Seems by that chart the only winners under Bernie are mostly endorsing Hillary as those who are totally on the dole and pay nothing and earn nothing. We are royally screwed.
yeah, I'm still ambivalent about the net effects of the family/medial leave program...for sure, the positive and negative long-term consequences are difficult to quantify...currently, i'm comfortable paying $1.61 a week for the benefit it will provide because i think the net effect will be positive for our society (in many ways).
the only way the health care plan will cost you more money is if (a) you currently pay virtually nothing for health care (i.e., including premiums, medications, deductibles, co-pays, etc.), and (b) you never need expensive health care (e.g., major surgery, cancer treatment, heart treatment, palliative care, etc.)...for the overwhelming majority of americans, that isn't the case. this plan also allows our medical system to transition from a treatment based system to a more preventative based system, which will in itself save (everyone) a lot of money
there isn't any evidence that the other programs will result in "passed down costs"...similarly to minimum wage increases, although this is an intuitive conclusion, in practice it doesn't happen (mostly because of the highly competitive free market we enjoy).
bombing oil supply lines is exactly what Trump advocated long before any other candidate .. my only question is why did it take so long???
Please post your source documents that prove this.
Because after all, the Obamacare penalties weren't a punitive tax, but then presto changeo! They suddenly were!
Farmer with the mic drop...
UT next? Sure. Now tell me what a bastion of conservatism it is. lol
I also dropped my mic when I first saw that pretty graph...just look at the great use of contrasting blues, and nice choice of font also. I mean, who could argue with those numbers, right? Well, for starters, anyone serious about trying to understand the plans, proposals, and policies (and I realize that most people on this forum are not). Too bad it's not just laughable propaganda, but it's an outright lie. That's not, in any way, reflective of how Bernie's proposals actually work; and is in every way purposely misleading. I have to give them credit though; they are using simple psychological principles to persuade people, and seem to be doing it effectively...lmao. Vox is relying on the fact the most people won't put much thought into it (or any, for that matter). The graph incorrectly presents Bernie's proposed income tax brackets, and also fails to mention these are marginal tax rates, not actual. More problematic though, then it presents all the new monies needed as being funded by income and payroll taxes (which is totally misleading and mostly false, especially the bit about payroll taxes), and fails to mention the net income savings that will result. In short, Bernie's proposals specifically state they will be funded by x, y, and z sources...and the Vox graph says, "oh look! Bernie's proposals will be funded with a, b, and c sources that you will directly pay for" (i.e., blatant lies, given it's actually x, y, and z sources).
I don't agree with all of Bernie's proposals, ideas, and arguments. But if we're going to have a serious discussion about them, it'll require moving beyond the "oh look, free stuff!" and "it's all just socialist commie BS anyway" level of argumentation, and digging into the mechanics of the ideas and proposals. I'll certainly welcome and enjoy those types of discussions.
Of course, this is all simply my ignorance of Vox. That explains their rhetoric and lies. You're making this too easy...lmfao.So your position is that the conservative bastion known as VOX has skewed information in this graph against Bernie? Me thinks you haven't a clue from what perspective VOX reports from. (Hint: It isn't right wing.)
Enter your email address to join: