GDP for 1st Quarter Very Stagnant

[Guest]

GDP Growth hardly has a pulse at .5% for the First Quarter .
Contrary to healthy pitcher the US CEO tries to paint .

Generally speaking the outcome of Presidential Elections are
determined by " pocket-book " issues . IE Household economics .

[Guest]

The poor are getting paid, they have a house, the electricity and heat are on, there's food on the table and the cell phone works. It's what those in power want that will determine the election outcome.

The recovery was paid for with $10 trillion in borrowing.

Don't believe the numbers...it's all manipulated.

[Guest]

This is the ONLY administration in history that has not had a 3% or higher GDP growth in it's two terms.

[Guest]

This is the ONLY administration in history that has not had a 3% or higher GDP growth in it's two terms.

Because they spent their time and effort on things/industries that don't work?

Or...they sent manufacturing away so there is no production?

[Guest]

I don't blame the fed gov. For lost of jobs over seas. Blame the CEOs, lobbist, and dirty politicians that got greased to change the laws which allows the CEOs to move there company over seas and not get taxes heavily which allows slave labor. Amazing how you can got to Washington with in Dodge Dart and claim to be just working man and in 20 years be multi millionaire and buffoon.
O I frogot the blame lies squarely on the people that keep voting in these crooks also.

[Guest]

I don't blame the fed gov. For lost of jobs over seas. Blame the CEOs, lobbist, and dirty politicians that got greased to change the laws which allows the CEOs to move there company over seas and not get taxes heavily which allows slave labor. Amazing how you can got to Washington with in Dodge Dart and claim to be just working man and in 20 years be multi millionaire and buffoon.
O I frogot the blame lies squarely on the people that keep voting in these crooks also.

Of course, having the highest corporate tax rate in the world might have something to do with it.

[Guest]

O I frogot the blame lies squarely on the people that keep voting in these crooks also.

Yes...EVERYONE who votes D or R. Because BOTH sides are crooks!

Of course, having the highest corporate tax rate in the world might have something to do with it.

And all those quotas and EEO laws.

[Guest]

GDP Growth hardly has a pulse at .5% for the First Quarter .
Contrary to healthy pitcher the US CEO tries to paint .

Generally speaking the outcome of Presidential Elections are
determined by " pocket-book " issues . IE Household economics .

Sadly not much reaction on here to this very important issue .
For some reason people would rather fight over Wedding Cakes and Rest-Rooms than what should be the central issue of this campaign --- the horrible state of our economy .

[Guest]

Sadly not much reaction on here to this very important issue .
For some reason people would rather fight over Wedding Cakes and Rest-Rooms than what should be the central issue of this campaign --- the horrible state of our economy .

Well, the Dems, Chillary and Bernie the commie both could care less on how the economy goes. Their only claim to fame is to increase taxes to pay for freebies. The Two GOP candidates are concerned about the economy and I would think that a businessman, along with some expert assistance should be able to figure out a way to boost our weak economy. Without a decent economy there won't be any taxes to steal from the earners.

[Guest]

Well, the Dems, Chillary and Bernie the commie both could care less on how the economy goes. Their only claim to fame is to increase taxes to pay for freebies. The Two GOP candidates are concerned about the economy and I would think that a businessman, along with some expert assistance should be able to figure out a way to boost our weak economy. Without a decent economy there won't be any taxes to steal from the earners.Do you say these things to make people laugh?
Have you ever read Bernie's platform?

The U.S. is home to some of the world's wealthiest families and corporations. It is a land of opportunity for many; however, among developed nations America has the highest rates of income inequality. Income inequality has been rapidly rising in America since the late 1970s. Income inequality has a host of social-economic consequences, and the topic has become a cornerstone issue for the socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders. His campaign is heavily focused on the economy, but more than that, his economic policies are heavily focused on reversing the upward trend in income and wealth inequality.

Focusing on the Wealth and Income Gap
Sanders has made it clear that tackling income inequality is a critical aspect of his presidential campaign:“Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy?” states Sanders on his campaign website.

Many of Sanders’ proposed policies aim directly at reducing the income inequality gap. From increasing the minimum wage to challenging Wall Street, here's a brief overview of Sanders' policies. (For related reading on income inequality, see: A Brief History of Income Inequality in the United States).

Empowering the 99 Percent
Sanders contends that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is entirely inadequate, calling it “starvation pay.” Adamant that no one working over 40 hours a week should be living in poverty, he proposes a “living” minimum wage of $15 an hour that would be introduced over the next few years.

Throughout the past century, union membership rates having declined drastically; moreover, the current corporate environment discourages union participation. Sanders promises to “strengthen the labor movement” as a means of reducing income inequality. He also wants to increase workers’ influence and strength by promoting more worker-owned cooperatives.


Inequality between the rich and poor is not the only type of inequality Sanders wishes to focus on. He also aims to eliminate the pay gap between men and women performing similar work. As well, Sanders seeks to highlight issues of racial inequality.

Sanders' other reforms intended to help those at the bottom include providing Medicare for all, eliminating tuition at public colleges and universities and reducing interest rates on student loans.

Taking Away Free Lunch for the Super-Rich
A press release issued last June unleashed a proposal from the Vermont senator for a number of tax reform policies that would raise rates on the wealthy and eliminate loopholes. (To read more, see: Carried Interest: A Loophole in America’s Tax Code).

Included in the proposal were plans for lowering the estate tax exemption level, increasing the estate marginal tax rates, creating a billionaire surtax, and ending loopholes that allow billionaires to avoid taxes by setting up dynasty trusts or avoid estate taxes. Further, he plans to raise the cap on taxable income that goes towards Social Security. Sanders is also proposing a financial transaction tax aimed at reducing different forms of risky and unproductive speculative trading.

