2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Akrasia

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I saw that analysis and there is a gaping hole in their figures. They include a reduction in the health insurance tax deductible as an increase in tax, but they don't consider the fact that people and businesses would no longer have to pay health insurance premiums.

Increases in social insurance taxes are more than offset by the reduction in other health care costs.

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

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo

Interesting article, that consolidates much of what I've been saying here lately:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/03/the-gop-s-crump-cancer.html

Skylinehead

Rand Paul has dropped out.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Skylinehead

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Aye I liked a lot of his policies, one of the only Republicans I'd contemplate voting for (if I was in the States obviously....). He seems to want to concentrate on keeping his Senate seat.

ancapailldorcha

Skylinehead wrote: »

Rand Paul has dropped out.

A shame. I found him to be grounded, reasonable and articulate. A nice counterweight to blowhards Trump and Cruz.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

well, he's losing Iowa.

Iowa always picks losers. We all know Ted Cruz can't win. He owes about 4 of those delegates to Trump whose policies he copied. And Iowa is not a winner takes all state so Trump is one delegate behind Cruz effectively.

walshyn93

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/268014-trump-accuses-cruz-of-illegal-iowa-win-in-deleted-tweet#

Okay, even I think he's jumping the shark here. But it's more likely a ploy to keep Rubio out of the headlines.

walshyn93

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/268014-trump-accuses-cruz-of-illegal-iowa-win-in-deleted-tweet#

Okay, even I think he's jumping the shark here. But it's more likely a ploy to keep Rubio out of the headlines.

oscarBravo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They don't really have another obvious GOP candidate, do they? As in, they'll disperse quietly across the next-least-worst candidates according to their personal preferences, or - like you - go all-out for the Libertarian party.

Quin_Dub

walshyn93 wrote: »

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/268014-trump-accuses-cruz-of-illegal-iowa-win-in-deleted-tweet#

Okay, even I think he's jumping the shark here. But it's more likely a ploy to keep Rubio out of the headlines.

Trump is Trump , but there might be something to the claims being made..

I saw a few comments about Cruz campaign staff announcing that Carson had withdrawn shortly before the votes in a number of places...

Not sure about legality etc. but not great optics one way or the other if true..

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Akrasia

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Your employer will be paying increased social insurance payments to cover your health costs. your health insurance will no longer be directly linked to your employment (so lets say your employer goes bankrupt, you still get to have cancer treatment if you need it)

The reduced cost to the employer for paying private health insurance for employees will be offset by an increase in payroll tax by 6.2%. Your contribution will be 2.2% in additional tax, and this will be further topped up by increasing taxes on the very wealthy.

Single payer universal health insurance with universal access is also a lot cheaper to administer than the system America has at the moment. American spending on healthcare is so ridiculously higher than European countries. 17% of GDP versus 11%. in 2012. There is huge room for efficiency in the U.S. system.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Overheal

That's curious since Bernie has a number of major Union endorsements.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What rate did they set? I recall Sanders is talking about a .3% rate. Is that enough to get traders to pack up and run?

Overheal

Regardless, losing Iowa has caused Trump to melt down.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/02/03/donald-trump-twitter-says-cruz-stole-iowa-calls-caucus-results-be-nullified

an earlier version of one of his comments said cruz "illegally stole" Iowa. He wants the entire Caucus to be nullified and redone :rolleyes:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Maybe that's why Average Joe harbours resentment towards Wall Street. It's a bit "heads I win, tails you lose", isn't it?

Overheal

I find it baffling that a fractional tax percentage is enough for these guys to pack up and leave.

Additionally to that, I find it harder to believe they would leave Wall Street vs. a smaller market. But sure if they do, screw em.

Akrasia

Would anyone really miss the high frequency traders?

All they seem to add is volatility to the marketplace

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Overheal

The point I'm trying to make here is that if you screw Wall Street, you don't just screw Wall Street. You screw everybody.

Then perhaps we need an economy that doesn't depend on Wall Street if they can hold the country ransom and pay nothing back.

walshyn93

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Trump is Trump , but there might be something to the claims being made..

I saw a few comments about Cruz campaign staff announcing that Carson had withdrawn shortly before the votes in a number of places...

Not sure about legality etc. but not great optics one way or the other if true..

Okay now I understand why people get Trump wrong all the time. I just had a look at what he actually said in his speech and the tone is the exact opposite of what I thought. He really is someone you need to hear in his own words to get.

eire4

AbusesToilets wrote: »

After 8 years of the Republicans efforts, I would imagine Democrats would be less than motivated to support any legislative efforts of a Republican President.

Congressmen are barely in the door before they have to worry about re-election, which only increases their dependence and susceptibility to private money. Promotes short term thinking and a need to stiff the opposition.

No question your right about the house members constantly having to be on the take due to how short their terms are. The flood of money into the house plus the massive amount of gerrymandered districts have created a house that is largely bought and paid for and certainly not interested in anything that is in the publics best interests unless that just happens to coincide with whomever has paid for said house members to be elected which is naturally a pretty rare occurance.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

I know that congress and senate elections are notoriously difficult to call in advance because they're so personality driven, but I find it hard to imagine why neutral or even moderate people would vote for many of the incumbent republican candidates given their disgraceful behaviour over the last number of years.

How could a politician stand for re-election on the platform that they will do everything possible to stop the government from functioning if there is a Democrat president.

The government shutdown in 2014 and the brinkmanship in 2015 affected millions of people directly.

I know electorates are a strange bunch that defy logic a lot of the time, but that kind of clowning around has to cost them some support?

You would think so. But so many house districts are gerrymadered that incumbents can pretty much say and do whatever they want and they will still get elected. Plus there is the fact that so many Americans have just checked out and or given up on the system which is so clearly corrupted and dysfunctional. The 2014 midterms had a turnout of just 34%. Presidential year turnout has not even hit 60% since the 1960's. We in Ireland obviously have a general election coming up in a few weeks. The turnout last time in 2011.... was 70%!