Tim Duncan endorses Mike Bloomberg for president (with commercial) [Archive] - Page 2

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 10:36 PM

Are you arguing 300k salary or household income. A single person on 300k should be fine but a family on 300k can certainly struggle depending on where they live. It really isn't that hard to fathom when a place like silicon valley's median home price is something like 1.5M.
yeah, and a household earning 300k a year would still be in the 96th percentile of households and the typical rule of thumb is spending something like 28% of your income on housing. well, that would be 7k per month for a 300,000 earner, which is going to be good enough to get you a 1.5 million dollar home without stretching your budget.

As far as frowning on people who make more money I'm not referring to you specifically but isn't that the entire basis of Bernie's campaign of attacking millionaires and billionaires (when in reality it'll also attack middle class families as well)?
thats a bit of an oversimplification. i never picked up the sense that bernie's gripe was with the fact that some people make a lot of money (he has even talked about how much money he made from his book sales)... it's that the system we have in place (tax code, etc) serves to disproportionately benefit those people that dont really need all that much help. his gripe with "billionaahs" is that they have too much of a say in how those structures are put in place, by influencing politicians with huge contributions, and inherently, the threat of cutting funding (or funding opponents) if they dont continue to play ball. the role they play in special interest groups that largely dictate policy.

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 10:37 PM

really? i could have sworn you just said his policies attack the middle class and millionaires. how is that to his benefit?

He's made a lot of money as a politician has he not?

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 10:38 PM

He's made a lot of money as a politician has he not?
how is raising taxes on himself benefitting himself?

i mean if your claim is he wants to be president for the primary purpose of the $400,000.00 salary that comes with it (and therefore benefitting himself) then that would disqualify just about everybody who ever ran for president :lol

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 10:51 PM

yeah, and a household earning 300k a year would still be in the 96th percentile of households and the typical rule of thumb is spending something like 28% of your income on housing. well, that would be 7k per month for a 300,000 earner, which is going to be good enough to get you a 1.5 million dollar home without stretching your budget.

And what happens if they lose their source of income for a few months? Are they going to be that comfortable vs someone who owns a 100k-200k home making 50-60k. As I said it's all relative, a person making 1/6th the money can be in a much better financial footing. But it's ok we can agree to disagree on this since we're talking extreme situations.

thats a bit of an oversimplification. i never picked up the sense that bernie's gripe was with the fact that some people make a lot of money (he has even talked about how much money he made from his book sales)... it's that the system we have in place (tax code, etc) serves to disproportionately benefit those people that dont really need all that much help. his gripe with "billionaahs" is that they have too much of a say in how those structures are put in place, by influencing politicians with huge contributions, and inherently, the threat of cutting funding (or funding opponents) if they dont continue to play ball. the role they play in special interest groups that largely dictate policy.

He's proposing a wealth tax among many other things so I disagree.

But given a fresh slate what would you consider a fair tax code?

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 10:56 PM

how is raising taxes on himself benefitting himself?

i mean if your claim is he wants to be president for the primary purpose of the $400,000.00 salary that comes with it (and therefore benefitting himself) then that would disqualify just about everybody who ever ran for president :lol

He is running for president not dictator, the odds of him passing his agenda, is very low. Even AOC has acknowledged M4A isn't likely. So he gets to profit from his ideas (you already pointed out his book sales), just like AOC has propelled herself by being outlandish. If he really wants to help others he could do so right now, with his own money, just like many other very wealthy people.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:01 PM

He is running for president not dictator, the odds of him passing his agenda, is very low. Even AOC has acknowledged M4A isn't likely. So he gets to profit from his ideas (you already pointed out his book sales), just like AOC has propelled herself by being outlandish. If he really wants to help others he could do so right now, with his own money, just like many other very wealthy people.
donating money from his own account would pale in comparison to passing legislation that changes the entire landscape. its a weak talking point, in my honest opinion

Nathan89

02-20-2020, 11:05 PM

who do his policies stand to benefit?

His policies will ruin America just like they did Sweden as I already mentioned. So I guess China would be a big winner along with many other countries.

The fact that he's encouraging illegals to come here for healthcare now and generally seems to have flipped on his position that 'open borders is a Koch brothers proposal" shows he's not trying to benefit Americans.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:09 PM

And what happens if they lose their source of income for a few months? Are they going to be that comfortable vs someone who owns a 100k-200k home making 50-60k. As I said it's all relative, a person making 1/6th the money can be in a much better financial footing. But it's ok we can agree to disagree on this since we're talking extreme situations.
then they're no longer 300k per year earners as we contemplated, so it completely changes the equation. anybody who loses a job while they have pending mortgage payments is facing jeopardy. its also why you dont want to stretch it so thin such that you are living paycheck to paycheck. if you aren't able to put away money into a rainy day fund because your mortgage is too high, then you bought too much home. dave ramsey 101.

if you choose to live in an exorbitantly expensive area, then you have to adjust accordingly. maybe that person should have only gotten a 1.3 million dollar home instead of 1.5. they'd still be able to live comfortably even if they have slightly smaller bedrooms and maybe one less walk-in closet

He's proposing a wealth tax among many other things so I disagree.

But given a fresh slate what would you consider a fair tax code?
i disagree that taxation on income/wealth amounts to an attack on income/wealth.

i think we need far more tax brackets. right now, the highest bracket for people filing jointly is 612k and up. i think its absurd to tax a household earning 700k at the same rate that you would tax a household earning 70 mil per year.

i think a wealth tax on extreme wealth is a good idea. policy generally incentivizes what is considered "good behavior." its why you get certain tax benefits when you get married, and its why charitable donations can be written off. we recognize that marriage provides stability, and that giving to charity is good, so the government treats it as such in the tax code. similarly we shouldnt be incentivizing people to just sit on massive hordes of money (warren's proposal is for people who have 50 mil or more of wealth). better to have that money circulated and stimulate the economy. and taking 2% of your wealth that exceeds 50 mil is going to have zero impact on your standard of living, so in the scheme of things, its no skin off your back tbh

people should absolutely be allowed to and incentivized to save money (see my earlier point above) but when you reach those 10s of millions, it no longer serves that purpose.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:11 PM

His policies will ruin America just like they did Sweden as I already mentioned. So I guess China would be a big winner along with many other countries.

The fact that he's encouraging illegals to come here for healthcare now and generally seems to have flipped on his position that 'open borders is a Koch brothers proposal" shows he's not trying to benefit Americans.
so you think that the beneficiary of guaranteeing health care to everybody in the US is china

duncan2k5

02-20-2020, 11:11 PM

At least he didn’t endorse Bernie tbh.

I do follow politics and picnroll is right on. Bernie has zero chance of winning the general election electorally.

Woke leftists have purity tested all the rational candidates out of the race, so ironically they’ve opened the door for Bloomberg who out of everybody left, probably fares best against Trump.

Ur political analysis is so bad I can't wait to laugh at this when the election is over

duncan2k5

02-20-2020, 11:12 PM

More than one person can beat Trump. How anyone, especially people of color, can have an issue with Trump and then support Bloomberg is beyond me, but I digress.

Black ppl HATE Bloomberg...the guy has zero chance of winning

Gibbz

02-20-2020, 11:14 PM

It sucks seeing these Timmy ads tbh

daslicer

02-20-2020, 11:16 PM

It sucks seeing these Timmy ads tbh

Just saw his commercial now while watching the Rox-Warriors game. :lol I always wanted Duncan to get national exposure but not this type of exposure.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:16 PM

Black ppl HATE Bloomberg...the guy has zero chance of winning
seeing bloomberg get his shit pushed on yesterday was cathartic

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 11:16 PM

donating money from his own account would pale in comparison to passing legislation that changes the entire landscape. its a weak talking point, in my honest opinion

What is stopping him from doing both? It's not a weak talking point when we see the billionaires he continually demonizes have committed to donating a large amount of their wealth. It's a valid question that is deflected because there isn't a good reason for why he hasn't done it.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:17 PM

It sucks seeing these Timmy ads tbh
eh, he can have whatever political views he wants. we love him as the basketball player/teammate/franchise player. dont have to agree with him on everything

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:23 PM

What is stopping him from doing both? It's not a weak talking point when we see the billionaires he continually demonizes have committed to donating a large amount of their wealth. It's a valid question that is deflected because there isn't a good reason for why he hasn't done it.
nothing is stopping him. could he give more? yeah, sure. i dont think its particularly relevant when it comes to his policy.

his biggest sticking point is wanting to guarantee healthcare to everybody. there's no donation he could give that's going to help that situation. that change can only be made through policy

he thinks the minimum wage should be higher (i personally disagree with a $15 minimum wage). nothing he donates would help that situation. would have to come through policy

on climate change... yeah he flies in private jets. is that hypocritical? somewhat. but the scope of good that can be made through policy is immeasurable. if he decided to only ride bicycles everywhere from now on, its not going to get us to where we need to be. its going to have to come from a much larger scale policy

bernie thinks that the tax code is unnecessarily kind to the wealthy. how is his decision to donate more money going to change that? it's not

you want to say there is some hypocrisy in the way he lives now? thats fine. but if he's sincere about the policies he wants to pass (and given his decades long track record of saying the same thing, i see no reason to believe that he's been lying this whole time), then thats what i'll measure him by when deciding who to vote for

im not going to convince you that his positions are right/wrong. you have your opinions and are entitled to them. i just dont think that the particular criticism is worthy of consideration in deciding who to vote for

Nathan89

02-20-2020, 11:24 PM

so you think that the beneficiary of guaranteeing health care to everybody in the US is china

I said nothing about healthcare. You ask who his policies would benefit. I answered.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:25 PM

I said nothing about healthcare. You ask who his policies would benefit. I answered.
healthcare is his seminal policy issue

DPG21920

02-20-2020, 11:25 PM

Not sure why people make fun of his height, tbh, extremely short people can be very smart. Look at DPG...

Truth + Facts

DPG21920

02-20-2020, 11:26 PM

Black ppl HATE Bloomberg...the guy has zero chance of winning

Bruh Tim is black!