A central prong of Sanders' plan seeks to ensure the wealthy do not have an unfair economic advantage. In short, he hopes to challenge Wall Street’s current status of being “too big to fail”. His proposals to reform Wall Street include: breaking up big banks, limiting huge financial institutions from being able to make risky speculations with insured deposits, capping credit card rates at 15%, and limiting bankers’ abilities to get rich from taxpayer bailouts.

How Sanders' Proposals Would Impact the Economy
While Sanders’ policy proposals will help to reduce economic inequality, there are some that would argue, that these reforms could have negative implications for the overall economy. They argue that increasing tax burdens on the super rich punishing the nation's most productive class and could lead to lower investments and overall production. In short, they argue that extending benefits to the poorest means rewarding the most unproductive class, creating disincentives for hard work.

However, Sanders’ proposals are fairly modest and are not looking to eliminate all economic incentives. Proponents of Sanders' work argue that tilting the balance of economic rewards in favour of the poor is likely to benefit the overall economy rather than hurt it. They argue that the rich tend to have much lower marginal propensities to consume than the poor. Thus, for every extra dollar of income the rich earn they spend less of it than the poor. In an economy that seems to be struggling with a lack of aggregate demand, redistributing incomes from the wealthy to the poor is likely to spur economic growth to the benefit of all.

The Bottom Line
As a self-proclaimed socialist, Bernie Sanders is campaigning on a platform that promises to empower the bottom 99% through minimum wage reforms and strengthening the labor movement while increasing taxes and eliminating tax loopholes for the super rich. With income inequality reaching highs not seen since before the Great Depression Sanders aims to champion the 99%.



Read more: A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/110915/review-bernie-sanders-economic-policies.asp#ixzz47KdiChxa)
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

[Guest]

Do you say these things to make people laugh?
Have you ever read Bernie's platform?

The U.S. is home to some of the world's wealthiest families and corporations. It is a land of opportunity for many; however, among developed nations America has the highest rates of income inequality. Income inequality has been rapidly rising in America since the late 1970s. Income inequality has a host of social-economic consequences, and the topic has become a cornerstone issue for the socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders. His campaign is heavily focused on the economy, but more than that, his economic policies are heavily focused on reversing the upward trend in income and wealth inequality.

Focusing on the Wealth and Income Gap
Sanders has made it clear that tackling income inequality is a critical aspect of his presidential campaign:“Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy?” states Sanders on his campaign website.

Many of Sanders’ proposed policies aim directly at reducing the income inequality gap. From increasing the minimum wage to challenging Wall Street, here's a brief overview of Sanders' policies. (For related reading on income inequality, see: A Brief History of Income Inequality in the United States).

Empowering the 99 Percent
Sanders contends that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is entirely inadequate, calling it “starvation pay.” Adamant that no one working over 40 hours a week should be living in poverty, he proposes a “living” minimum wage of $15 an hour that would be introduced over the next few years.

Throughout the past century, union membership rates having declined drastically; moreover, the current corporate environment discourages union participation. Sanders promises to “strengthen the labor movement” as a means of reducing income inequality. He also wants to increase workers’ influence and strength by promoting more worker-owned cooperatives.


Inequality between the rich and poor is not the only type of inequality Sanders wishes to focus on. He also aims to eliminate the pay gap between men and women performing similar work. As well, Sanders seeks to highlight issues of racial inequality.

Sanders' other reforms intended to help those at the bottom include providing Medicare for all, eliminating tuition at public colleges and universities and reducing interest rates on student loans.

Taking Away Free Lunch for the Super-Rich
A press release issued last June unleashed a proposal from the Vermont senator for a number of tax reform policies that would raise rates on the wealthy and eliminate loopholes. (To read more, see: Carried Interest: A Loophole in America’s Tax Code).

Included in the proposal were plans for lowering the estate tax exemption level, increasing the estate marginal tax rates, creating a billionaire surtax, and ending loopholes that allow billionaires to avoid taxes by setting up dynasty trusts or avoid estate taxes. Further, he plans to raise the cap on taxable income that goes towards Social Security. Sanders is also proposing a financial transaction tax aimed at reducing different forms of risky and unproductive speculative trading.

A central prong of Sanders' plan seeks to ensure the wealthy do not have an unfair economic advantage. In short, he hopes to challenge Wall Street’s current status of being “too big to fail”. His proposals to reform Wall Street include: breaking up big banks, limiting huge financial institutions from being able to make risky speculations with insured deposits, capping credit card rates at 15%, and limiting bankers’ abilities to get rich from taxpayer bailouts.

How Sanders' Proposals Would Impact the Economy
While Sanders’ policy proposals will help to reduce economic inequality, there are some that would argue, that these reforms could have negative implications for the overall economy. They argue that increasing tax burdens on the super rich punishing the nation's most productive class and could lead to lower investments and overall production. In short, they argue that extending benefits to the poorest means rewarding the most unproductive class, creating disincentives for hard work.

However, Sanders’ proposals are fairly modest and are not looking to eliminate all economic incentives. Proponents of Sanders' work argue that tilting the balance of economic rewards in favour of the poor is likely to benefit the overall economy rather than hurt it. They argue that the rich tend to have much lower marginal propensities to consume than the poor. Thus, for every extra dollar of income the rich earn they spend less of it than the poor. In an economy that seems to be struggling with a lack of aggregate demand, redistributing incomes from the wealthy to the poor is likely to spur economic growth to the benefit of all.

The Bottom Line
As a self-proclaimed socialist, Bernie Sanders is campaigning on a platform that promises to empower the bottom 99% through minimum wage reforms and strengthening the labor movement while increasing taxes and eliminating tax loopholes for the super rich. With income inequality reaching highs not seen since before the Great Depression Sanders aims to champion the 99%.



