2016 Presidential Elections in the US

And anyone who lies doesn't have an agenda?


A study says that if we taxed the 1% at 100% - meaning we took all the earnings from income, capital gains, etc. for top 1%, it would only pay for either - medicare for 3 years OR eliminate the existing student loans.
This of course is assuming that all of the 1% would willingly give up 100% of their earnings for the year and not try to hide their money or move out of the country. Second, it would only sustain obamacare for 3 years - but what about the years after that and what about the fact that this figure is simply impossible? As far as education, okay so it would eliminate all the existing student loans, but libs want to make college free - who's going to pay for this? The 1%?

Mathematics is the best weapon against liberals. It's not too hard to show that their plans of free healthcare, free education, etc. are mathematically impossible.

The only one that COULD work is the $15 minimum wage - if phased in gradually over a few years. However, this would make goods extremely expensive and force small businesses in hospitality and the food and beverage industry to lay off workers. For example, a big mac - just the hamburger not the meal - would cost between $7.50 to $8.00.

The liberals argue - oh well in 1968 workers had a minimum wage that is worth over $10 now. Well, they chose that one specific year because it's an outlier. If you look at the any other years they are close to what the minimum wage is right now. Even when minimum wage was first established, i think it was like 15 cents, it's the same as $3 an hour in today's money. I'm all for raising the minimum wage because it is really low... but $15 immediately is going to totally destroy business.

These people want $15 immediately for flipping burgers and pressing buttons on a McDonald's cash register that is basically a glorified kid's toy. I mean any idiot can operate it as the freakin' meals and choices are spelled and shown in pictures - and even still they get it wrong! Yet they demand $15 an hour for a job that is meant to be filled be part time high school students and people without any education and no skills - but now people have turned this into life long careers and they demand good money due to their poor life choices and lack of advancing their lives.

Interesting, Johnny, how the statue of limitations (ever so CONVENIENTLY!!!!) runs out on Republicans, but not on Democrats:-)
lol

I suppose if, e.g. Tony Wiener, had been a Republican and found "guilty" of the same pervy pranks, then the Dems, not to mention his own, would have jumped all over him, eh?

Fat chance, kiddo!!!

@Adrian,

My response to your mathematical counter post is to quote Sir Winston Churchill (or was it Disraeli?): "There are lies, there are damned lies, and then there are statistics!"

Motto of the story. It's always easy to lie with stats and by overpowering the other side with mind-bending numbers, is nothing more than courtroom-style bullying one's opponent into submission. One can justify almost any dastardly deed by countering with figures so that one is left bewildered and confused and therefore not able to properly fight back, having been dazed by a barrage of self-serving nonsense:-)

Is it because you can't come up with numbers to support your claims? Please prove to me how free college education and free healthcare for everyone are economically viable?


If it wasn't for math, we wouldn't have rockets, escalators, iphones, or even the keyboard you're typing on. Don't think math is awesome? Take the stairs next time you have to walk up 10 stories - and even that required basic math to build.

Yes, statistics can be manipulated in just about anyway and I know this because I took statistics courses and use some statistics in my job. This is why people shouldn't believe commercials that cite statistics. This wouldn't actually be very complicated though and require 1st year statistics and a $100 TI-89 to solve.

You can first use linear extrapolation to estimate the sum of gradual tax increases on ALL taxpayers beyond current rates - i.e. taxing everyone 10% more the first year, 10% more the second, till you reach 100% or if you prefer use logistic regression to estimate taxes raised by decreasing taxes for the 99% further but massively taxing the 1% more over time - as the liberals wish to do. Drastically raising taxes for everyone would make this model work, although with drastic outliers, but the taxing of only the 1% while lowering taxes for the rest would not. You can then also use extrapolation to estimate the gradual costs of cancelling student loans, free healthcare, and free tuition, plus let's say minus say military spending. You can then use data points from each extrapolation model in a matrix to create a regression model and see that this would only be possible with outliers, meaning the extrapolation tax model's data points where you tax everyone at much higher rates gradually COULD work in the regression model compared with data points of gradually increasing costs of free healthcare, free educations, etc. but with very high, unusual numbers - the model would show that people would have to either make way more money, be taxed at way higher rates with a break even point in the middle to account for the model of free heatlhcare, free college, etc. So yes, for example if everyone in the US was making $1 million a year and 75% of that was taken by the government, yes it could certainly work mathematically. Of course, this would not work in the real world. There would be no real world tax increases on income that would be able to pay for free tuition, free healthcare, and cancelling student loans while decreasing military spending (which is rather small when compared to even social security payments in a year for example). Unless, of course the government does this anyway, raises taxes immediately as a sort of 'down payment' and just votes to raise the debt even further which further weakens the US dollar. I guess yes, with kick the can down the road politics like we've had under Obama, maybe if you triple the debt yet again then it may work.