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 11:31 PM

then they're no longer 300k per year earners as we contemplated, so it completely changes the equation. anybody who loses a job while they have pending mortgage payments is facing jeopardy. its also why you dont want to stretch it so thin such that you are living paycheck to paycheck. if you aren't able to put away money into a rainy day fund because your mortgage is too high, then you bought too much home. dave ramsey 101.

if you choose to live in an exorbitantly expensive area, then you have to adjust accordingly. maybe that person should have only gotten a 1.3 million dollar home instead of 1.5. they'd still be able to live comfortably even if they have slightly smaller bedrooms and maybe one less walk-in closet

Being comfortable takes into factors like losing your job for a short period (that income isn't guaranteed). Keep in mind the example I'm referring to is something like 2 computer engineers (both making 150k each) with children. They have to live in that exorbitantly expensive area for their job, it isn't like they just really wanted to have a beach front home. Like I said though this is an extreme situation so we can just agree to disagree.

i disagree that taxation on income/wealth amounts to an attack on income/wealth.

i think we need far more tax brackets. right now, the highest bracket for people filing jointly is 612k and up. i think its absurd to tax a household earning 700k at the same rate that you would tax a household earning 70 mil per year.

i think a wealth tax on extreme wealth is a good idea. policy generally incentivizes what is considered "good behavior." its why you get certain tax benefits when you get married, and its why charitable donations can be written off. we recognize that marriage provides stability, and that giving to charity is good, so the government treats it as such in the tax code. similarly we shouldnt be incentivizing people to just sit on massive hordes of money (warren's proposal is for people who have 50 mil or more of wealth). better to have that money circulated and stimulate the economy. and taking 2% of your wealth that exceeds 50 mil is going to have zero impact on your standard of living, so in the scheme of things, its no skin off your back tbh

people should absolutely be allowed to and incentivized to save money (see my earlier point above) but when you reach those 10s of millions, it no longer serves that purpose.

Policy also tends to punish what people consider "bad behavior" like a tabacco tax/sugar tax etc. So how is a wealth tax not an attack/punishment towards wealth? And I'm not sure what you think wealthy people do with their money but they aren't just stuffing it into a safe, if they have any brains (which I'd assume an extremely wealthy person would) then they'd be reinvesting that money into the economy to make more money.

DPG21920

02-20-2020, 11:35 PM

Ok, that makes total sense. And I was off on the 10k figure. I redid the math and got 6k, which is in the range of your $5400 so that all adds up. Thanks.

This is more of where I have issues. Frankly, I don't give a shit about healthcare - which is largely a function of me being a healthy dude in his 30s. I think this is more a philosophic matter than anything else, but I'd rather that 5-10k increase go to infrastructure or subsidizing small business or something else. I just don't see a societal payoff in subsidizing other people's health.

Well the good news is you don’t have to make that decision; your actual dollars don’t change in this scenario really. And you get to help others! Win-win.

But we just disagree - sure you may be healthy and most people vote for themselves vs others. That is totally rational behavior and doesn’t make you a bad person or anything. But a lot of us are starting to put this planet and others on equal footing as ourselves; especially when it means no real change in our quality of life.

But to not see how there is a societal payoff for others health? Like I said, you know how many American’s are literally trapped at jobs because they can’t afford health insurance?

Now imagine if that was not the case. Imagine all the people that could start business, make big changes, pump up the economy because they can work more vs being sick/injured all the time. Because they can leave jobs they hate to purse start ups and other careers without fear of dying or going into crippling debt is something health wise happens. There are real tangible benefits here.

DPG21920

02-20-2020, 11:37 PM

Being comfortable takes into factors like losing your job for a short period (that income isn't guaranteed). Keep in mind the example I'm referring to is something like 2 computer engineers (both making 150k each) with children. They have to live in that exorbitantly expensive area for their job, it isn't like they just really wanted to have a beach front home. Like I said though this is an extreme situation so we can just agree to disagree.

Policy also tends to punish what people consider "bad behavior" like a tabacco tax/sugar tax etc. So how is a wealth tax not an attack/punishment towards wealth? And I'm not sure what you think wealthy people do with their money but they aren't just stuffing it into a safe, if they have any brains (which I'd assume an extremely wealthy person would) then they'd be reinvesting that money into the economy to make more money.

The point is the wealth that the real 1%’s have was 1) made most of the time off exploiting labor and dodging taxes despite making ungodly profits & 2) that amount of concentrated wealth and power leads to the the corruption and legitimate issues we have today.

It’s not like the billionaires are going to die. They will still have multiple BILLIONS of dollars after it’s all said and done. I also like how people rally against “socialism” but have no problem with rich socialism in the form of bailouts and incentives and other things for the already rich/corporations.

DPG21920

02-20-2020, 11:40 PM

He's made a lot of money as a politician has he not?

Bruh - Bernie Sanders has a net worth of 2.5M. He’s 78. Plenty of average joes that save for retirement have that type of money. Sure, that is a lot of money, but it’s not like he’s been raking it in and living the high life.

That is not even THAT much money for someone who has done as much as him for so long. That is like standard retirement level money that people who work for a long time save/have.

spurraider21

02-20-2020, 11:44 PM

Being comfortable takes into factors like losing your job for a short period (that income isn't guaranteed). Keep in mind the example I'm referring to is something like 2 computer engineers (both making 150k each) with children. They have to live in that exorbitantly expensive area for their job, it isn't like they just really wanted to have a beach front home. Like I said though this is an extreme situation so we can just agree to disagree.
yeah i think even in that scenario, their options aren't limited to

a) 1.5 million dollar home
b) living on the streets

Policy also tends to punish what people consider "bad behavior" like a tabacco tax/sugar tax etc. So how is a wealth tax not an attack/punishment towards wealth? And I'm not sure what you think wealthy people do with their money but they aren't just stuffing it into a safe, if they have any brains (which I'd assume an extremely wealthy person would) then they'd be reinvesting that money into the economy to make more money.
the tax burden should be representative of what somebody can generally pay. somebody earning 50 million per year wouldn't realistically be able to observe a difference in standard of living between having a marginal tax rate of 37% or 47%, while a 10% difference could cripple a family of 4 with a household income of 60k (median in the US). its not a punishment, its a realistic representation on what people can part with without jeopardizing their livelihood.

the wealth tax is a bit of a different category, but i think i'd just be repeating my previous post. i think instead of "stimulating the economy" through investing in stock portfolios so they can raise their net worth from 55 million to 60 million, we'd be better served with a small percentage (warren's plan is 2% of wealth in excess of 50 mil) of that going toward child care/college tuitions, etc

rasuo214

02-20-2020, 11:56 PM

Bruh - Bernie Sanders has a net worth of 2.5M. He’s 78. Plenty of average joes that save for retirement have that type of money. Sure, that is a lot of money, but it’s not like he’s been raking it in and living the high life.

That is not even THAT much money for someone who has done as much as him for so long. That is like standard retirement level money that people who work for a long time save/have.

A net worth of 2.5M puts him in the top 5% which classifies him as wealthy.

DPG21920

02-21-2020, 12:11 AM

A net worth of 2.5M puts him in the top 5% which classifies him as wealthy.

Look - if you can’t have an adult discussion with context what’s the point? Also, that goes to show you the real issue. Bernie is in the “top 5%” and he’s a piss ant compared to the 1%

spurs10

02-21-2020, 12:41 AM

The point is the wealth that the real 1%’s have was 1) made most of the time off exploiting labor and dodging taxes despite making ungodly profits & 2) that amount of concentrated wealth and power leads to the the corruption and legitimate issues we have today.

It’s not like the billionaires are going to die. They will still have multiple BILLIONS of dollars after it’s all said and done. I also like how people rally against “socialism” but have no problem with rich socialism in the form of bailouts and incentives and other things for the already rich/corporations. :bobo

ElNono

02-21-2020, 12:43 AM

hombre

02-21-2020, 12:43 AM

His policies will ruin America just like they did Sweden as I already mentioned. So I guess China would be a big winner along with many other countries.

Ruin Sweden? What are you talking about?

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 12:58 AM

Ruin Sweden? What are you talking about?

You should see the shit he posts in the political forum.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 01:29 AM

Ruin Sweden? What are you talking about?

They got rid of the braindead policy that Bernie is proposing. They had it. It was a catastrophic failure. They got rid of it. Now Bernie is proposing it.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 01:32 AM

Guy who wants to give the government more power and control is concerned with corruption.

Obi Juan Kenobi

02-21-2020, 01:42 AM

Bruh - Bernie Sanders has a net worth of 2.5M. He’s 78. Plenty of average joes that save for retirement have that type of money. Sure, that is a lot of money, but it’s not like he’s been raking it in and living the high life.

That is not even THAT much money for someone who has done as much as him for so long. That is like standard retirement level money that people who work for a long time save/have.

Very well said, this whole discussion about him being a millionaire somehow negating his credibility is completely misleading when compared to the insane amount of wealth that people like Jeff Bezos have...

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 01:42 AM

This thread is littered with envy of the rich. It's pretty sad tbh.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 01:45 AM

Very well said, this whole discussion about him being a millionaire somehow negates his credibility is completely misleading when compared to the insane amount of wealth that people like Jeff Bezos have...

Except for the fact that in 2016 he would always say "millionaires and billionaires" and now that the socialist is a millionaire he cut that off.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 01:47 AM

Evil Bezos just announced he's allocating $10 billion to fight climate change.

spurraider21

02-21-2020, 02:07 AM

This thread is littered with envy of the rich. It's pretty sad tbh.
https://media.tenor.com/images/5c6b255f6f726a613c04a8f785add151/tenor.gif

ElNono

02-21-2020, 06:23 AM

Guy who wants to give the government more power and control is concerned with corruption.

So if you think government is powerless, what’s your concern really about? And frankly, what ‘more’ power? Government already has the authority to tax as it see fits and is already on the hook for the largest portion of healthcare expenses. They already backstop college loans. What ’more’ powers? Like SR21 said, it’s all about policy.

Ending corruption and better oversight are also intrinsic to any reform.

Unlike you, I’m not a current or former BernieBro, tbh, but I can see how he is appealing in his message. There’s truly absolutely no money baron(s) that would be behind his policies. And in this climate of people being fed up with same old, same old, it resonates, IMO.

Trumpistas should also stop pretending it’s this terrible message. POTUS campaigned on a closed economy, tariffs, his rich buddies ‘having to take a hit’ if he was elected (funny how that one didn’t pan out), how govt was going to provide ‘best and cheapest’ healthcare... don’t hate the player, hate the game.

hater

02-21-2020, 07:38 AM

Bruh Tim is black!

debatable

hater

02-21-2020, 07:40 AM

This thread is littered with envy of the rich. It's pretty sad tbh.

not envy. repulsion. and not the rich, but the filthy rich

I have lots of rich friends with million dollar houses. nothing wrong with that. some support bernie as well

picnroll

02-21-2020, 07:59 AM

So if you think government is powerless, what’s your concern really about? And frankly, what ‘more’ power? Government already has the authority to tax as it see fits and is already on the hook for the largest portion of healthcare expenses. They already backstop college loans. What ’more’ powers? Like SR21 said, it’s all about policy.

Not necessarily. The constitutionality of a direct tax on wealth as proposed by Warren is questionable, would be challenged legally and would go to the Supreme Court with the outcome uncertain, particularly given the courts current constitution.

dbestpro

02-21-2020, 07:59 AM

Does not seem to be Tim Duncan's year.

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 08:00 AM

Guy who wants to give the government more power and control is concerned with corruption.

Trumptard concerned with corruption. :lol

vy65

02-21-2020, 09:25 AM

Well the good news is you don’t have to make that decision; your actual dollars don’t change in this scenario really. And you get to help others! Win-win.

But we just disagree - sure you may be healthy and most people vote for themselves vs others. That is totally rational behavior and doesn’t make you a bad person or anything. But a lot of us are starting to put this planet and others on equal footing as ourselves; especially when it means no real change in our quality of life.

But to not see how there is a societal payoff for others health? Like I said, you know how many American’s are literally trapped at jobs because they can’t afford health insurance?

Now imagine if that was not the case. Imagine all the people that could start business, make big changes, pump up the economy because they can work more vs being sick/injured all the time. Because they can leave jobs they hate to purse start ups and other careers without fear of dying or going into crippling debt is something health wise happens. There are real tangible benefits here.

If your concern is that people are trapped in jobs because they need healthcare, why not just invest directly in new sectors and subsidize jobs in infrastructure and IT that innovate and also provide healthcare. Seems like you can do what you want and just cut out the middleman.

benefactor

02-21-2020, 09:52 AM

You should see the shit he posts in the political forum.
Yep. When I'm not stopping to laugh at him for posting a topic that's next level stupid I just scroll past his takes. There is nothing to gain from any sort of serious discussion with him. He's the non-bot version of Chris.

DPG21920

02-21-2020, 09:57 AM

If your concern is that people are trapped in jobs because they need healthcare, why not just invest directly in new sectors and subsidize jobs in infrastructure and IT that innovate and also provide healthcare. Seems like you can do what you want and just cut out the middleman.

That’s not my “concern”. It was an example of a real actualized benefit to people having healthcare outside of the current trappings of this system.

SpursDynasty85

02-21-2020, 10:02 AM

Some of y’all just don’t understand the struggle of us multimillionaires, tbh... we’re already forced to donate to charity to dodge as much taxing as possible, pay accountants through the nose to find every loophole, ‘donate’ to politicos to get them off our back. The only thing government is good for is handing us those filthy rich contracts, and those ain’t free either, they take a lot of greasing the right people.

I want to see you guys pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, like I did. It’s not our fault that we make more money trading stocks, futures, etc than employing people, tbh.

A lot of that is exactly what people want to fight. Each side (right and left) have their own versions of people trying to politicize and divide for their own gain but we have to agree on what is good for the country. Winners have always been touting that money is supposed to trickle down. We have the lowest taxes for the super-rich vs any modernized country in the world on top of that an inefficient medical system that puts working families in serious threat. Historically it has been shown that money in not trickling down and winners are hoarding more. I come from a relatively wealthy family and it's all about money and all about building on top of what they have. Making sustainable well-paying jobs with good health insurance? The opposite goals of most people with money. Andrew Yang is right about the way stock market, GDP growth, relative economic ideology in this country is not built for sustainable growth as a country but a "only take care of me" mentality. "Trickle Down" has been greatly overstated and will soon die because of automation and AI unless you are a computer/software programmer (only a few have the skills to be true winners).

"Winners" easily benefit from a stronger and healthier working class. As a christian I think we need to find a way to get more people engaging and taking care of their communities. Living in TEXAS you can see "winners" picking up leaving, building new communities, and dividing themselves from other "losers". That mentality it will only keep getting worse and leave behind more devastated and dangerous communities which equates to more crime and more inequality. What are we going to leave behind after we live? What trends are we setting?

exstatic

02-21-2020, 11:00 AM

Bloomberg's entire platform: I'm an old, white, male, billionaire, misogynist, but I'm not as awful as Trump, so vote for me.

vy65

02-21-2020, 11:08 AM

That’s not my “concern”. It was an example of a real actualized benefit to people having healthcare outside of the current trappings of this system.

You’re trying to have it both ways. Either it’s a meaningful benefit or valid concern to you, in which case I suggested, what I think to be, a better alternative. Or the benefit of avoiding the current trapping of the system isn’t that important. Identifying a problem isn’t meaningful if the problem itself isn’t meaningful.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 11:11 AM

https://media.tenor.com/images/5c6b255f6f726a613c04a8f785add151/tenor.gif

I'm not defending people expecting return. If I were you'd have a point but I'm not so you don't.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 11:15 AM

In other words you can defend people based on principle. Just like people defend the free speech rights of others even if they disagree with what they say. It's really not complicated.

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 11:19 AM

not envy. repulsion. and not the rich, but the filthy rich

I have lots of rich friends with million dollar houses. nothing wrong with that. some support bernie as well

Imagine being repulsed by the monumental impact Bill Gates has had on the world.

DPG21920

02-21-2020, 11:19 AM

You’re trying to have it both ways. Either it’s a meaningful benefit or valid concern to you, in which case I suggested, what I think to be, a better alternative. Or the benefit of avoiding the current trapping of the system isn’t that important. Identifying a problem isn’t meaningful if the problem itself isn’t meaningful.

I’m trying to make sure everyone has healthcare. Your suggestion doesn’t even make sense to that goal

hater

02-21-2020, 11:31 AM

Bloomberg's entire platform: I'm an old, white, male, billionaire, misogynist, but I'm not as awful as Trump, so vote for me.

:lmao basically

cant believe some democrats actually take him as option :lmao

hater

02-21-2020, 11:33 AM

Imagine being repulsed by the monumental impact Bill Gates has had on the world.

Bill Gates preyed on smaller businesses not to mention stole their ideas in his cutthroat days

you realize windows was created at Xerox labs right and Bill stole it.

without that we could possibly have a better world with multiple IT giants competing w each other

for example that Xerox lab of geniuses would still be thriving and producing much better shit that Bill

its sad that ppl dont knowthe truth about that criminal Gates

picnroll

02-21-2020, 11:48 AM

Bill Gates preyed on smaller businesses not to mention stole their ideas in his cutthroat days

you realize windows was created at Xerox labs right and Bill stole it.

without that we could possibly have a better world with multiple IT giants competing w each other

for example that Xerox lab of geniuses would still be thriving and producing much better shit that Bill

its sad that ppl don't know the truth about that criminal Gates
Any thoughts about your hero Sanders dodging disclosing his taxes in the 2016 election or the curiously unaccounted for way he never fully disclosed how he financed purchase of his Maine home? If we’re purity testing all the candidates let’s do it for everyone.

...and Bernie never withdrew from the 2016 election until way after it was obvious he wasn’t going to win and didn’t tepidly endorse Clinton until the last minute. Bernie is a little weasel with a big weasel ego.

hater

02-21-2020, 11:55 AM

Any thoughts about your hero Sanders dodging disclosing his taxes in the 2016 election or the curiously unaccounted for way he never fully disclosed how he financed purchase of his Maine home? If we’re purity testing all the candidates let’s do it for everyone.

meh first of all Im not too hung up on Dump not disclosing his taxes. if we want to make that a requirement for presidents then Im all for changing the law and making it mandatory

second I dont need to see Bernies taxes to decide that the man lives like an average politician/senator. sure they probably live a bit better than most

third, this is Bernies famous “lake house” its a shithole IMO :lol Im not gona bend over backwards to find out how he purchased that rathole :lol

https://twitter.com/vitogesualdi/status/1230344152610570240?s=21

picnroll

02-21-2020, 11:58 AM

meh first of all Im not too hung up on Dump not disclosing his taxes. if we want to make that a requirement for presidents then Im all for changing the law and making it mandatory

second I dont need to see Bernies taxes to decide that the man lives like an average politician/senator. sure they probably live a bit better than most

third, this is Bernies famous “lake house” its a shithole IMO :lol Im not gona bend over backwards to find out how he purchased that rathole :lol

https://twitter.com/vitogesualdi/status/1230344152610570240?s=21
So dishonesty and hypocrisy are ok as long as it’s your guy’s dishonesty and hypocrisy. Got it.

hater

02-21-2020, 12:02 PM

So dishonesty and hypocrisy are ok as long as it’s your guy’s dishonesty and hypocrisy. Got it.

I dont see not disclosing your full taxes as sign of dishonesty tbqh

again. make it a requirement if its such a big deal

picnroll

02-21-2020, 12:09 PM

I dont see not disclosing your full taxes as sign of dishonesty tbqh

again. make it a requirement if its such a big deal
How about the COMPLETE medical history he promised he'd release and now won’t?Id sure as hell want to know a 78 year old guy I'm electing to serve for four years doesn't have any significant medical issues.

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 12:10 PM

Bill Gates preyed on smaller businesses not to mention stole their ideas in his cutthroat days

you realize windows was created at Xerox labs right and Bill stole it.

without that we could possibly have a better world with multiple IT giants competing w each other

for example that Xerox lab of geniuses would still be thriving and producing much better shit that Bill

its sad that ppl dont knowthe truth about that criminal Gates

Bill stole it from Apple who walked right in and took it from Xerox. If you ever want to see a talk about how the GUI we know and love today was invented at Xerox PARC, you should check these two videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLHM3Mls9Kc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_0e3EoPJ4

These are from an amazing freshman CS course called CS61A at UC Berkeley based on one of the greatest CS books ever written (which is also 100% free).

https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full-text/book/book.html

hater

02-21-2020, 12:15 PM

Bill stole it from Apple who walked right in and took it from Xerox. If you ever want to see a talk about how the GUI we know and love today was invented at Xerox PARC, you should check these two videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLHM3Mls9Kc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_0e3EoPJ4

These are from an amazing freshman CS course called CS61A at UC Berkeley based on one of the greatest CS books ever written (which is also 100% free).

https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full-text/book/book.html

never saw that! thanks

hater

02-21-2020, 12:16 PM

How about the COMPLETE medical history he promised he'd release and now won’t?Id sure as hell want to know a 78 year old guy I'm electing to serve for four years doesn't have any significant medical issues.

same thing. make it a requirement

dont see dihonesty

and I am worried about his health but it is what it is. im willing to risk it over 4 years of Dump or DNC puppet

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 12:18 PM

never saw that! thanks

It's pretty cool how they developed GUIs from studying how kids learned and how they used computers. And the lecture is given by the guy largely credited with inventing object oriented programming as we know it today through Smalltalk, the language of the Xerox Alto.

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 12:23 PM

Damn here's much better version of those two videos since it's not videotaping a video being played like the two I posted above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZdxiQoOBgs

picnroll

02-21-2020, 12:30 PM

Russ

02-21-2020, 01:41 PM

Bill stole it from Apple who walked right in and took it from Xerox. If you ever want to see a talk about how the GUI we know and love today was invented at Xerox PARC, you should check these two videos:

Better yet, read the book "Accidental Empires" by Robert Cringely. That book explicates the entire Gates, Jobs, Xerox PARC story.

Spoiler alert, Xerox didn't get anything stolen from them. They just didn't think it was worth anything.

baseline bum

02-21-2020, 01:51 PM

Spoiler alert, Xerox didn't get anything stolen from them. They just didn't think it was worth anything.

True, Xerox were morons.

hater

02-21-2020, 02:26 PM

Better yet, read the book "Accidental Empires" by Robert Cringely. That book explicates the entire Gates, Jobs, Xerox PARC story.

Spoiler alert, Xerox didn't get anything stolen from them. They just didn't think it was worth anything.

yeah that author(Stephens I think) was one of the original Apple employees. lets believe his take only :lmao

Nathan89

02-21-2020, 05:09 PM

meh first of all Im not too hung up on Dump not disclosing his taxes. if we want to make that a requirement for presidents then Im all for changing the law and making it mandatory

second I dont need to see Bernies taxes to decide that the man lives like an average politician/senator. sure they probably live a bit better than most

third, this is Bernies famous “lake house” its a shithole IMO :lol Im not gona bend over backwards to find out how he purchased that rathole :lol

https://twitter.com/vitogesualdi/status/1230344152610570240?s=21

He should sell that house and give the money to the poor. After all he doesn't "need" that house and that's your standard.

hater

02-21-2020, 05:25 PM

He should sell that house and give the money to the poor. After all he doesn't "need" that house and that's your standard.

thats not whqt hes asking everyone tbqh

you are putying words in his mouth.

rasuo214

02-21-2020, 07:51 PM

Look - if you can’t have an adult discussion with context what’s the point? Also, that goes to show you the real issue. Bernie is in the “top 5%” and he’s a piss ant compared to the 1%

So someone stating a fact indicates to you that they can't have an adult discussion? What did I say that was out of context? Is Bernie's net wealth not 2.5M? Is that not top 5%? Does that not classify him as wealthy?

picnroll

02-21-2020, 08:08 PM

ElNono

02-21-2020, 08:48 PM

ElNono

02-21-2020, 08:57 PM

Apparently Bernie’s got Putin’s endorsement. Anybody want to guess why? Does he think Bernie’s the easily most beatable by Trump or maybe that Bernie elected is equally or even more divisive to the US population at large than Trump. Must be some reason.

I think it has much more to do with keeping a highly politicized, polarized US public, which is working out great, if that’s the end game.

I mean, look at this whole thing, now half the country rather believe a fat orange moron than our intelligence services.

picnroll

02-21-2020, 08:59 PM

You can mount a legal challenge to anything. The authority of Congress to levy taxes is undisputed though.

In some ways yes and in some ways no.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-12-03/how-warren-could-get-a-wealth-tax-past-the-u-s-supreme-court
Warren’s proposal likely no.

picnroll

02-21-2020, 09:04 PM

I think it has much more to do with keeping a highly politicized, polarized US public, which is working out great, if that’s the end game.

I mean, look at this whole thing, now half the country rather believe a fat orange moron than our intelligence services.

True but one thing is for sure, if Trump loses he won’t go gracefully and quietly. He will continue out of office to rabble rouse his supporters and Bernie is no healer of wounds. It would be an idealogic warfare unseen since the civil war.

ElNono

02-21-2020, 09:11 PM

In some ways yes and in some ways no.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-12-03/how-warren-could-get-a-wealth-tax-past-the-u-s-supreme-court
Warren’s proposal likely no.

No, seriously, quote me case law where the SCOTUS has ever challenged the authority of Congress from levying taxes.

Heck, Obamacare’s individual mandate was saved by that exact Congressional power, and we’ve had marginal tax rates all the way up over 90% before.

Now, I would agree this would be in much more shaky ground if it’s a wealth confiscation instead (that is, it’s not a tax on new income)

ElNono

02-21-2020, 09:13 PM

True but one thing is for sure, if Trump loses he won’t go gracefully and quietly. He will continue out of office to rabble rouse his supporters and Bernie is no healer of wounds. It would be an idealogic warfare unseen since the civil war.

Ergo, a positive for a foreign adversary

picnroll

02-21-2020, 09:25 PM

Ergo, a positive for a foreign adversary

Yep. A win-win for Putin. And Putin has those naked pictures of Trump with a donkey to hold him in line.

ElNono

02-21-2020, 09:30 PM

Yep. A win-win for Putin. And Putin has those naked pictures of Trump with a donkey to hold him in line.

Wonder what he has on Bernie. Pop giving him a blowjob?

picnroll

02-21-2020, 09:38 PM

Wonder what he has on Bernie. Pop giving him a blowjob?

I know it’s a joke but obviously Bernie’s not as stupid and degenerate as Trump to put himself in a compromised position. Big problem with Bernie is he’s a zealot with a vision, least willing to compromise. That’s what the bros love about him. What we’ll end up instead of two factions, those that love and those that hate Trump, three factions, Trump’s nuts and crooks, the angry centrist democrats and Bernie’s gang. There will be congressional noise and inaction like never before seen. I can actual see where Putin would even prefer Bernie over Trump.

spurraider21

02-21-2020, 09:44 PM

Not necessarily. The constitutionality of a direct tax on wealth as proposed by Warren is questionable, would be challenged legally and would go to the Supreme Court with the outcome uncertain, particularly given the courts current constitution.
might face a challenge, but there's a lot of SCOTUS precedent allowing all kinds of taxes, with even some opinions stating that the "apportionment" requirement on direct taxes (probably the challenge you are referring to) should only be applied where it can be reasonable

"The rule of apportionment is only to be adopted in such cases where it can reasonably apply; and the subject taxed, must ever determine the application of the rule." (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14447164451328190646&q=hylton+v.+united+states&hl=en&as_sdt=80000006&as_vis=1)

and realistically, the apportionment rule has absolutely no reasonable application in the modern day, and was enacted at a time where the best measure of economic strength was population. i know there was one SCOTUS case, Pollock, which found the income tax unconstitutional, but that case has virtually never been relied upon for subsequent rulings, and there are other SCOTUS opinions which have called that very ruling/analysis "mistaken."

you're right that it may face a challenge, but if passed (big if), it would remain in effect until a court struck it down

picnroll

02-21-2020, 09:48 PM

Do you really think with the current Supreme Court it would have a snowballs chance in hell?

JeffDuncan

02-21-2020, 10:19 PM

No, seriously, quote me case law where the SCOTUS has ever challenged the authority of Congress from levying taxes.

Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

BackHome

02-21-2020, 10:31 PM

Washington Post reporting Putin is backing Bernies run for Presidency OMG :reading

ducks

02-21-2020, 10:35 PM

Duncan should have waited for a debate before he opened his mouth

spurraider21

02-21-2020, 10:35 PM

Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
pollock was an awful decision that came out of nowhere after years of fairly consistent rulings on congress's tax power, which was poo-pood on at the time, and subsequent rulings have called it mistaken. it was never formally overruled, but it was basically rendered moot after the 16th amendment was passed, so i dont even think the opportunity to do so ever came up

it was partially overruled in south carolina v baker... but even in that case, the court basically said that pollock has already effectively been overruled over the years (though that was really tailored to one very specific issue, not the case at large)

SayTown

02-21-2020, 10:36 PM

Good on Timmy. For everyone it's impossible to not see race, but Timmy can!

ducks

02-21-2020, 10:39 PM

I am sure Tim hates trump because perico and where he is from
Trump does not want free handouts and Duncan wants free handouts because pop likes free handouts
Why work for something

ducks

02-21-2020, 10:42 PM

https://www.mikebloomberg.com/2020/acq-mike-beats-trump-32450?utm_source=%7E00_%7E01facebook_%7E02_&utm_medium=%7E00_%7E03cpm_&utm_campaign=%7E00_%7E04b20_%7E05pm_%7E06p_%7E07az-t5_%7E08a92_&utm_content=%7E00_%7E09cp01+06_%7E10_%7E11scared_% 7E12na_%7E1330_%7E14en_&fbclid=IwAR1pknF82-WjHwYE33BLjw1rP7o9163Khz9hOxXz_XGxwQ60HISA8_uCrS0

Lol mini mike is nuts if he thinks he is going to beat trump

spurraider21

02-21-2020, 10:43 PM

I am sure Tim hates trump because perico and where he is from
Trump does not want free handouts and Duncan wants free handouts because pop likes free handouts
Why work for something
:lmao thinking duncan would be getting the handouts

spurs10

02-21-2020, 11:24 PM

ducks

02-21-2020, 11:43 PM

:lmao thinking duncan would be getting the handouts

Dude he wants free hand outs for his country not himself

JeffDuncan

02-21-2020, 11:59 PM

pollock was an awful decision that came out of nowhere after years of fairly consistent rulings on congress's tax power, ...