Read more: A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/110915/review-bernie-sanders-economic-policies.asp#ixzz47KdiChxa)
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

Just more commie rhetoric. When do the little red books get issued?

[Guest]

Dude, there is NO pay gap. Women get paid the same as men IF they are doing the same work. Get over it and quit listening to liberal commies parroting propaganda.

[Guest]

Amazing thought process ---- by in essence rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic our economy will be saved ! beyond belief .
Also with respect to " the death tax " these monies were already taxed when they were income and when they generated dividends .
You need to understand the mechanism and importance of Capital Formation . We already have the highest Corporate Tax Rates in the World ! We need to give our corporations financial incentives in the form of new tax policy to encourage them to bring back into the US Economy the Billions and Billions of dollars that they are holding outside of the US .
Just too much to even bother trying to explain . However it is an argument that I would expect to be put forward by a 20 year old political science major .

[Guest]

Do you say these things to make people laugh?
Have you ever read Bernie's platform?

The U.S. is home to some of the world's wealthiest families and corporations. It is a land of opportunity for many; however, among developed nations America has the highest rates of income inequality. Income inequality has been rapidly rising in America since the late 1970s. Income inequality has a host of social-economic consequences, and the topic has become a cornerstone issue for the socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders. His campaign is heavily focused on the economy, but more than that, his economic policies are heavily focused on reversing the upward trend in income and wealth inequality.

Focusing on the Wealth and Income Gap
Sanders has made it clear that tackling income inequality is a critical aspect of his presidential campaign:“Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy?” states Sanders on his campaign website.

Many of Sanders’ proposed policies aim directly at reducing the income inequality gap. From increasing the minimum wage to challenging Wall Street, here's a brief overview of Sanders' policies. (For related reading on income inequality, see: A Brief History of Income Inequality in the United States).

Empowering the 99 Percent
Sanders contends that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is entirely inadequate, calling it “starvation pay.” Adamant that no one working over 40 hours a week should be living in poverty, he proposes a “living” minimum wage of $15 an hour that would be introduced over the next few years.

Throughout the past century, union membership rates having declined drastically; moreover, the current corporate environment discourages union participation. Sanders promises to “strengthen the labor movement” as a means of reducing income inequality. He also wants to increase workers’ influence and strength by promoting more worker-owned cooperatives.


Inequality between the rich and poor is not the only type of inequality Sanders wishes to focus on. He also aims to eliminate the pay gap between men and women performing similar work. As well, Sanders seeks to highlight issues of racial inequality.

Sanders' other reforms intended to help those at the bottom include providing Medicare for all, eliminating tuition at public colleges and universities and reducing interest rates on student loans.

Taking Away Free Lunch for the Super-Rich
A press release issued last June unleashed a proposal from the Vermont senator for a number of tax reform policies that would raise rates on the wealthy and eliminate loopholes. (To read more, see: Carried Interest: A Loophole in America’s Tax Code).

Included in the proposal were plans for lowering the estate tax exemption level, increasing the estate marginal tax rates, creating a billionaire surtax, and ending loopholes that allow billionaires to avoid taxes by setting up dynasty trusts or avoid estate taxes. Further, he plans to raise the cap on taxable income that goes towards Social Security. Sanders is also proposing a financial transaction tax aimed at reducing different forms of risky and unproductive speculative trading.

A central prong of Sanders' plan seeks to ensure the wealthy do not have an unfair economic advantage. In short, he hopes to challenge Wall Street’s current status of being “too big to fail”. His proposals to reform Wall Street include: breaking up big banks, limiting huge financial institutions from being able to make risky speculations with insured deposits, capping credit card rates at 15%, and limiting bankers’ abilities to get rich from taxpayer bailouts.

How Sanders' Proposals Would Impact the Economy
While Sanders’ policy proposals will help to reduce economic inequality, there are some that would argue, that these reforms could have negative implications for the overall economy. They argue that increasing tax burdens on the super rich punishing the nation's most productive class and could lead to lower investments and overall production. In short, they argue that extending benefits to the poorest means rewarding the most unproductive class, creating disincentives for hard work.

However, Sanders’ proposals are fairly modest and are not looking to eliminate all economic incentives. Proponents of Sanders' work argue that tilting the balance of economic rewards in favour of the poor is likely to benefit the overall economy rather than hurt it. They argue that the rich tend to have much lower marginal propensities to consume than the poor. Thus, for every extra dollar of income the rich earn they spend less of it than the poor. In an economy that seems to be struggling with a lack of aggregate demand, redistributing incomes from the wealthy to the poor is likely to spur economic growth to the benefit of all.

The Bottom Line
As a self-proclaimed socialist, Bernie Sanders is campaigning on a platform that promises to empower the bottom 99% through minimum wage reforms and strengthening the labor movement while increasing taxes and eliminating tax loopholes for the super rich. With income inequality reaching highs not seen since before the Great Depression Sanders aims to champion the 99%.



Read more: A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/110915/review-bernie-sanders-economic-policies.asp#ixzz47KdiChxa)
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

Bernie sanders offers me NOTHING that I don't already have. If you feel so strongly about living in a socialist utopia, why don't you just move to one? I'm sure that they would welcome you with open arms.

[Guest]

Amazing thought process ---- by in essence rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic our economy will be saved ! beyond belief .
Also with respect to " the death tax " these monies were already taxed when they were income and when they generated dividends .
You need to understand the mechanism and importance of Capital Formation . We already have the highest Corporate Tax Rates in the World ! We need to give our corporations financial incentives in the form of new tax policy to encourage them to bring back into the US Economy the Billions and Billions of dollars that they are holding outside of the US .
Just too much to even bother trying to explain . However it is an argument that I would expect to be put forward by a 20 year old political science major .

