children's parents forced them to enter the country illegally. I understand the reasons why. I applaud their courage and the moxy required to take charge of their lives and take a huge risk to better their lives.
Every time I read or hear someone talk about some these harder issues while twisting logic and semantics - I want to take a decontamination shower. The way people twist the lanugage to try to manipulate people - they are just so dang clever.....
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:15 pm
by OCanada
They are not illegal until they are adjudicated in terms of the current dust up. They are immigrants seeking asylum and entitled to do what they are doing. Calling them illegal is disparaging and playing to the base. In order to have constructive dialogue there has to be agreement in facts and proper terminology
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 2:54 pm
by HooDat
my point exactly re the semantics. They are important.
So question: where in that process do you suppose the "undocumented children" (who are 18 or older by the way *) happen to be when they are receiving state sponsored tuition assistance? Have they been adjudicated yet?
* just one more example of using semantics to mislead.....
Re: Progressive Ideology
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 3:00 pm
by CU77
HooDat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:12 amI can't get my head around the notion of a legislative body actually writing a law the specifically benefits a group of people who (by the intentional language of the law) have broken the law.
If we are going to deny scholarships to the children of illegal immigrants, why not deny them also to the children of other criminals?
If one of your parents ever committed a crime, no scholarship for you!
How about the crime of hiring an illegal immigrant? The vast majority of illegals are here working ordinary low-paying jobs. And without those job opportunities, they would not be here. So why is hiring them not a crime that gets prosecuted? Why should the children of those handing out jobs to illegals not be barred from scholarships?
But no, those of you who are going to scream about children of illegals being eligible for scholarships are perfectly happy to have an illegal-employing criminal as your President. And you are perfectly happy to have his children be paid salaries by your tax dollars.
HooDat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:12 amI can't get my head around the notion of a legislative body actually writing a law the specifically benefits a group of people who (by the intentional language of the law) have broken the law.
If we are going to deny scholarships to the children of illegal immigrants, why not deny them also to the children of other criminals?
If one of your parents ever committed a crime, no scholarship for you!
How about the crime of hiring an illegal immigrant? The vast majority of illegals are here working ordinary low-paying jobs. And without those job opportunities, they would not be here. So why is hiring them not a crime that gets prosecuted? Why should the children of those handing out jobs to illegals not be barred from scholarships?
But no, those of you who are going to scream about children of illegals being eligible for scholarships are perfectly happy to have an illegal-employing criminal as your President. And you are perfectly happy to have his children be paid salaries by your tax dollars.
The wallstreet banksters make tRump look like a genious and choir boy.