Nonsense. The Pollock decision followed from the "direct tax" interpretation that U.S. courts had adopted from the beginning. The Constitution requires apportionment of direct taxes.

The Pollock decision led to the ratification of the 16th amendment, which removed the need for Congress to consider sources of income when imposing an income tax. Court decisions after the 16th amendment have been under different law than that which applied at the time of Pollock.

Your notion that a 1982 decision could somehow "overrule" Pollock is just peculiar, since 1982 is after the adoption of the 16th amendment. You don't know much about this subject. Not that you should, since it's all irrelevant now.

ducks

02-22-2020, 12:01 AM

CNBC: Trump's Small-Business Approval Rating Hits All-Time High of 64%

daslicer

02-22-2020, 12:10 AM

Dude he wants free hand outs for his country not himself

VI is a US territory.

ElNono

02-22-2020, 12:10 AM

Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

I appreciate the example, and concur with the lawyer assessment.

Again, anything can be challenged in court, but there’s fairly robust legalese about congress tax power.

FkLA

02-22-2020, 12:17 AM

This is Bernie's year, tbh.

ElNono

02-22-2020, 12:17 AM

Anyhow, about the topic at hand, good for Timmy to participate in the political process.

Hopefully he’ll run for office one of these days after getting a haircut.

daslicer

02-22-2020, 12:18 AM

Anyhow, about the topic at hand, good for Timmy to participate in the political process.

Hopefully he’ll run for office one of these days after getting a haircut.

Agreed. He needs to cut that hair and just go back to the mini fro or go with the old shaved head look.

ducks

02-22-2020, 12:36 AM

VI is a US territory.
I know that I was not born yesterday. USA states have issues
America first USA territory second
Other
Counties last especially ones that send people to USA illegally !

ducks

02-22-2020, 12:37 AM

This is Bernie's year, tbh.

Better hope he has no more heartaches

coachmac87

02-22-2020, 12:38 AM

Hate it break it the never Trumpers...but he ain’t losing.

Say whatever you want about the guy...he’s a total douche. But his results are undeniable and NOBODY even his supporters could’ve predicted his success.

But serious question? Y’all Bernie supporters really wanna get taxed more than you ever have in your lifetime?? The only people who don’t mind getting taxed out the ass are the people who don’t make money or a living...

Y’all also want more government control? Since when do people put their trust in the government AND the media??

Smh Sheep

ducks

02-22-2020, 12:52 AM

ducks

02-22-2020, 01:00 AM

Did you know:

Russia donated over $145,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation

Hillary Clinton sold 20% America’s Uranium to Vladimir Putin

Yet she's calling President Trump "Putin's Puppet," despite the fact that a 3 year, 40 million dollar investigation found no collusion

coachmac87

02-22-2020, 01:02 AM

Bernie wants to raise min wage to 15
15 times 40 is 600 a week
600
Times 52 is 31,200

Want health care for all

Everyone over 29k pay 52 percent taxes

Means the people min wage makes
7.33 an hour

So much for min wage increase !

I saw that but not sure how accurate it is...only thing for certain if he somehow becomes president..US Citizens will be taxed more than they ever have in their lives.

Only thing I agree on with Bernie is he knows the Swamp is corrupt. But as we’ve seen he doesn’t have balls to do anything about it. He folds like a lawn chair cause he knows he’s not shit.

Heads will roll in the swamp once Trump is re elected..the deep state knows it and that’s why you’ve seen the circus of trying to remove him.

Roscoe P. Coltrane

02-22-2020, 01:03 AM

nothing is stopping him. could he give more? yeah, sure. i dont think its particularly relevant when it comes to his policy.

his biggest sticking point is wanting to guarantee healthcare to everybody. there's no donation he could give that's going to help that situation. that change can only be made through policy

he thinks the minimum wage should be higher (i personally disagree with a $15 minimum wage). nothing he donates would help that situation. would have to come through policy

on climate change... yeah he flies in private jets. is that hypocritical? somewhat. but the scope of good that can be made through policy is immeasurable. if he decided to only ride bicycles everywhere from now on, its not going to get us to where we need to be. its going to have to come from a much larger scale policy

bernie thinks that the tax code is unnecessarily kind to the wealthy. how is his decision to donate more money going to change that? it's not

you want to say there is some hypocrisy in the way he lives now? thats fine. but if he's sincere about the policies he wants to pass (and given his decades long track record of saying the same thing, i see no reason to believe that he's been lying this whole time), then thats what i'll measure him by when deciding who to vote for

im not going to convince you that his positions are right/wrong. you have your opinions and are entitled to them. i just dont think that the particular criticism is worthy of consideration in deciding who to vote forWhat do you think would happen if minimal wage was raised to 15.00 an hour?

Roscoe P. Coltrane

02-22-2020, 01:16 AM

Well the good news is you don’t have to make that decision; your actual dollars don’t change in this scenario really. And you get to help others! Win-win.

But we just disagree - sure you may be healthy and most people vote for themselves vs others. That is totally rational behavior and doesn’t make you a bad person or anything. But a lot of us are starting to put this planet and others on equal footing as ourselves; especially when it means no real change in our quality of life.

But to not see how there is a societal payoff for others health? Like I said, you know how many American’s are literally trapped at jobs because they can’t afford health insurance?

Now imagine if that was not the case. Imagine all the people that could start business, make big changes, pump up the economy because they can work more vs being sick/injured all the time. Because they can leave jobs they hate to purse start ups and other careers without fear of dying or going into crippling debt is something health wise happens. There are real tangible benefits here.Do you like to occasionally have a soda, cookies, chips, beer, tobacco ? You can say goodbye to all of that if free health Care is implemented.

ElNono

02-22-2020, 01:34 AM

Do you like to occasionally have a soda, cookies, chips, beer, tobacco ? You can say goodbye to all of that if free health Care is implemented.

how do you figure? list me countries (you have a long list to pick from, pretty much all of them except the US) that implement government subsidized healthcare that have such prohibitions, tbh...

ElNono

02-22-2020, 01:35 AM

Bernie wants to raise min wage to 15
15 times 40 is 600 a week
600
Times 52 is 31,200

Want health care for all

Everyone over 29k pay 52 percent taxes

Means the people min wage makes
7.33 an hour

So much for min wage increase !

You should be on board with this, ducks... we're already paying your ER visits coz you make $7/hour with no insurance, tbh

DPG21920

02-22-2020, 01:40 AM

Do you like to occasionally have a soda, cookies, chips, beer, tobacco ? You can say goodbye to all of that if free health Care is implemented.

Are you a bot?

Obi Juan Kenobi

02-22-2020, 01:57 AM

Y’all also want more government control? Since when do people put their trust in the government AND the media??

Smh Sheep

Ah yes, the whole "throw the baby out with the bathwater" argument in regards to mistrust in government...

BackHome

02-22-2020, 02:00 AM

Nothing is Free. Lol

daslicer

02-22-2020, 02:37 AM

JeffDuncan

02-22-2020, 07:36 AM

... but there’s fairly robust legalese about congress tax power.

To say the least. The statement in the Constitution,

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,"

has been seen from the beginning as empowering any sort of tax that a government might impose. It was intended that way. The Founders didn't presume to know exactly what sort of taxation would be needed to support the new government they were creating. They left the specifics to later generations, based on experience.

The power of the USA to collect an income tax was always there. The Pollock case, and then the 16th amendment, only addressed details of exactly how the congress had to go about it.

But on the more important matter, Tim Duncan's hair, the younger generation might prefer his casual look, and their votes are important. Getting an "establishment" haircut could cost him votes.

JeffDuncan

02-22-2020, 07:56 AM

:lol Well it's not much different than you putting your trust in the rich who by the way now run the government. I just believe the rich have done a shitty job of running the government efficiently and I would just like to see something new.

I hate to be the bearer of sad tidings, but you won't see anything new. For example, a majority of the population is already under "government health insurance" but it's administered by private insurance companies, because those companies have the clerical capability to do it. Free, ahem, universal health coverage won't change that. It will still be administered the same, through the big insurance companies - because nobody else can do it. The rich, who own big stakes in those companies, will make out like bandits. They'll have a government-guarenteed customer base, and thus a government-guarenteed (very large) income. The rich will get richer. So it goes.

hater

02-22-2020, 09:36 AM

This is Bernie's year, tbh.

sadly I doubt it

There are too many candidates for him to be able to get 51%

this means it will go to DNC superdelegates which will never select Bernie

I think they are keeping the scrubs in the filed to do exactly this

hater

02-22-2020, 09:39 AM

Apparently Bernie’s got Putin’s endorsement. Anybody want to guess why? Does he think Bernie’s the easily most beatable by Trump or maybe that Bernie elected is equally or even more divisive to the US population at large than Trump. Must be some reason.

:lmao “apparently”

because CNN is parroting some secret sauces? :lmao

the “intelligence” even said they dont know how russia is interfering but they just have an “assertion” :lmao

hater

02-22-2020, 09:40 AM

Yep. A win-win for Putin. And Putin has those naked pictures of Trump with a donkey to hold him in line.

:lmao ^ still believes the russia hoax even after Mueller proved nothing :lmao

hater

02-22-2020, 09:42 AM

What do you think would happen if minimal wage was raised to 15.00 an hour?

everybody will die

Rosewood

02-22-2020, 09:43 AM

I'm not really into the whole political bullshit, but I'm no longer getting fucked on my taxes. I did get fucked pretty much the entire Obama presidency. And I was a kid during Bush so I can't speak on that.

picnroll

02-22-2020, 10:50 AM

:lmao ^ still believes the russia hoax even after Mueller proved nothing :lmao

Of course Putin would voluntarily send Mueller any incriminating evidence he might have on Trump and it’s impossible to believe Trump is capable of being an out of control pig.