Naw, liberals feel that we are doing them a favor by raising their taxes. They will even tell you that raising their taxes will not make them change their business. They are just blind and dumb.

[Guest]

Amazing thought process ---- by in essence rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic our economy will be saved ! beyond belief .
Also with respect to " the death tax " these monies were already taxed when they were income and when they generated dividends .
You need to understand the mechanism and importance of Capital Formation . We already have the highest Corporate Tax Rates in the World ! We need to give our corporations financial incentives in the form of new tax policy to encourage them to bring back into the US Economy the Billions and Billions of dollars that they are holding outside of the US .
Just too much to even bother trying to explain . However it is an argument that I would expect to be put forward by a 20 year old political science major .

Do we? There is such thing as the effective tax rate. The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes | Citizens for Tax Justice (http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/sorrystateofcorptaxes.php)

Take a look at the large corporations that are paying no federal income taxes. These 26 Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/corporation-tax-rate_n_4855763.html)

If you give the major corporations incentives to bring the billions back into the country, there is no guarantee that they will put the money back into the economy via job creation.

Both parties are kissing the butt of the rich and powerful people, and large corporations. It is almost a given incentives to bring money back into the US via reducing the rate tax is a road to nowhere. They are not paying federal income taxes now. So, what tax rate is less than zero?

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1219632]Yes...EVERYONE who votes D or R. Because BOTH sides are crooks!


No only the states tha that keep voting in the career politician IN BOTH PARTIES. But , I will Amit democrats are the worse of the two evils.

[Guest]

Do we? There is such thing as the effective tax rate. The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes | Citizens for Tax Justice (http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/sorrystateofcorptaxes.php)

Take a look at the large corporations that are paying no federal income taxes. These 26 Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/corporation-tax-rate_n_4855763.html)

If you give the major corporations incentives to bring the billions back into the country, there is no guarantee that they will put the money back into the economy via job creation.

Both parties are kissing the butt of the rich and powerful people, and large corporations. It is almost a given incentives to bring money back into the US via reducing the rate tax is a road to nowhere. They are not paying federal income taxes now. So, what tax rate is less than zero?


No, only the career politicians that sheep keep voting them in office over and over and over. Who makes tax laws. The career politicians. Bottom line it's the voting citzens fault in certain portions of this country keep voting in flimflam lying pieces of brown stinky lumps.

[Guest]

Do we? There is such thing as the effective tax rate. The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes | Citizens for Tax Justice (http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/sorrystateofcorptaxes.php)

Take a look at the large corporations that are paying no federal income taxes. These 26 Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/corporation-tax-rate_n_4855763.html)

If you give the major corporations incentives to bring the billions back into the country, there is no guarantee that they will put the money back into the economy via job creation.

Both parties are kissing the butt of the rich and powerful people, and large corporations. It is almost a given incentives to bring money back into the US via reducing the rate tax is a road to nowhere. They are not paying federal income taxes now. So, what tax rate is less than zero?

There are approx. 30 MILLION corporations in America. And you are concerned about 26 that are legally not paying their "fair share" of taxes. I bet there are more than 26 Democrats in congress that cheat on their taxes every year. Wow dude, is that the best you can do, 26? Big deal. Like your idol says, "what difference does it make?"

Let's face it, you liberals are very, very greedy. And very, very dependent.

[Guest]

There are approx. 30 MILLION corporations in America. And you are concerned about 26 that are legally not paying their "fair share" of taxes. I bet there are more than 26 Democrats in congress that cheat on their taxes every year. Wow dude, is that the best you can do, 26? Big deal. Like your idol says, "what difference does it make?"

Let's face it, you liberals are very, very greedy. And very, very dependent.The Waltons are collectively worth as much as 40% of the population. And the 40% are greedy. figures

[Guest]

The Waltons are collectively worth as much as 40% of the population. And the 40% are greedy. figures

Do I detect more liberal wealth envy? Only in America, where everyone has the same opportunity to become wealthy, do we have liberal complain about someone else doing better than themselves. So unbecoming and selfish.

[Guest]

The Waltons are collectively worth as much as 40% of the population. And the 40% are greedy. figures

Another Bernie-ism. The correct statement would be that the Waltons are worth as much as the BOTTOM 40% income levels in America. And they also pay more taxes than ALL of those lower 40% too. But, you failed to include that little detail. If you are going to quote a socialist, at least check out what they say before being their pet parrot.

If you yearn for socialism so bad, why not travel to a socialist country and live there a bit to find out what it is all about. I have and there is nothing that any other country has that I would want here in MY country. You are nothing more than a spoiled liberal with wealth envy. If you weren't so lazy, you could be just as wealthy as the Waltons.

[Guest]

Do you say these things to make people laugh?
Have you ever read Bernie's platform?

The U.S. is home to some of the world's wealthiest families and corporations. It is a land of opportunity for many; however, among developed nations America has the highest rates of income inequality. Income inequality has been rapidly rising in America since the late 1970s. Income inequality has a host of social-economic consequences, and the topic has become a cornerstone issue for the socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders. His campaign is heavily focused on the economy, but more than that, his economic policies are heavily focused on reversing the upward trend in income and wealth inequality.

Focusing on the Wealth and Income Gap
Sanders has made it clear that tackling income inequality is a critical aspect of his presidential campaign:“Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy?” states Sanders on his campaign website.

Many of Sanders’ proposed policies aim directly at reducing the income inequality gap. From increasing the minimum wage to challenging Wall Street, here's a brief overview of Sanders' policies. (For related reading on income inequality, see: A Brief History of Income Inequality in the United States).

Empowering the 99 Percent
Sanders contends that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is entirely inadequate, calling it “starvation pay.” Adamant that no one working over 40 hours a week should be living in poverty, he proposes a “living” minimum wage of $15 an hour that would be introduced over the next few years.