The math would prove that liberal's love of free everything is simply an unrealistic dream and could never happen in the real world. This is why I break it down into more simple terms for people who don't really understand extrapolation, linear interpolation, regression analysis, or other aspects of statistics.

In simple speak, using just the cancelling debt example the following would be true - considering the government collects just over $3 trillion in taxes and cancelling student loans is estimated to cost $1 trillion, the US would have to essentially not spend a single dollar on social security and the military for a year, OR, raise taxes on everyone by roughly 33%. This is just cancelling the current student loan debt - what about providing free tuition (of course the schools will raise tuition rates if they know the government is going to pay it), providing free health care for everyone, providing $15 wages for everyone, and all the other 'free' things that taxpayers would have to fund but libs demand for free? In addition of course to the already $70+ trillion debt we have as the $19 trillion doesn't include non funded pensions and many other obligations. To basically dig ourselves out of this hole, everyone would basically have to pay 100% more taxes than they do right now for about 12 years just to pay off this debt. You don't think people would hide their money and the rich wouldn't leave America if that happened? They're already leaving with far lower taxes than my extreme example - but again, these are napkin mathematic examples that would be needed to justify what the liberals want.

Living in fairy land and quoting dead people isn't going to change the situation. However, I will counter your quote with one of mine that describes the situation quite nicely: "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

Works just fine in Poland. You're always talking about how great Poland is...

Exactly - because you don't have 100 million people out of the labor force. You don't have generation after generation living off welfare demanding food stamps, housing, healthcare, and all sorts of other nonsense for free. People actually work in Poland - even if its for a small wage.

Adrian, the Nazis too took their math ultra seriously indeed, deliniating with clinical clarity, casting the "objective" (MY FOOT!!!!!) lasar beam of (pseudo-)science to justify the most murderous, thuggish, malevolent regime known to man. Himmler, Eichmann above all, and his boss Heydrich prided themselves in fact on a Germanically thorough reading of Herr Kant, who roughly stated in his Critique of Pure Reason that empathy, emotion and compassion have zero place in a rational universe:-)

Guess if you slavishly follow statistics and construct a solely mathematical government, any sort of help is, a la Scrooge (in whose morality tale, he eventually learned the penny-wise and pound-foolishness of his wayward ways), "stealing" someone else's hard-won bread, and therefore, punishable.

An even-keel course set by a caring, if prudent, administration, uses its powers to dole out as carefully as its abilty and strength to reign in excess spending which is truly excess.

The best way for someone to ignore the agony around them is to claim tough love. "I let my son die in a tenement whilst I made billions, because it was his choice to be miserable and not figure out how to get mega rich mega quick!"

If that's not self-rationalization, I don't know my own name!

...except we do.

Numbers are pretty much broadly comparable. I don't remember the exact amount, but it was something between 17-18 million were economically productive in Poland out of an estimated population of 38.53 million. It's about 43-44% anyway. In the US, about 37% are economically productive, but bear in mind that your life expectancy is higher by about 3 years and your birth rate is also about 25% higher.

And yes, there are generations that live off social funding. You should be familiar with the flats around Nowy Targ in Wrocław - there are generations of people living there that rely entirely on social help. They don't pay the administration bills, they don't pay rent- - nothing.

Margaret Thatcher, a basically intelligent, if unimaginative, leader, made one flagrant error in her snide crack about the failings of socialism, namely, it is NOT "someone else's" money the state is using, it is by definition EVERYONE'S money, as the government is essentially supported by taxpayer funds, therefore legally a dependent of the nation:-)

A lot of these ultra rich people and companies don't even pay their share of tax. If they did economies would improve and there certainly would be more money. Its been allowed to happen here and in usa also. They are just starting to crack down on it here. Just one of those people brought to account pays 100s if not more peoples healthcare. Before you start bashing the poor how about we collect that above from all the slimes that owe it and see if there isn't enough money.

You see, the entire question as to what exactly constitutes one's "fair share" is at the heart of the gaping divide between the Trump/Cruz vs. the Clinton/Sanders team!

In my opinion, any sort of capitalism is intrinsically "unfair", as it isn't designed (fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be) for the benefit of the wage-earner, but almost solely for the exclusive benefit of the owner.