Trump claims he’s been harder in Russia than anyone. The only reason sanctions have been imposed is because they were rammed down his throat by a congress that made it clear they would override any veto. His unrecorded meetings with Putin, throwing his intelligence depts under the bus saying he believed Putin instead, trying to screw the Ukraine to the advantage of Russia, pulling out of Syria giving Russia an open road to markedly increased influence in the Middle East. God knows what we don’t know about. Something smells really bad.

Roscoe P. Coltrane

02-22-2020, 12:53 PM

how do you figure? list me countries (you have a long list to pick from, pretty much all of them except the US) that implement government subsidized healthcare that have such prohibitions, tbh...How many people are there in those countries? Once the healthcare cost are grater then the taxation used for paying it you will see items and products being banned or have extremely high taxes. Already seen a huge increase in sugar and tobacco products, wait until government is in control of healthcare not to even mention the other problems free healthcare brings. Don't be naive.

Roscoe P. Coltrane

02-22-2020, 12:55 PM

Are you a bot? Yes, I'm a Russian prototype bot 3631-28

JeffDuncan

02-22-2020, 12:57 PM

All you have to do to get free health care is pay for it....

hater

02-22-2020, 02:10 PM

Yes, I'm a Russian prototype bot 3631-28

:lmao

hater

02-22-2020, 02:12 PM

Of course Putin would voluntarily send Mueller any incriminating evidence he might have on Trump and it’s impossible to believe Trump is capable of being an out of control pig.

3 year FBI investigation, thousands of agents on the job, millions of dollars spent. no evidence was found

there is no evidence, Nancy

having CNN on everyday for the last few years has done a number on you

ElNono

02-22-2020, 05:47 PM

To say the least. The statement in the Constitution,

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,"

has been seen from the beginning as empowering any sort of tax that a government might impose. It was intended that way. The Founders didn't presume to know exactly what sort of taxation would be needed to support the new government they were creating. They left the specifics to later generations, based on experience.

The power of the USA to collect an income tax was always there. The Pollock case, and then the 16th amendment, only addressed details of exactly how the congress had to go about it.

But on the more important matter, Tim Duncan's hair, the younger generation might prefer his casual look, and their votes are important. Getting an "establishment" haircut could cost him votes.

Agree 100%, but the world is still full of GenX'ers, Baby Boomers (hopefully not for long), tbh... he's an avid videogame player, he has that going with them kiddos and not so much kiddos...

ElNono

02-22-2020, 05:58 PM

How many people are there in those countries? Once the healthcare cost are grater then the taxation used for paying it you will see items and products being banned or have extremely high taxes. Already seen a huge increase in sugar and tobacco products, wait until government is in control of healthcare not to even mention the other problems free healthcare brings. Don't be naive.

Well, we get a lot to pick from, from India's ~1,370 million all the way down to San Marino 33,400... that's why there's really no excuse there.

It's also implicit that all these countries impose certain amount of price controls in one way or another (there's a plethora of different models out there, from hybrid private-public to all public, to government leveraging it's purchasing power, etc), which is the main reason they pay a fraction of the cost of the same procedures and same or better outcomes.

Now, I'm not advocating any system in particular, and none of these systems are 'free'. There's always winners and losers, just like in any market, whether there's government intervention or not. That said, patients (and thus tax payers) have been the major losers in the US for way too long.

ElNono

02-22-2020, 06:00 PM

Damn, Bernie dunking all over Duncan/Mike today, looks like...

baseline bum

02-22-2020, 06:05 PM

Damn, Bernie dunking all over Duncan/Mike today, looks like...

Can you photoshop Bernie and Tim onto this gif?

https://media.giphy.com/media/PywD3Rpu3gbWo/giphy.gif

ElNono

02-22-2020, 06:16 PM

You gotta hand it to that dude Putin, he really knows how to win elections, tbh...

DPG21920

02-22-2020, 06:27 PM

All you have to do to get free health care is pay for it....

It’s not called free healthcare. It’s called Medicare for All.

DPG21920

02-22-2020, 06:28 PM

Damn, Bernie dunking all over Duncan/Mike today, looks like...

Feel the Bernnnn

hater

02-22-2020, 06:55 PM

You gotta hand it to that dude Putin, he really knows how to win elections, tbh...

lame post

Russ

02-22-2020, 08:28 PM

Bernie is just now delivering his Nevada victory speech (in San Antonio of course).

hater

02-22-2020, 08:50 PM

Ma niga Bernie ejaculating on this thread :lmao

deal w that shit nigas

hater

02-22-2020, 09:53 PM

https://twitter.com/joewhatshisname/status/1231411023900528643?s=21

ma niga bernie owns more brown ppl than Charmin

Capt Bringdown

02-22-2020, 10:30 PM

Duncan is a mental midget off the court.

hater

02-22-2020, 11:17 PM

Duncan is a mental midget off the court.

:lol

Roscoe P. Coltrane

02-22-2020, 11:37 PM

I like Duncan as a player but don't give a shit about who he supports. Stop worshipping these people like they're your God or something. Anyone that's going to vote based on what some celebrity says or thinks has no business voting. Besides, Bloomberg is probably the right choice for the Democratic party considering the alternative.

hater

02-22-2020, 11:38 PM

https://twitter.com/cockycat/status/1231435925680513024?s=21

:lmao

hombre

02-22-2020, 11:50 PM

They got rid of the braindead policy that Bernie is proposing. They had it. It was a catastrophic failure. They got rid of it. Now Bernie is proposing it.

You absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

BackHome

02-23-2020, 12:50 AM

The power elites on the Democratic side are going to start really going after Bernie they hate Trump but they fear Bernie

daslicer

02-23-2020, 12:59 AM

The power elites on the Democratic side are going to start really going after Bernie they hate Trump but they fear Bernie

They hate Trump's social views but deep down they like his economic polices. The democratic elites would love to have a non-racist version of Trump. That's what they are gunning for. Bernie is just exposing there is really no difference anymore between the Republican party and the Democratic party today other than views on social issues.

gambit1990

02-23-2020, 01:46 AM

when is manu gonna endorse bernie?

BackHome

02-23-2020, 04:58 PM

Manu is from Argentina not Cuba

ElNono

02-23-2020, 06:15 PM

South Mexico, same thing, tbh

spurraider21

02-23-2020, 07:17 PM

:lol boomerberg

hater

02-24-2020, 10:15 AM

:lmao Duncan

yQBMg47Mmkg

Nathan89

02-24-2020, 10:57 AM

Meanwhile Bernie is still praising Cuba.:lmao

hater

02-24-2020, 11:09 AM

Meanwhile Bernie is still praising Cuba.:lmao

Cuba has great public schooling. miles ahead of US

Bernie once again hits it on the head

baseline bum

02-24-2020, 11:15 AM

:lol boomerberg

:lol

That Judge Judy ad convinced them.

hater

02-24-2020, 11:19 AM

:lol “democratic” candidates advisor helped a Fascist win in Brazil :lol

https://twitter.com/thealleyeceeing/status/1230460308659064832?s=21

:lmao Duncecan

dbestpro

02-24-2020, 12:08 PM

Cuba has great public schooling. miles ahead of US

Bernie once again hits it on the head

The government sets most prices and rations goods to citizens. In 2016 Cuba ranked 68th out of 182 countries, with a Human Development Index of 0.775, much higher than its GDP per capita rank (95th). As of 2018, the country's public debt comprised 45.3% of GDP, inflation. they may be smart, but their still poor.

hater

02-24-2020, 12:53 PM

The government sets most prices and rations goods to citizens. In 2016 Cuba ranked 68th out of 182 countries, with a Human Development Index of 0.775, much higher than its GDP per capita rank (95th). As of 2018, the country's public debt comprised 45.3% of GDP, inflation. they may be smart, but their still poor.

thanks for posting tidbit that has nothing to do with education

Coach X

02-24-2020, 05:26 PM

Nathan89

02-24-2020, 10:40 PM

Cuba has great public schooling. miles ahead of US

Bernie once again hits it on the head

What metrics are you using?

"As attorney Hans Bader noted in an August 2016 article, nearly eight out of 10 Cubans already knew how to read by 1950. This figure was similar to that of Costa Rica, which also achieved 100 percent literacy over the following decades — except Costa Rica and other countries did so without the kind of Marxist dictatorship that Cubans have endured under the Castro regime for over 61 years."

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-his-support-for-communist-fidel-castro-in-60-minutes-interview

Bernie is just doing everything can to praise failed states with failed ideologies. Just as he always has.

But yeah the public education system sucks in America. We should move to a voucher system to create competition.

Nathan89

02-24-2020, 10:44 PM

https://twitter.com/BenShapQuotes/status/1232061144145309697?s=20

A dose of reality for my big brain Bernie friends.

hater

02-24-2020, 11:02 PM

:lmao Mini Mike

:lmao Dim Tuncan

:lmao Bloomberg supporters

https://twitter.com/emsteck/status/1232057444458733569?s=21

https://twitter.com/tvietor08/status/1232138538453352448?s=21

https://twitter.com/camedwards/status/1232067996622913537?s=21

hater

02-24-2020, 11:07 PM

:lmao paid an army of bots to make himself look cool online

has to delete their cringe posts after only a few hours :lmao

https://twitter.com/merica/status/1232153085226749953?s=21

phxspurfan

02-25-2020, 01:02 AM

https://twitter.com/BenShapQuotes/status/1232061144145309697?s=20

A dose of reality for my big brain Bernie friends.

Not sure who Ben Shapiro is (not going to bother Googling him) and really don't give af. Is he one of your Rush Limbaugh types you guys love, some blowhard with an opinion on everything

daslicer

02-25-2020, 01:05 AM

Not sure who Ben Shapiro is (not going to bother Googling him) and really don't give af. Is he one of your Rush Limbaugh types you guys love, some blowhard with an opinion on everything

Basically a young nerdy Rush.

hater

02-25-2020, 08:47 AM

What metrics are you using?

"As attorney Hans Bader noted in an August 2016 article, nearly eight out of 10 Cubans already knew how to read by 1950. This figure was similar to that of Costa Rica, which also achieved 100 percent literacy over the following decades — except Costa Rica and other countries did so without the kind of Marxist dictatorship that Cubans have endured under the Castro regime for over 61 years."