Throughout the past century, union membership rates having declined drastically; moreover, the current corporate environment discourages union participation. Sanders promises to “strengthen the labor movement” as a means of reducing income inequality. He also wants to increase workers’ influence and strength by promoting more worker-owned cooperatives.


Inequality between the rich and poor is not the only type of inequality Sanders wishes to focus on. He also aims to eliminate the pay gap between men and women performing similar work. As well, Sanders seeks to highlight issues of racial inequality.

Sanders' other reforms intended to help those at the bottom include providing Medicare for all, eliminating tuition at public colleges and universities and reducing interest rates on student loans.

Taking Away Free Lunch for the Super-Rich
A press release issued last June unleashed a proposal from the Vermont senator for a number of tax reform policies that would raise rates on the wealthy and eliminate loopholes. (To read more, see: Carried Interest: A Loophole in America’s Tax Code).

Included in the proposal were plans for lowering the estate tax exemption level, increasing the estate marginal tax rates, creating a billionaire surtax, and ending loopholes that allow billionaires to avoid taxes by setting up dynasty trusts or avoid estate taxes. Further, he plans to raise the cap on taxable income that goes towards Social Security. Sanders is also proposing a financial transaction tax aimed at reducing different forms of risky and unproductive speculative trading.

A central prong of Sanders' plan seeks to ensure the wealthy do not have an unfair economic advantage. In short, he hopes to challenge Wall Street’s current status of being “too big to fail”. His proposals to reform Wall Street include: breaking up big banks, limiting huge financial institutions from being able to make risky speculations with insured deposits, capping credit card rates at 15%, and limiting bankers’ abilities to get rich from taxpayer bailouts.

How Sanders' Proposals Would Impact the Economy
While Sanders’ policy proposals will help to reduce economic inequality, there are some that would argue, that these reforms could have negative implications for the overall economy. They argue that increasing tax burdens on the super rich punishing the nation's most productive class and could lead to lower investments and overall production. In short, they argue that extending benefits to the poorest means rewarding the most unproductive class, creating disincentives for hard work.

However, Sanders’ proposals are fairly modest and are not looking to eliminate all economic incentives. Proponents of Sanders' work argue that tilting the balance of economic rewards in favour of the poor is likely to benefit the overall economy rather than hurt it. They argue that the rich tend to have much lower marginal propensities to consume than the poor. Thus, for every extra dollar of income the rich earn they spend less of it than the poor. In an economy that seems to be struggling with a lack of aggregate demand, redistributing incomes from the wealthy to the poor is likely to spur economic growth to the benefit of all.

The Bottom Line
As a self-proclaimed socialist, Bernie Sanders is campaigning on a platform that promises to empower the bottom 99% through minimum wage reforms and strengthening the labor movement while increasing taxes and eliminating tax loopholes for the super rich. With income inequality reaching highs not seen since before the Great Depression Sanders aims to champion the 99%.



Read more: A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia A Review of Bernie Sanders' Economic Policies | Investopedia (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/110915/review-bernie-sanders-economic-policies.asp#ixzz47KdiChxa)
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

Dear Guest:

You express yourself like a millennia who has been thoroughly indoctrinated into social diversified and inequality issues and at the expense of economic realities meaning learning to only emote and not to think

People since the beginning of time have been jealous of those whom they perceive have more. Its why one of the Ten Commandments says "Thous shalt not covet thy neighbors goods". Its a canard when some tells poor people they can get richer by taking away from the rich. Its a political illusion by politicians to get votes by getting a collection of people to follow their absurdities and frankly its a waste of time and energy

The Obama Administration is the Sanders agenda and because of it we have never had the historic recovery seen in the past.

We are 7 years past the recession of 2008 and we are limping along, median wage is down people actually participation in the economy is at its lowest level in many a year. The FED is in concert with Obama and they are contributing to this delay

Obama's spending is out of control, focused in the wrong areas and has been the least effective. Obama's regulations are strangling corporations. Businesses are sitting on huge amounts of cash but given Obama's anti-business bent they refuse to invest and use their cash to buy back their stock or invest overseas. I don't blame them its called capitalism and not communism

Obama had from the beginning of his first term set out to "get the man" but forgot he is the man....meaning he had the responsible to bring the country together and get the economy moving. Instead he maintained his role as community organizer causing disruption and division both here and abroad.

You speak of unions. Unions were perhaps necessary in the 1930's but after World War II the country expansion and the creation of technology created supply and demand and coincided with increases in educational pursuits by prospective employees.

Unions, especially public unions are very damaging to our economy. Public unions demand more but offer less in quality and production. they are sending many a city bankrupt because of commitment to medical benefits and pensions.

Unions in general cost consumer more because of the outrageous demands they make in their contracts.

It why the progressive party caters to union bosses which grant them votes. This is a conflict of interest as respects public union employees because politicians quid pro quo arrangement with public unions is in conflict with taxpayers wishes.

Its why many states are moving to the right to work status

The economy is a big issue in this campaign. But so is defense and foreign policy thanks to the manifest incompetence of Obama

Finally people should stop worrying about rich people and focus on how they will achieve their goals and desired financial status.

Progressives claims of redistribution of wealth reminds me of those scenes in movies were you watch greedy claim jumpers steal another miners gold claim.

Personal Best Regards;

[Guest]

Dear Guest:

You express yourself like a millennia who has been thoroughly indoctrinated into social diversified and inequality issues and at the expense of economic realities meaning learning to only emote and not to think

People since the beginning of time have been jealous of those whom they perceive have more. Its why one of the Ten Commandments says "Thous shalt not covet thy neighbors goods". Its a canard when some tells poor people they can get richer by taking away from the rich. Its a political illusion by politicians to get votes by getting a collection of people to follow their absurdities and frankly its a waste of time and energy

The Obama Administration is the Sanders agenda and because of it we have never had the historic recovery seen in the past.

