He didn't mention they were worthless IOU's that the government would have to raise taxes and fees or borrow  to redeem.

WTF is this thread about?

The failure of Sanders.

I piss my pance but i'm gonna be prez
\
:gramps:

. said:

I piss my pance but i'm gonna be prez
\
:gramps:

I'm gonna be prez........Never! :rofl:

The IOU's are for money meant for SS which was spent by the Congress on other things.

. said:

The IOU's are for money meant for SS which was spent by the Congress on other things.

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

. said:

. said:

The IOU's are for money meant for SS which was spent by the Congress on other things.

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

Yet you believe the shit the Koch Bros. put out.

. said:

. said:

The IOU's are for money meant for SS which was spent by the Congress on other things.

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

Teh point is that Koch bro's think SS is a ponzi scheme which it is and it better be reformed or it's going to implode. Saunders wants the status quo and lied that it has $2.8 trillion in assets , when in fact it has worthless IOU's in it's account .

The 'assets' angle is just a lie. Benefits paid out come from a combination of tax revenue coming in, and borrowing coming in.

. said:

. said:

. said:

The IOU's are for money meant for SS which was spent by the Congress on other things.

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

Teh point is that Koch bro's think SS is a ponzi scheme which it is and it better be reformed or it's going to implode. Saunders wants the status quo and lied that it has $2.8 trillion in assets , when in fact it has worthless IOU's in it's account .

You're going to believe what the Koch bro's say?  

https://ssa.gov/oact/ProgData/assets.html

. said:

 . said:

. said:

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

Teh point is that Koch bro's think SS is a ponzi scheme which it is and it better be reformed or it's going to implode. Saunders wants the status quo and lied that it has $2.8 trillion in assets , when in fact it has worthless IOU's in it's account .

You're going to believe what the Koch bro's say?  

https://ssa.gov/oact/ProgData/assets.html

 Sanders is the one who said the SS has $2.8 trillion in assets.So does the SS site, but ahem, they are worthless paper assets,  the money has been spent.

. said:

 . said:

 . said:

Teh point is that Koch bro's think SS is a ponzi scheme which it is and it better be reformed or it's going to implode. Saunders wants the status quo and lied that it has $2.8 trillion in assets , when in fact it has worthless IOU's in it's account .

You're going to believe what the Koch bro's say?  

https://ssa.gov/oact/ProgData/assets.html

 Sanders is the one who said the SS has $2.8 trillion in assets.So does the SS site, but ahem, they are worthless paper assets,  the money has been spent.

Let's see a link to that. One that isn't from a Koch Bros. puppet.

. said:

 Sanders is the one who said the SS has $2.8 trillion in assets.So does the SS site, but ahem, they are worthless paper assets,  the money has been spent.

GWB tried this argument ten years ago; he was shown to be incorrect.  

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20050406/news_1n6socsec.html

. said:

 . said:

 Sanders is the one who said the SS has $2.8 trillion in assets.So does the SS site, but ahem, they are worthless paper assets,  the money has been spent.

GWB tried this argument ten years ago; he was shown to be incorrect.  

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20050406/news_1n6socsec.html

I know they are treasuries.What makes them worthless is that the government to borrow ,raise taxes and fees or cut spending to redeem them, thus making taxpayers pay twice .

. said:

. said:

 . said:

 Sanders is the one who said the SS has $2.8 trillion in assets.So does the SS site, but ahem, they are worthless paper assets,  the money has been spent.

GWB tried this argument ten years ago; he was shown to be incorrect.  

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20050406/news_1n6socsec.html

I know they are treasuries.What makes them worthless is that the government to borrow ,raise taxes and fees or cut spending to redeem them, thus making taxpayers pay twice .

It's a fucked up system for sure, but I wouldn't listen to billionaires like the Koch Bros and their solution.  It's deeper than that.

. said:

­
Exactly.

Tax-cuts for billionaires are far more important to America's well-being that just making sure some old fucks don't have to eat cat-food for supper.