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-his-support-for-communist-fidel-castro-in-60-minutes-interview

Bernie is just doing everything can to praise failed states with failed ideologies. Just as he always has.

But yeah the public education system sucks in America. We should move to a voucher system to create competition.

Obamas metrics tbqh :lmao

https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1231971619750334464?s=21

BackHome

02-25-2020, 10:03 AM

Nothing is Free in this life not even death

TimDunkem

02-25-2020, 10:09 AM

Basically a young nerdy Rush.

Don't forget he's also a self-hating Jew.

Brazil

02-25-2020, 10:42 AM

:lol only 17 pages on a Duncan endorses Bloomberg... dear god this site is dying

Biggems

02-25-2020, 02:37 PM

K...

02-25-2020, 03:31 PM

Shakril

02-25-2020, 03:49 PM

I will once again be voting for The Donald.....if Congress would actually legislate instead of obstruct and go on vacation, I am speaking for all of Congress, we could have gotten so much more done these last 4 years. Trump is a workaholic. He would have negotiated over and over until everyone had a reasonable compromise worth signing. Too bad Congress sucks.

What you claim is factualy wrong. Democrats signaled from the beggining that they would love to make an infrastructure Bill, a bipartisan bill for immigration was vetoed from Donald despite him saying before the vote on it, that he would sign it, a comprehensive bipartisan Gun Legislative reform, which would have at least helped a little with the gun epidemie. This are just 3 possible Legislations which have not been realised because of Trump, noone else to blame.

Also remember that from 2016 to 2018 the Congress was under the control of the Republicans. The only thing they got done, was the Tax Cut for the already wealthy. Poor and lower Middle Class got nothing, and in some states even lost money.

This are Facts, not a spin or opinion. I suggest listening and reading independet Media. Fox News, NBC, CNN and other "News" Mainstream Media are to partisan to get real information.

Genovaswitness

02-25-2020, 04:14 PM

daslicer

02-25-2020, 04:37 PM

Nathan89

02-25-2020, 05:00 PM

exstatic

02-25-2020, 05:21 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sanders-doubles-down-on-defending-castro-praises-china-for-lifting-people-out-of-extreme-poverty/

Bernie doubles on his praise for authoritarian regimes by complimenting China for bringing people out of poverty. The dumbass can just look around the world to see that capitalism has done that far more effectively but can't resist praising authoritarian systems of government. Bernie is a threat to our country. Don't let his supporters tell you he's been on the right side of history for decades. He's been praising failed states for decades.

Projection, much?

The Dullard

USSR
NK
Every regime in the Middle East

Didn't bat an eyelash, and in fact complemented Saudis for murdering Khashoggi in the most heinous way.

hater

02-25-2020, 06:49 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sanders-doubles-down-on-defending-castro-praises-china-for-lifting-people-out-of-extreme-poverty/

Bernie doubles on his praise for authoritarian regimes by complimenting China for bringing people out of poverty. The dumbass can just look around the world to see that capitalism has done that far more effectively but can't resist praising authoritarian systems of government. Bernie is a threat to our country. Don't let his supporters tell you he's been on the right side of history for decades. He's been praising failed states for decades.

except hes right. pre communist chinese lived in condition of peasants. remember Japan took over the entire country in a matter of hours :lol

the comparison to today is not even close

good luck convincing the chinese people they used to live better before Communism :lmao

Nathan89

02-25-2020, 07:40 PM

Nathan89

02-25-2020, 07:44 PM

Nathan89

02-25-2020, 07:45 PM

There really is no surprise that multiple Bernie staffers have been caught supporting gulags for conservatives.

hater

02-25-2020, 07:50 PM

So you also think communism is more effective than a capitalist system at lifting people out of extreme poverty? This is seemingly Bernie's position. Otherwise it's not worth praising a less effective system.

china is state capitalism with communist party rule.

this is probably the best choice for a country as big as china with its biggest resource being its people. thanks to this its people went from eating shit to at least eating rice

why does every country have to follow Western government? south america and africa try and they live in shit. being a capitalist country does not automatically make you freer or richer

stop regurgitating the talking points of american politicians that claim china is evil and american capitalism is Gods choice of government :lmao

daslicer

02-25-2020, 08:56 PM

china is state capitalism with communist party rule.

this is probably the best choice for a country as big as china with its biggest resource being its people. thanks to this its people went from eating shit to at least eating rice

why does every country have to follow Western government? south america and africa try and they live in shit. being a capitalist country does not automatically make you freer or richer

stop regurgitating the talking points of american politicians that claim china is evil and american capitalism is Gods choice of government :lmao

Every system in the world outside of North Korea and Cuba is pretty much capitalistic. Now they are just different versions of capitalism like you have illustrated in China. The problem with the US capitalistic system is it now favors the rich over the middle class/poor where it use to be the opposite 30-40 years ago.

Biggems

02-25-2020, 09:03 PM

What you claim is factualy wrong. Democrats signaled from the beggining that they would love to make an infrastructure Bill, a bipartisan bill for immigration was vetoed from Donald despite him saying before the vote on it, that he would sign it, a comprehensive bipartisan Gun Legislative reform, which would have at least helped a little with the gun epidemie. This are just 3 possible Legislations which have not been realised because of Trump, noone else to blame.

Also remember that from 2016 to 2018 the Congress was under the control of the Republicans. The only thing they got done, was the Tax Cut for the already wealthy. Poor and lower Middle Class got nothing, and in some states even lost money.

This are Facts, not a spin or opinion. I suggest listening and reading independet Media. Fox News, NBC, CNN and other "News" Mainstream Media are to partisan to get real information.

You need to read better, I blamed all of Congress, not just the left. I am well aware of the weak Republicans who did almost 0 for 2 years.

Biggems

02-25-2020, 09:05 PM

Do you live in Texas?

Can I get a hell yeah!

hater

02-25-2020, 10:52 PM

BackHome

02-26-2020, 08:26 PM

Man the South Carolina Debate was embarrassing but yet funny at the same time.

libertarian4321

02-27-2020, 04:25 AM

except hes right. pre communist chinese lived in condition of peasants. remember Japan took over the entire country in a matter of hours :lol

the comparison to today is not even close

good luck convincing the chinese people they used to live better before Communism :lmao

Wrong.

Japan and China fought from 1937-1945. Japan never "took over" and never was able to defeat China

Would you like me to give you a lesson on China's decades of economic failure following the communist takeover including the failed Great Leap Forward, The Great Chinese Famine (tens of MILLIONS of unnecessary deaths caused by failures of Central Planning), etc?

You don't know history.

You should probably learn something before spewing easily refutable nonsense.

exstatic

02-27-2020, 10:45 AM

Wrong.

Japan and China fought from 1937-1945. Japan never "took over" and never was able to defeat China

Would you like me to give you a lesson on China's decades of economic failure following the communist takeover including the failed Great Leap Forward, The Great Chinese Famine (tens of MILLIONS of unnecessary deaths caused by failures of Central Planning), etc?

You don't know history.

You should probably learn something before spewing easily refutable nonsense.

Japan took over and conquered the area of China that was important to them for their war effort, and it was never under threat by Chinese forces: industrialized Manchuria. I'm sure they felt that the ROI for a bunch of rice paddies in South China and a bunch of nothing in West China didn't justify the effort.

hater

02-27-2020, 10:52 AM

NameLess Scrub

02-27-2020, 01:23 PM

Bloomberg is running ads in Puerto Rico.
https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239696128.html

Seems like he’s claiming he wants to make the island the 51st state.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/bloomberg-rolls-plan-make-puerto-rico-51st-state/story?id=68581644

Dverde

02-27-2020, 03:17 PM

Bloomberg is going to lose. Just think of all the scholarships he could’ve given out instead of buying tv airtime.

Spur|n|Austin

02-27-2020, 08:43 PM

Don't forget he's also a self-hating Jew.

And cancer free too

Spurtacular

02-27-2020, 09:15 PM

I don't agree with Duncan; but this is a smart move for him. Having a billionaire in your back pocket after getting swindled is probably helpful.

Proxy

02-28-2020, 01:02 AM

rasuo214

03-01-2020, 04:00 PM

Say what you want about trump but this shit was funny:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfl13QyQZKc

Russ

03-01-2020, 04:12 PM

stop regurgitating the talking points of american politicians that claim china is evil and american capitalism is Gods choice of government :lmao

China is a police state. Surely we can agree on that much.

JPB

03-01-2020, 04:57 PM

Every system in the world outside of North Korea and Cuba is pretty much capitalistic. Now they are just different versions of capitalism like you have illustrated in China. The problem with the US capitalistic system is it now favors the rich over the middle class/poor where it use to be the opposite 30-40 years ago.

Indeed and that's the same everywhere where capitalism has proven the "less worst" system to develop stable and democratic societies but where a tinier and tinier minority are getting more and more of the cake nowadays.

But people start to react and the 'gilet jaune" movement (for all its flaws) in France was pretty much about that. Middle class followed by lower class people sick of seeing their purchasing power decrease while the market biggest companies are piling profit records and their board members or stokeholders always bigger and bigger incomes.

exstatic

03-02-2020, 10:44 AM

Bloomberg is going to lose. Just think of all the scholarships he could’ve given out instead of buying tv airtime.

Spends $400M trying not to pay $400M in taxes.

ducks

03-03-2020, 09:45 PM

Lol mini getting his ass handed to him

ducks

03-03-2020, 09:46 PM

Mini 500 million in toilet
What a fucking clown

BackHome

03-03-2020, 10:46 PM

Looking like a Contested Convention between two of the Oldest and Whitest guys and let me tell you it’s going to get ugly real quick. It reminds me “ No Place For Old Men” and “There Will Be Blood” the Bernie Bro’s Vs Biden/CNN/MSNBC it’s going to be epic!!!

Harry Callahan

03-04-2020, 10:08 AM

How old was John McCain when he ran in 08? I think significantly younger than either JB or BS.

Answer 71 on JM age when running.

I think both the front runners are absolutely horrible candidates - even when you consider they are Democrats.