We are 7 years past the recession of 2008 and we are limping along, median wage is down people actually participation in the economy is at its lowest level in many a year. The FED is in concert with Obama and they are contributing to this delay

Obama's spending is out of control, focused in the wrong areas and has been the least effective. Obama's regulations are strangling corporations. Businesses are sitting on huge amounts of cash but given Obama's anti-business bent they refuse to invest and use their cash to buy back their stock or invest overseas. I don't blame them its called capitalism and not communism

Obama had from the beginning of his first term set out to "get the man" but forgot he is the man....meaning he had the responsible to bring the country together and get the economy moving. Instead he maintained his role as community organizer causing disruption and division both here and abroad.

You speak of unions. Unions were perhaps necessary in the 1930's but after World War II the country expansion and the creation of technology created supply and demand and coincided with increases in educational pursuits by prospective employees.

Unions, especially public unions are very damaging to our economy. Public unions demand more but offer less in quality and production. they are sending many a city bankrupt because of commitment to medical benefits and pensions.

Unions in general cost consumer more because of the outrageous demands they make in their contracts.

It why the progressive party caters to union bosses which grant them votes. This is a conflict of interest as respects public union employees because politicians quid pro quo arrangement with public unions is in conflict with taxpayers wishes.

Its why many states are moving to the right to work status

The economy is a big issue in this campaign. But so is defense and foreign policy thanks to the manifest incompetence of Obama

Finally people should stop worrying about rich people and focus on how they will achieve their goals and desired financial status.

Progressives claims of redistribution of wealth reminds me of those scenes in movies were you watch greedy claim jumpers steal another miners gold claim.

Personal Best Regards;Think a little more. Are the lobbyists looking out for you? Why can't you afford your own lobbyist? Are your kids doing better than you? Are most? Are they all lazy and greedy?

[Guest]

There are approx. 30 MILLION corporations in America. And you are concerned about 26 that are legally not paying their "fair share" of taxes. I bet there are more than 26 Democrats in congress that cheat on their taxes every year. Wow dude, is that the best you can do, 26? Big deal. Like your idol says, "what difference does it make?"

Let's face it, you liberals are very, very greedy. And very, very dependent.

Is that the best I can di? Not by a long shot.Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812)

You are falling right in line with your party. They take statements out of context, and apply them to everything.

I don't remember the person that I voted for, John Kasich, in the primary making that statement. Can you please provide the link, so I can read his entire statement?

I must be some kind of funny liberal, since I am not dependent on anybody. By all means, keep making statements of fact that have literally nothing to do with reality. It fits you well.

[Guest]

Think a little more. Are the lobbyists looking out for you? Why can't you afford your own lobbyist? Are your kids doing better than you? Are most? Are they all lazy and greedy?

Dear Guest: Did you even read what I wrote? I grant you that lobbyist have only their self-interests at heart and that they work for political support but I question that it is all wrong and I question people who have a conditional knee jerk reaction to the term. Our government has gotten so large and so out of control that corporations are wise to stay close to the action.

Yes, root out cronyism and corruption but don't toss the baby out with the bathwater. If you want to rid the country of most lobbyist demand the federal government relinquish their control of states. Pure and simple states created the federal government the federal government did not create the states and therein lies the biggest concern of all. In that same vein it takes two to tango and a crooked lobbyist couldn't exist without crooked politicians

Capitalism is a complicated system not perfect but in the long run provides more opportunity for citizens. Would you rather a dictatorship, a caste system, etc?

Universities and colleges have for a number of years been pushing a socialist agenda, an anti-capitalism anti-national theme. Sanders followers actually believe what he is saying. social inequality, diversity has been the main theme and these kids have no idea what capitalism is and why while not perfect provides a better opportunity for them than any other economic system.

America's superiority is testament to a Republican form of government with a capitalist system that promotes productivity and pay for performance.

Sanders literally is saying rich people need to be punished for achieving. He says the system is rigged and his solution is to rig the system so that non-achievers reap rewards they never earned.

So if you are so inclined toward this form of government then you agree what's yours belongs to whom ever makes claim for the sake of equality of course?

Sanders is preaching pure bupkus. Hillary has now pivoted to the right in a desperation move to garner votes.

Finally people need to stop complaining and start taking responsibility for their lives no one person or organization owes them anything. It is amazing to me how we read of story after story of immigrants who come to America with nothing and yet size the opportunity capitalism affords and are not listed as millionaires. Apparently they found American streets are paved with gold

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Dear Guest:



People since the beginning of time have been jealous of those whom they perceive have more. Its why one of the Ten Commandments says "Thous shalt not covet thy neighbors goods". Its a canard when some tells poor people they can get richer by taking away from the rich. Its a political illusion by politicians to get votes by getting a collection of people to follow their absurdities and frankly its a waste of time and energy

The Obama Administration is the Sanders agenda and because of it we have never had the historic recovery seen in the past.

We are 7 years past the recession of 2008 and we are limping along, median wage is down people actually participation in the economy is at its lowest level in many a year. The FED is in concert with Obama and they are contributing to this delay

Obama's spending is out of control, focused in the wrong areas and has been the least effective. Obama's regulations are strangling corporations. Businesses are sitting on huge amounts of cash but given Obama's anti-business bent they refuse to invest and use their cash to buy back their stock or invest overseas. I don't blame them its called capitalism and not

You speak of unions. Unions were perhaps necessary in the 1930's but after World War II the country expansion and the creation of technology created supply and demand and coincided with increases in educational pursuits by prospective employees.

Unions, especially public unions are very damaging to our economy. Public unions demand more but offer less in quality and production. they are sending many a city bankrupt because of commitment to medical benefits and pensions.