Although I don't believe that this is as things should be (not being a fatalist, but a determinist by nature), this IS by and large the way things are and almost always have been in the US, save for that all too brief shining moment between approx. 1946-1962 thereabouts, known forever as the New Deal! This was when people who were NOT mega rich could still enjoy their piece of the American Dream without fear of economic reprisals from an ever more punitive and mean-spirited government!

The rates are around 54-56% in Poland - they're not in the 40's. Also, many people are employed in more traditional jobs like even selling blueberries along the highway in rural parts and may not get counted as being in the labor force. Bartering, trade, market stalls, and bazaars are still a big part of Poland. However, yes, there are people living off the government in Poland - but not nearly as much as in the US and the costs of providing for these people are far, far lower. Also, I highly doubt 1/5 Poles are on food stamps or the equivalent like in the US

In the US, there is well over 100 million out of the labor force. Then add the 70 million children, 40 million retirees, some estimated 60 million people making less than $12 an hour (or whatever the figure was that the $15 a wage movement was citing that's in poverty), all the part time people then you start seeing why it's impossible to provide for all these people - especially with the high cost of living in the US. If a person can barely provide for himself at $10 an hour, how are they going to provide for someone else - especially if there's 60 million people like this individual? 47% of Americans don't pay any sort of federal income taxes. There simply is too few people in the labor force and those people are making too little money to support the rest of society.

I recently read some numbers stating that after WW2, there was some 40 workers to support every 1 person on social security. Now, it's closer to something like 3 workers supporting 1 person on social security.


Yeah try telling Stalin or Mao that they're your dependent and see how quickly you'd end up in gulag. Yes, the money is the people's - your absolutely right. However, as we have seen in Russia and Mao's China, the way the government collects money and owns all capital of the country - they redistribute it with terrible inefficiency. If Socialism was so great, then Russia and China wouldn't of changed their models. Even North Korea is gradually allowed free market microeconomic reform and farms to keep some of their harvest because it can't even provide food for its people.

I'm all for helping people in need out, but the problem is too many people are just too lazy to go to wokr because they know they're not going to make much money. Even stupid people can do a basic pro and con analysis - should I go to work and make maybe $13,000 a year at best or should I sit at home and have my rent, food, and healthcare paid for and receive around $8k cash a year for free?

And while you're condeming the moochers, eternal freeloaders, cuckolds and just plain bums (and rightly so, I might add), you and others like you, risk thowing the perennial baby out with the proverbial bathwater!!! For every one of the above, there is one who honestly needs a helping hand.

One can rationalize with statistics and sliderules and percentages all one wants, the "real" world is complicated and for the most part doesn't fit into a simple category:-)

You're right - that's why the BLS groups the 'out of labor force' into many different categories - disabled, veteran, taking care of kids, in school/training - however, the largest group stated simply that 'they don't want a job': you can view this by googling 'bls don't want a job' and various charts will come up. even just my gender - men... well, according to the BLS, there's over 30 million men over 16 that simply don't want a job..beta.bls.gov/dataViewer/view/timeseries/LNU05027043Q

I posted the entire chart a couple weeks back but it was something liek 70-80 million people out of the 100 million (the rest being sick, disabled, discouraged over job prosects, in school/training, taking care of family) simply stated their main reason for not being in the labor force is that they don't want a job.

Those are the people who don't deserve a helping hand.

Quite so! Such are the ones who abuse a perfectly, reasonably humane, system of social welfare and spoil it for the rest of those who are earnestly in dire straights. I know of someone who cajoled a local politico round about twenty some odd years back into having this person declared "obsessive-compulsive", thus entitled to "FREE BENEFITS FROM NY STATE FOR THE REST OF HIS NATURAL LIFE!!!!"

I'm paying for this buzzard every time I spend a buck for a cup of coffee.
To a judge I will gladly say: Your Honor, throw the book at him!

The new Rasmussen poll puts Trump ahead of Hilary

rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39

Let's only pray someone read it wrong:-)

Economically though, Trump might well be better for the markets (therefore, for the country) than Cruz, who'd doubtless plunge the nation into a second Great Depression for some two decades!

In the end, Hillary's the only choice as Sanders is simply too vague and kumbaya-liberal for most people...including yours truly!

Simply because he knows that the nomination is all but won, so he can drop the nasty language now. I fully expect him to start using the language of inclusiveness once he seals the nomination - it's pretty obvious that his rhetoric was simply to appeal to the Angry Southern Republican Alex Jones Vote, nothing else.

Sorry there, Delph, but for my money, it ain't over till the fat lady singsLOL

Jeez, I hope not, the thought of that smug Cruz going anywhere near the Presidency disgusts me.