­
You can't tax billionaires. Any of the candidates who says they will tax billionaires is a fucking idiot.

Front and center is Sanders who says he will "increase taxes on the wealthy"

The wealthy don't pay tax. Why? They have no fucking income.

Libbies are complete morons. The google guys, oracle guys, facebook guys, buffett, etc... none of them have income. They have stock that appreciated in value.

They get stock, hold it, it goes up in value. No tax.

No, you say "BUT NOOO!! THEY HAVE TO SELL AND THAT'S WHEN THEY GET TAXES!!! BLARRGGHHHH!!! RAISE CAPITAL GAINS TAXES!!! BLARGCGHHH!!!"

WRONG.

First of all, most of their corporate money, that they own a share of via their stock ownership, is out of the country. They have some shell company in Ireland that holds all their IP, the shell company licenses the IP to the American company, the American company pays the Irish company 50 billion a year for the IP and deducts that cost. Since the American company has no income, it pays no tax.

Bllaarggg! We'll get rid of that.

WRONG.

You see even if you did get rid of that, you taxed it away, the billionaires would still pay NO TAXES. Why?

BECAUSE THEY DON'T SELL.

So, how do they get money to spend on yots and supermodels?

They borrow it from one of the large banks. They use their stock holdings as collateral.

Done. They don't need to sell stock. They have no income. They have all the money they want to spend.

And you'll hear the libbies screech "RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH"

What they are really saying is "raise taxes on people who work!!!"

Because billionaires don't pay taxes.

I laff at GenX/GenY morons who still think they're actually going to get social security. :lol:

. said:

­
You can't tax billionaires. Any of the candidates who says they will tax billionaires is a fucking idiot.

Front and center is Sanders who says he will "increase taxes on the wealthy"

The wealthy don't pay tax. Why? They have no fucking income.

Libbies are complete morons. The google guys, oracle guys, facebook guys, buffett, etc... none of them have income. They have stock that appreciated in value.

They get stock, hold it, it goes up in value. No tax.

No, you say "BUT NOOO!! THEY HAVE TO SELL AND THAT'S WHEN THEY GET TAXES!!! BLARRGGHHHH!!! RAISE CAPITAL GAINS TAXES!!! BLARGCGHHH!!!"

WRONG.

First of all, most of their corporate money, that they own a share of via their stock ownership, is out of the country. They have some shell company in Ireland that holds all their IP, the shell company licenses the IP to the American company, the American company pays the Irish company 50 billion a year for the IP and deducts that cost. Since the American company has no income, it pays no tax.

Bllaarggg! We'll get rid of that.

WRONG.

You see even if you did get rid of that, you taxed it away, the billionaires would still pay NO TAXES. Why?

BECAUSE THEY DON'T SELL.

So, how do they get money to spend on yots and supermodels?

They borrow it from one of the large banks. They use their stock holdings as collateral.

Done. They don't need to sell stock. They have no income. They have all the money they want to spend.

And you'll hear the libbies screech "RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH"

What they are really saying is "raise taxes on people who work!!!"

Because billionaires don't pay taxes.

­

well, you make the case that the game  is rigged and yes, most Dems do nothing to change this.


Robert Kiyosaki of rich dad poor dad fame came out and said that he is rich and does not pay taxes

. said:

­
You can't tax billionaires. Any of the candidates who says they will tax billionaires is a fucking idiot.

Front and center is Sanders who says he will "increase taxes on the wealthy"

The wealthy don't pay tax. Why? They have no fucking income.

Libbies are complete morons. The google guys, oracle guys, facebook guys, buffett, etc... none of them have income. They have stock that appreciated in value.

They get stock, hold it, it goes up in value. No tax.

No, you say "BUT NOOO!! THEY HAVE TO SELL AND THAT'S WHEN THEY GET TAXES!!! BLARRGGHHHH!!! RAISE CAPITAL GAINS TAXES!!! BLARGCGHHH!!!"