Unions in general cost consumer more because of the outrageous demands they make in their contracts.

It why the progressive party caters to union bosses which grant them votes. This is a conflict of interest as respects public union employees because politicians quid pro quo arrangement with public unions is in conflict with taxpayers wishes.

Its why many states are moving to the right to work status

The economy is a big issue in this campaign. But so is defense and foreign policy thanks to the manifest incompetence of Obama

Finally people should stop worrying about rich people and focus on how they will achieve their goals and desired financial status.

Progressives claims of redistribution of wealth reminds me of those scenes in movies were you watch greedy claim jumpers steal another miners gold claim.

Personal Best Regards;

Let me ask YOU about your envy statement. If your next door neighbor (a staunch Democrat) has a Mercedes and a Corvette and is constantly going on luxury cruises, but you find out he pays no Federal income tax on his cash only business with profits of $500,000 AND he gets the low income senior exemption for county tax - are YOU jealous and turn him in? Oh yeah, he encourages his 2 Pit Bulls to use your yard for a bathroom!

Regarding the anti-union stuff, they have gone too far in many things but they still are needed for employee protection.

[Guest]

Let me ask YOU about your envy statement. If your next door neighbor (a staunch Democrat) has a Mercedes and a Corvette and is constantly going on luxury cruises, but you find out he pays no Federal income tax on his cash only business with profits of $500,000 AND he gets the low income senior exemption for county tax - are YOU jealous and turn him in? Oh yeah, he encourages his 2 Pit Bulls to use your yard for a bathroom!

Regarding the anti-union stuff, they have gone too far in many things but they still are needed for employee protection.

Would YOU?

[Guest]

Of course, having the highest corporate tax rate in the world might have something to do with it.

Yet again another Republican LIE!

Corporate Income Tax Rates around the World, 2015 | Tax Foundation (http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2015)

The highest corporate tax rate is Africa!

Fifteen (of Many) Reasons Why We Need Corporate Tax Reform | CTJReports (http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2015/04/fifteen_of_many_reasons_why_we_need_corporate_tax_ reform.php#.VyYKSGNvNOo)

At least 15 Fortune 500 companies paid ZERO taxes. I paid more taxes than they did!

[Guest]

Let me ask YOU about your envy statement. If your next door neighbor (a staunch Democrat) has a Mercedes and a Corvette and is constantly going on luxury cruises, but you find out he pays no Federal income tax on his cash only business with profits of $500,000 AND he gets the low income senior exemption for county tax - are YOU jealous and turn him in? Oh yeah, he encourages his 2 Pit Bulls to use your yard for a bathroom!

Regarding the anti-union stuff, they have gone too far in many things but they still are needed for employee protection.

How can you even compare someone who pay no taxes in clear violation of income tax laws (i.e, undeclared income) to someone who pays taxes (or no taxes) in accordance with said laws?

[Guest]

Yet again another Republican LIE!

Corporate Income Tax Rates around the World, 2015 | Tax Foundation (http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2015)

The highest corporate tax rate is Africa!

Fifteen (of Many) Reasons Why We Need Corporate Tax Reform | CTJReports (http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2015/04/fifteen_of_many_reasons_why_we_need_corporate_tax_ reform.php#.VyYKSGNvNOo)

At least 15 Fortune 500 companies paid ZERO taxes. I paid more taxes than they did!

And, according to the IRS 45% of all income filers paid no income tax. Do you also take issue with that?

[Guest]

And, according to the IRS 45% of all income filers paid no income tax. Do you also take issue with that?
Did they get their withholding amounts back?

[Guest]

Did they get their withholding amounts back?

They sure did and do. Tax refund season has become almost equal to holiday shopping.

[Guest]

Did they get their withholding amounts back?

They paid NO federal income tax. So, would the answer not be YES.

[Guest]

They paid NO federal income tax. So, would the answer not be YES.

I don't think so. Re-read your tax information and you will find out your mistakes.

[Guest]

I don't think so. Re-read your tax information and you will find out your mistakes.

What tax information?

[Guest]

The problem is that we have way too
many people in this country not producing anything of value,
and at the same time we have way too many taking
out and not putting anything into the pot!

There are a lot of folks that want higher income,
but they are reluctant to work for it, and why should they,
if they can get a check from the government for doing nothing.
Plus many people make a good living knocking out babies,
all at tax payer expense!

[Guest]

The problem is that we have way too
many people in this country not producing anything of value,
and at the same time we have way too many taking
out and not putting anything into the pot!

There are a lot of folks that want higher income,
but they are reluctant to work for it, and why should they,
if they can get a check from the government for doing nothing.
Plus many people make a good living knocking out babies,
all at tax payer expense!

And, Obama only wants everyone to pay their fair share. So, I can only assume that he thinks that the 45% of workers that pay NO federal income tax have a fair share that amounts to ZERO.

[Guest]

The problem is that we have way too
many people in this country not producing anything of value,
and at the same time we have way too many taking
out and not putting anything into the pot!

There are a lot of folks that want higher income,
but they are reluctant to work for it, and why should they,
if they can get a check from the government for doing nothing.
Plus many people make a good living knocking out babies,
all at tax payer expense!


This describes a fair number of posters on the forum. They may not be knocking out babies, but they do nothing other than live off of their parents, or grandparents, government checks.

[Guest]

The problem is that we have way too
many people in this country not producing anything of value,
and at the same time we have way too many taking
out and not putting anything into the pot!

There are a lot of folks that want higher income,
but they are reluctant to work for it, and why should they,
if they can get a check from the government for doing nothing.
Plus many people make a good living knocking out babies,
all at tax payer expense!

Yes they do, a single mother can receive benefits equaling $60,000 a year.