Hey, I'm on your side! He repulses me.

He wins Indian he's won the primary.
President Trump is going to chew Hillary up and spit her out.
Trump has so much ammunition to work with on all her failures and scandals.
And Buddy he ain't gonna show no mercy on the old girl.
I think Trump should start by asking her about campaigning on equal pay for women when she pays her female staff less then she pays her male staff.
Could you please explain that Crooked Hillary ?
Then hit her in the gut with Benghanzi and losing 500 million in cash that just mysteriously disappeared while she was Secretary of State.
Oh the Trumpster is going to have a ball tearing that witch up.
More popcorn please.

Frankly, I think the qualities you mention are going to be just the things which will hurt him as we inch closer to November!!
Even his nemisis "Lyin'" Ted, confessed that he is sick and tired of Trump's negative devisiveness.

Anyhow, Hillary will make mince-meat out of the old boy just the way Biden trounced Ryan in 2012:-)

Oh, and hold the butter! The best is yet to comeLOL

"Frankly I think" means the same thing as "Frankly I hope".
Trump is way ahead of Cruz out on the Left Coast.
Donald Trump is leading Ted Cruz by a whopping 34 percentage points - 54%-20% -- among likely Republican voters in California, a Survey USA poll for KUSA found.

Poor Joe Biden was/is the laughing stock of America.
See Lyzko I am a Conservative Constitutionalist.
The Constitution is what made America the most powerful country in the world.
You liberals want to change and bastardize the Constitution in the name of "Progressivism".
With your Progressivism we loose more of our freedoms and the country is being destroyed little by little with it.
The people of this country (especially the Christians) have had a belly full of your Political Correctness.
Trump is representing what the guts of this country stands for and what it was built on.
The pansy asses are scared to death that FINALLY America will be great again and not give in to what has destroyed this country.
Bust up the teachers union and get some conservative teachers in our schools would be a great start.
If you can afford cable t.v., pets, cigarettes, drugs, booze, a leased vehicle, season pass to sport events......then you can afford to buy your own groceries and pay for your own health care. OUCH ! How cruel.........
President Trump will undue ever illegal executive order Obama signed his first week in office.
Hopefully he will require every citizen to have gun training and to own a gun. :-)
Women want equal rights then give them a draft card.
Nothing would do my heart happier then to see Obama's daughter's in the infantry of the U.S. Army.
And for the finale indict Crooked Hillary and put her wrinkled up old ass in prison where she belongs.
That's what I think.
Oh, and double butter for me. lol

Vote on line Lyzko.
Vote on weather Hillary should be locked up for her crimes and then get the results of how America has voted.
Vote here:
therighttobear.com/Polls/hillary/?utm_source=GoogleHillaryPoll&utm_campaign=GoogleHillaryPoll2016

How's the whether down there, Johnny O?

I don't know weather you're in earnest or not:-)

I'm a constitutionalist as well and I believe that it exists to protect people like me and even folks like you!

Apparently you did catch that Ryan/Biden debate in '12! I sure did and then ask yourself; who's the laughing stock now?
lol

PS
Your post indicates that you're looking to go BACK, rather than forward in time! Roosevelt represented progress whereas you represent regress with a capital RE!!!

Someone like you who voted for Obama twice maybe better that you sit this one out.

I like everyone else make typo's too.
Only President Trump is perfect.

The problem is that there is far more of those free loaders than those who actually deserve welfare. I believe somewhere around 80 million stated that they are out of the labor force because they simply 'don't want a job.' 45%-47% of the US population don't pay federal income taxes - so it's up to the 53%-55% to pay for these people.

The US is really is a bad spot - politically, socially, economically - just everything. We have a powerful military, yes, but we've become a 2nd rate nation. Quite frankly, I don't think a person as scandal-ridden as Hillary is going to be the one to fix it and neither is a person like Bernie who wants free health care, free education, $15 wages but can't show how this would be paid for - well, because it's mathematically impossible.

I really see things getting even worse up until the election - and who knows what's going to happen.. Thankfully, I can always move to Poland and be quite comfortable - but not everyone has that option.

Since I'm voting for Hillary rather than Bernie, I don't think it makes much difference because Trump's gonna lose!!

See, you like millions of other brainwashed suckers out there have a simple lack of empathy. Not only G-d, guns, and guts build a nation, but compassion as well. America is our home, not merely a house constructed by her founders:

"Build your house with brick and wood, but build your home with love."

I find it interesting that the people who tell me that Donald Trump would be a bad president are the same people who told me that Barrack Obama would be a good president. :-/

Enabling people to continue to be losers is not love.