WRONG.

First of all, most of their corporate money, that they own a share of via their stock ownership, is out of the country. They have some shell company in Ireland that holds all their IP, the shell company licenses the IP to the American company, the American company pays the Irish company 50 billion a year for the IP and deducts that cost. Since the American company has no income, it pays no tax.

Bllaarggg! We'll get rid of that.

WRONG.

You see even if you did get rid of that, you taxed it away, the billionaires would still pay NO TAXES. Why?

BECAUSE THEY DON'T SELL.

So, how do they get money to spend on yots and supermodels?

They borrow it from one of the large banks. They use their stock holdings as collateral.

Done. They don't need to sell stock. They have no income. They have all the money they want to spend.

And you'll hear the libbies screech "RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH"

What they are really saying is "raise taxes on people who work!!!"

Because billionaires don't pay taxes.

Great, let's change that and tax billionaires.

. said:

Great, let's change that and tax billionaires.

Sure. How?
On what?

. said:

 . said:

. said:

GWB tried this argument ten years ago; he was shown to be incorrect.  

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20050406/news_1n6socsec.html

I know they are treasuries.What makes them worthless is that the government to borrow ,raise taxes and fees or cut spending to redeem them, thus making taxpayers pay twice .

It's a fucked up system for sure, but I wouldn't listen to billionaires like the Koch Bros and their solution.  It's deeper than that.

I don't. I hate rich people any party. This is about Sanders misleading comment.

What is sorely lacking in this country is a realization from where our greatness as a nation springs forth. Our bounty of jobs and world-leading economy is owing to none other than the top 1%. Who else has the resources to create jobs that fund virtually every aspect of America?


Certainly not the lowest 99%.

This is why they should be exempt from all forms of taxation, lest they view us as unappreciative of all the things they do for us - and simply decide that enough harassment is enough, and move out of the United States. Where would we be then?

For this reason alone, our tax-code should be re-written to collect ALL FEDERAL REVENUE from W2 wage-earners ONLY - these are the people that do nothing but feed at the bountiful trough set forth by our industrious providers in the top 1%.

Once this grievous oversight has been corrected, our economy will flourish and with the huge investment-accounts that all of these fully-employed people would have as a result of this plan, no form of social security would even be necessary..

. said:

­

well, you make the case that the game  is rigged and yes, most Dems do nothing to change this.


Robert Kiyosaki of rich dad poor dad fame came out and said that he is rich and does not pay taxes

You remember when Buffett screeched about how his secretary paid a higher tax rate than he did? Do you know what Buffet's income is compared to his net worth? It is basically 0. He has essentially no income compared to his net worth because he has stock he holds or trades (merging companies) and it appreciates in value.

One way around it is a tax on wealth. They asked Buffett about that once and he just laffed and said "good luck with that". The assets would just move out of the country.

That is why billionaires support a tax rate increase. They know it doesn't affect them, it affects the people wanting to get rich. A higher tax rate actually benefits them because they already have their money. Keeps their competition down.

Libbies don't understand any of this because they are morons.

I wouldn't believe one thing Kiyosaki says. I doubt the guy has much money at all at this point. This is Kiyosaki, "Silver is my #1 investment!"

http://www.newsmax.com/Manage/Videos/VideoGallery/Kiyosaki--Silver-is-My--1-Investment/

How's that working out for him. LOL.

Here's Sanders tax plan:

http://time.com/4194179/bernie-sanders-tax-plan/

"It's a very, very, very big tax increase for everyone except those at the bottom."

A study says his tax plan would mean a:

"17.91% lower after-tax income for the wealthiest Americans"

Reminder: this will make billionaires even more rich compared to everyone else. Their tax increase is 0% because they are talking about an increase on "income taxes"

Want to increase income inequality? Go with that stupid fucking plan.

This is what the nitwit press says in the article:

"What’s clear is that those at the very top of the income ladder would definitely feel the Bern the most."

Yeah, not so much you fucking moron.