That's what happens when women get to make decisions and vote. You end up with these unsustainable programs.

This describes a fair number of posters on the forum. They may not be knocking out babies, but they do nothing other than live off of their parents, or grandparents, government checks.

Huh? the posters ere are the grandparents being lived off of.

[Guest]

Is that the best I can di? Not by a long shot.Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812)

You are falling right in line with your party. They take statements out of context, and apply them to everything.

I don't remember the person that I voted for, John Kasich, in the primary making that statement. Can you please provide the link, so I can read his entire statement?

I must be some kind of funny liberal, since I am not dependent on anybody. By all means, keep making statements of fact that have literally nothing to do with reality. It fits you well.

Whatever you say. Keep repeating that mantra and I am sure you will believe it eventually. No one else will, but you will. And Kasich is no conservative. Maybe a RINO, but no conservative. But, he did win one state.....:thumbup:

[Guest]

Yet again another Republican LIE!

Corporate Income Tax Rates around the World, 2015 | Tax Foundation (http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2015)

The highest corporate tax rate is Africa!

Fifteen (of Many) Reasons Why We Need Corporate Tax Reform | CTJReports (http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2015/04/fifteen_of_many_reasons_why_we_need_corporate_tax_ reform.php#.VyYKSGNvNOo)

At least 15 Fortune 500 companies paid ZERO taxes. I paid more taxes than they did!

"The United States has the third highest general top marginal corporate income tax rate in the world at 39.1 percent, exceeded only by Chad and the United Arab Emirates."
====================
The top ten highest income tax rates in the world are ALL socialist countries. And it is not the wealthy paying for socialism in those countries, it's everyone.

[Guest]

"The United States has the third highest general top marginal corporate income tax rate in the world at 39.1 percent, exceeded only by Chad and the United Arab Emirates."
====================
The top ten highest income tax rates in the world are ALL socialist countries. And it is not the wealthy paying for socialism in those countries, it's everyone.



Since Carrier HVAC is moving to Mexico whee there is a much lower corporate tax rate and they will be paying employees $6 per hour instead of $34; do you believe 1) will they be selling their products for much less than they do now and 2) will their corporate executives take huge pay cuts since the tax rates and labor costs are much less than in Indiana?

[Guest]

Since Carrier HVAC is moving to Mexico whee there is a much lower corporate tax rate and they will be paying employees $6 per hour instead of $34; do you believe 1) will they be selling their products for much less than they do now and 2) will their corporate executives take huge pay cuts since the tax rates and labor costs are much less than in Indiana?

Do you think that anyone has the right to mandate prices, other than the competition with Free Trade? Trump says that he will charge import taxes on Carrier if they insist on moving to Mexico. That seems legit to me. On the other hand, I do not think that the Federal gov be allowed put a price cap on products or mandate a wage scale. It is not Free Enterprise if the gov puts stipulations on trade.

What corporations pay their employees, such as bonuses is up to them, not us. I see no problem if I own a business and decide to give a giant bonus to the ones that bring me a profit. The gov gives big bonuses for doing nothing. I've seen it. Ask Hillary how many bonuses she has given to her staff in the State Dept.

[Guest]

On the other hand, I do not think that the Federal gov be allowed put a price cap on products or mandate a wage scale. It is not Free Enterprise if the gov puts stipulations on trade.

What corporations pay their employees, such as bonuses is up to them, not us. I see no problem if I own a business and decide to give a giant bonus to the ones that bring me a profit. The gov gives big bonuses for doing nothing. I've seen it. Ask Hillary how many bonuses she has given to her staff in the State Dept.

The bonuses and salaries the Fed Gov gives it's employees is peanuts to that of corporate executives. Top pay for a Fed employee is around $177,000 while corporate executives would sneeze at that salary. Top bonus in the Fed gov is around $40,000.

You are right that the government does not tell private companies what to pay their executives. The only pay mandate is minimum wage. Unions take care of the rest - as they should.

[Guest]

I was in a union for 21 years and the most I ever made was $27,068 and that included overtime.
"Top bonus in the Fed gov is around $40,000" sounds pretty dang good to me.

[Guest]

The bonuses and salaries the Fed Gov gives it's employees is peanuts to that of corporate executives. Top pay for a Fed employee is around $177,000 while corporate executives would sneeze at that salary. Top bonus in the Fed gov is around $40,000.

You are right that the government does not tell private companies what to pay their executives. The only pay mandate is minimum wage. Unions take care of the rest - as they should.

UNIONS????
Unions are defunct. They are no longer needed.
Private sector union membership is 6.7% and slipping fast.
Union membership should not be allowed in the public sector. Why should gov workers be able to force us, the taxpayer to pay them more? If they don't want to work for us, then they should quit. Our taxes pay their wages so they should not be able to utilize unions to negotiate benefits. Every time they get a raise, we have to pay higher taxes.

[Guest]

Since Carrier HVAC is moving to Mexico whee there is a much lower corporate tax rate and they will be paying employees $6 per hour instead of $34; do you believe 1) will they be selling their products for much less than they do now and 2) will their corporate executives take huge pay cuts since the tax rates and labor costs are much less than in Indiana?

The corporation is moving work off shore to lower the cost (increase the margins) so why would anybody think they would consider a selling price reduction which would again lower the margins that they moved off shore to attain??????????????????????????????

Why would the execs take a pay cut because the tax rates are less?

[Guest]

UNIONS????
Unions are defunct. They are no longer needed.
Private sector union membership is 6.7% and slipping fast.
Union membership should not be allowed in the public sector. Why should gov workers be able to force us, the taxpayer to pay them more? If they don't want to work for us, then they should quit. Our taxes pay their wages so they should not be able to utilize unions to negotiate benefits. Every time they get a raise, we have to pay higher taxes.

No, they borrow more to pay them more...