Not to the average citizen, to the top 1%. "Ninety-nine percent of all new income generated today goes to the top 1 percent. The top one-tenth of 1 percent owns as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. Does anybody think this is the kind of economy we should have. Do we think it's moral?"
That doesn't prove anything. He's talking about a very small % of the country (of which, you nor anyone who has ever posted on this board or ever will, belongs to) paying that amount on money made above a certain amount. Try to actually listen to the videos you link and read the articles, instead of just doing a search for shit on youtube or google and reading the headlines/titles.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-details-tax-plan Bernie wants to Increase capital gains to 39.6% for all. The current capital gains is 20% for upper 30% income and 15% lower Anyone selling their homes or stocks will pay 19.6-24.6% more taxes. So just don't sell your homes
If he wants to increase capital gains to 39.6%, that is increasing taxes across the board. Also, if you look at his detailed tax plan, there are subsidies he is taking out that effects everyone on their write offs.
I think you are misusing statistics. There is no free lunch. A 90% tax rate on Bill Gates would have netted the government $900K when he was CEO of Microsoft. If the government is going to spend $8T instead of $4T, everyone will see their taxes double. No matter how progressive the tax brackets are. The 74% top tax bracket in the Carter years didn't give us a surplus, or pay for a single thing Sanders deems "good" for the collective.
But isn't that on the current budget? I would think implementing even more welfare, it would at least go up to triple wouldn't it?
Spend $4T now, 25% of gdp (federal portion). To spend 50% of gdp, they'd spend $8T, or double. To spend double, they need to tax double or borrow $4T a year (not possible), or print $4T in new money.
I didn't misuse anything, I explained the statement you made. "Sanders wants a 90% tax rate, it's well documented." That was vague and not accurate. Listen Mags and Denny, I'm not defending Sanders. I do like him being in the race. He has brought important issues into the presidential discussion. So has Trump. All I'm saying is lets talk about the specific issues they are campaigning on instead of the weird shit your pants rhetoric. I am relieved that some in here have learned the difference between communism, socialism and democratic socialism. That is actually a huge step forward in discussing who these candidates are and the issues they are running on.
He referenced Eisenhower, he said for the top 1% he didn't think redistribution of wealth was necessarily wrong..he wasn't proposing it.
It's funny how someone who has claimed he'd vote for Bernie if Trump wasn't the republican nomination, seems to be all about throwing out the talking points that the other republicans would use against him if he wins the nomination.
I would absolutely want Bernie over Hillary and rather someone that isn't bought off by lobbyist and special interest groups over anyone else. It goes Trump, Carson then Bernie for me