They don't the juice physically for the job even for four years. Either one would probably die in office first term.

A socialist will not succeed due to bad policy based on history - a person needing the old folks home in memory care will not succeed either.

Genovaswitness

03-04-2020, 10:11 AM

How old was John McCain when he ran in 08? I think significantly younger than either JB or BS.

71-72. president trump will be 74 when he's reelected

Harry Callahan

03-04-2020, 10:16 AM

71-72. president trump will be 74 when he's reelected

The funny thing is Trump does not look like he aged very much on the job - even eating the Mickey D Burgers from time to time.

He may know a good plastic surgeon, but still.

Russ

03-04-2020, 10:49 AM

Mini 500 million in toilet
What a fucking clown

Naw, most of that $500 million was just aimed at Trump -- it wasn't wasted as you may (eventually) apprehend . . .

Frenchfred

03-04-2020, 11:26 AM

The funny thing is Trump does not look like he aged very much on the job - even eating the Mickey D Burgers from time to time.

He may know a good plastic surgeon, but still.

that’s what happens when you are just sitting around watching TV and playing on Twitter

mando6599

03-04-2020, 12:12 PM

Wasted endorsement. Mini Mike out.

BackHome

03-04-2020, 05:02 PM

that’s what happens when you are just sitting around watching TV and playing on Twitter

You forgot to add playing basketball and surfing but man did Obama sure did age quite a bit his last term.

libertarian4321

03-26-2020, 01:08 AM

Japan took over and conquered the area of China that was important to them for their war effort, and it was never under threat by Chinese forces: industrialized Manchuria. I'm sure they felt that the ROI for a bunch of rice paddies in South China and a bunch of nothing in West China didn't justify the effort.

Woefully incorrect.

Japan took Manchuria in 1931, years prior to the Second Sino-Japanese War. Hence their primary war goal during the Second Sino Japanese War was NOT to "take industrialized Manchuria," as they had already been in control of that region for years prior.

Also, they did not take Manchuria for it's "industry" as it had very little industry at the time. They took it primarily because of it's NATURAL RESOURCES. Japan had industry, China had little (and what little they did have was NOT located in Manchuria). China had resources, Japan had nearly none.

Resources, and an opportunity to create a buffer state against the Soviet Union to defend Korea, Sakhalin, and other territories taken by the Japanese from the Russians after the Russo-Japanese War, were the primary reasons Japan invaded Manchuria prior to the Second Sino-Japanese War.

If you want to learn more about the 1937-1945 Chinese victory over the Japanese, read my response to "hater."

libertarian4321

03-26-2020, 02:11 AM

yup Japan conquered china easily

anyone that denies is hasnt read history

You clearly have no background in either history or the military and are just blowing smoke.

I began studying military history in the '80s as I was training as a military officer. While my degrees are in engineering, public health, and business, I have a minor in history as well as a lifelong passion for military history. So while I'm not a professional military historian, I'm a bit better educated on the matter than the average "Spurstalk" forum member.

Feel free to attempt to make an intelligent refutation of anything that follows, if you can. The Second Sino-Japanese War is a deep and fascinating subject, and one that I've only recently begun to study in depth.

In a previous post, I explained in some detail how utterly clueless "exstatic" was. You may want to read that response first.

Anyway, China most certainly did NOT "conquer china easily." Early in the war (1937-38) they managed to win a number of victories over the Chinese forces, taking many several large cities, primarily along the coast, and inflicting heavy casualties, while taking far heavier than expected casualties to their own forces. However, they never conquered more than a tiny portion of China, and even in the "conquered" areas, rarely held control outside of the cities themselves. They never won a complete military victory- not even close. They became bogged down, taking losses they could ill afford to take. Their attempts to raise local armies to hold territory against guerrillas proved to be about as effective as when the USA did the same thing in attempting to "win" in Vietnam or Afghanistan- largely a failure.

So by 1939, the Japanese forces were overstretched and barely able to hold the cities they had captured, and were largely unable to secure their supply lines.

Then the tide of the war began to change. Up until that point, they had primarily just forced the Japanese to expend far greater than expected resources to get their "wins." The brutality demonstrated by the Japanese at Nanking was largely due to Japanese frustration that they had met much stiffer resistance than expected and taken heavy casualties in battles they had expected to win with ease (at Shanghai, Xinkou, Nanking, Wuhan, and others).

In 1939, Chinese forces started winning major battles (e.g. Suixian-Zaoyang, 1st Changsha, and South Guangshi). Taking heavy casualties, but bleeding the Japanese forces of men and resources. This, in addition to the losses incurred by the Japanese due to Chinese guerrilla activities, significantly limited the ability of the Japanese to make further gains. The Chinese, with a massive population, were fighting a war of attrition. They could afford to lose hundreds of thousands of soldiers, whereas the Japanese could not afford to lose even tens of thousands at every battle.

While the Japanese precariously held the large cities (with constant threats to their supply lines), they controlled almost none of the smaller cities/villages and countryside. They continuously lost men and equipment to guerrillas, equipment they could ill afford to lose, given that their main fear was an invasion by the Soviets. The situation was so bad, that Japan had to strip most of it's best troops from Manchuria (where they kept many of their best units to thwart any Soviet invasion) to hold the Chinese cities and keep supply lines open. Which is why, when the Soviets finally did invade Manchuria in the last weeks of the war, they found the remaining Japanese forces in Manchuria to be largely poorly trained conscripts, nearly useless locally raised Chinese forces (who had no loyalty to Japan), and broken down men who were no longer fit for front line service. The Japanese remnants and their local puppet allies were swept aside with ease.

It's a fascinating war. You could read about it for years and only begin to scratch the surface. I didn't even get into the machinations of the various members of the supposedly united Chinese front (Nationalists, Communists, Warlords, and others).

But your claim that "Japan conquered china easily" demonstrates that your knowledge of the war is likely limited to watching a couple of movies about the Battle and subsequent atrocities committed by the Japanese at Nanking. Entertaining stuff, but it hardly makes you an expert on such a massive war.

Based on the knowledge you've show, I'd guess, you also think the French were "surrender monkeys" who ran away and didn't fight in WW2?

Nathan89

03-26-2020, 02:48 AM

Tim Duncan proved himself to be a dumbass in the area of politics just as Pop has tbh

ducks

03-26-2020, 01:43 PM

Now mini is going to get sued he told them he pay them tell nov
Then says fuck you

K...

03-26-2020, 03:27 PM

Now mini is going to get sued he told them he pay them tell nov
Then says fuck you

Oh man, you're going love this man called Donald Trump

GAustex

03-26-2020, 03:51 PM

Tim has always been hit or miss on his personal decisions.

DMC

03-28-2020, 12:06 AM

You clearly have no background in either history or the military and are just blowing smoke.

I began studying military history in the '80s as I was training as a military officer. While my degrees are in engineering, public health, and business, I have a minor in history as well as a lifelong passion for military history. So while I'm not a professional military historian, I'm a bit better educated on the matter than the average "Spurstalk" forum member.

Feel free to attempt to make an intelligent refutation of anything that follows, if you can. The Second Sino-Japanese War is a deep and fascinating subject, and one that I've only recently begun to study in depth.

In a previous post, I explained in some detail how utterly clueless "exstatic" was. You may want to read that response first.

Anyway, China most certainly did NOT "conquer china easily." Early in the war (1937-38) they managed to win a number of victories over the Chinese forces, taking many several large cities, primarily along the coast, and inflicting heavy casualties, while taking far heavier than expected casualties to their own forces. However, they never conquered more than a tiny portion of China, and even in the "conquered" areas, rarely held control outside of the cities themselves. They never won a complete military victory- not even close. They became bogged down, taking losses they could ill afford to take. Their attempts to raise local armies to hold territory against guerrillas proved to be about as effective as when the USA did the same thing in attempting to "win" in Vietnam or Afghanistan- largely a failure.

So by 1939, the Japanese forces were overstretched and barely able to hold the cities they had captured, and were largely unable to secure their supply lines.

Then the tide of the war began to change. Up until that point, they had primarily just forced the Japanese to expend far greater than expected resources to get their "wins." The brutality demonstrated by the Japanese at Nanking was largely due to Japanese frustration that they had met much stiffer resistance than expected and taken heavy casualties in battles they had expected to win with ease (at Shanghai, Xinkou, Nanking, Wuhan, and others).

In 1939, Chinese forces started winning major battles (e.g. Suixian-Zaoyang, 1st Changsha, and South Guangshi). Taking heavy casualties, but bleeding the Japanese forces of men and resources. This, in addition to the losses incurred by the Japanese due to Chinese guerrilla activities, significantly limited the ability of the Japanese to make further gains. The Chinese, with a massive population, were fighting a war of attrition. They could afford to lose hundreds of thousands of soldiers, whereas the Japanese could not afford to lose even tens of thousands at every battle.

While the Japanese precariously held the large cities (with constant threats to their supply lines), they controlled almost none of the smaller cities/villages and countryside. They continuously lost men and equipment to guerrillas, equipment they could ill afford to lose, given that their main fear was an invasion by the Soviets. The situation was so bad, that Japan had to strip most of it's best troops from Manchuria (where they kept many of their best units to thwart any Soviet invasion) to hold the Chinese cities and keep supply lines open. Which is why, when the Soviets finally did invade Manchuria in the last weeks of the war, they found the remaining Japanese forces in Manchuria to be largely poorly trained conscripts, nearly useless locally raised Chinese forces (who had no loyalty to Japan), and broken down men who were no longer fit for front line service. The Japanese remnants and their local puppet allies were swept aside with ease.

It's a fascinating war. You could read about it for years and only begin to scratch the surface. I didn't even get into the machinations of the various members of the supposedly united Chinese front (Nationalists, Communists, Warlords, and others).

But your claim that "Japan conquered china easily" demonstrates that your knowledge of the war is likely limited to watching a couple of movies about the Battle and subsequent atrocities committed by the Japanese at Nanking. Entertaining stuff, but it hardly makes you an expert on such a massive war.

Based on the knowledge you've show, I'd guess, you also think the French were "surrender monkeys" who ran away and didn't fight in WW2?

tl;dr