Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 10/27/2015 5:57:57 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Mash-Up Of Bernie Sanders And Reagan Shows The Insanity Of The Modern GOP (SEE VIDEO/Article):

The video features both Sanders and Reagan speaking on topics such as tax loopholes, social security, budget deficits, and even gun control. Guess what? They are both almost identical in their rhetoric.

The video stats out by comparing the two’s positions on closing tax loopholes for corporations and the wealthy. First up is Reagan:

“…going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing. But a bus driver was paying 10% of his salary and that’s crazy.”

Then Sanders:

“Furthermore, not a whole lot of people know this, one out of four profitable corporations pay zero in taxes. These guys are putting their money in the Cayman Islands. Bermuda. Other tax havens. I have the radical idea that as we deal with deficit reduction, maybe we don’t cut social security and benefits for disabled veterans. And Medicaid, and Medicare, and education. Maybe we plug these loopholes and ask these guys to start paying their fair share of taxes.”

Reagan:

“Social security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on the employer and employee. If you reduce the out go of social security that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the social security trust fund. So social security has nothing to do with balancing a budget, or reducing or lowering the deficit.”

Sanders:

“Today, social security has a surplus of $2.76 trillion dollars… and then we hear the argument that, ‘we’ll you know we have a large deficit. Social security is one of the causes of our deficit and our national debt.’ That is absolutely inaccurate, social security has not contributed one nickel to our deficit or our national debt. Because, as every worker knows, social security is independently funded through payroll tax contributions through workers and their employers, 6.2% from each. It does not receive funding from the federal treasurer.”

Every single 2016 Republican presidential candidate has promised to either privatize or reduce social security, with the exception of Donald Trump, who has even lashed out against his Republican opponents for their insane ideas on social security.

It is hard to believe that we live in a day and age where a self-described democratic socialist has more in common with Reagan on many important issues than almost the entire GOP playing field. It just goes to show how far off the deep end the Republicans have gone, and proves that a hard turn left in our political economy would actually just be a move to the center.

Facebook version of the video



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 10/27/2015 5:58:49 AM >
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 10/27/2015 10:28:19 AM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

Well named: The Reasonable Americans Movement.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 10/27/2015 3:09:32 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
Well just as in another link on another OP, rhetoric as a candidate and practice as pres. are two different things. For example, speaking of loopholes, Reagan passed a housing depreciation benefit that allowed investors to deduct unlimited mortgage interest payments from the taxes. Now the limit is one additional house.

His tax law changes also allowed for passive loss deductions on commercial bldgs. to be deducted from profitable projects. This caused billion$ in spec. office and retail bldg. that created construction jobs but led to many empty bldgs. going back to the lenders.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 10/27/2015 3:10:41 PM >


_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 10/27/2015 3:39:46 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
I think I saw another person being aligned with speeches given over the years...im gonna have to see if I can find it.


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 11/1/2015 5:35:44 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Well just as in another link on another OP, rhetoric as a candidate and practice as pres. are two different things. For example, speaking of loopholes, Reagan passed a housing depreciation benefit that allowed investors to deduct unlimited mortgage interest payments from the taxes. Now the limit is one additional house.

His tax law changes also allowed for passive loss deductions on commercial bldgs. to be deducted from profitable projects. This caused billion$ in spec. office and retail bldg. that created construction jobs but led to many empty bldgs. going back to the lenders.

It also subsidizes mansions, rather than those dollars going to help average homeowners. It's essentially a regressive tax.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 11/1/2015 9:48:40 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
Republicans lie about everything? What else is new.....

Yes it is curious to see many of Mr. Reagan's views match up to Mr. Sanders. That might be because back in Reagan's day, the Republican Party had many liberals whom outnumbered the conservatives. In Ronald Reagan's day, the extreme Democrats would be known as members of the Tea Party. A huge political change took place during the Clinton Administration. More liberals went to the Democrats and more conservatives to the Republicans. In an effort to score more votes, the GOP created the Tea Party. An organization that has nothing to do with the ACTUAL Tea Party of Boston. Since the reason those guys throw tea overboard was because they weren't being taxed enough (completely opposite of what Tea Partiers demand today).

Reagan does have differences with Sanders in that the two men are operating in different ages of technology. Ronald Reagan never had to deal with social media on the depth and scale of Bernie Sanders. Nor have 24/7 coverage. Or of opinionated assholes dissecting his every tidbit of communication. Yes, American during Ronald Reagan's time in the Oval Office is very different from a Sander's administration. Yet, they do share many things in common. Like being very different from the GOP/TP at current!

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 11/1/2015 6:59:02 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
Not a big deal but in fact the Boston Tea Party and the destruction of tea was of the East India Tea company that was in financial troubles. Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773 giving [it] alone an import duty advantage. The east India Tea company could undersell the colonialists and even smugglers and were granted a monopoly.

Mass. in scope and Boston specifically chose not to go along with the colonial refusal to take delivery of that tea. So Sam Adams arranged for the Sons of Liberty to board the ships and dump the tea overboard.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 11/1/2015 7:58:41 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Not a big deal but in fact the Boston Tea Party and the destruction of tea was of the East India Tea company that was in financial troubles. Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773 giving [it] alone an import duty advantage. The east India Tea company could undersell the colonialists and even smugglers and were granted a monopoly.

Mass. in scope and Boston specifically chose not to go along with the colonial refusal to take delivery of that tea. So Sam Adams arranged for the Sons of Liberty to board the ships and dump the tea overboard.


The residents in and around Boston believed if they paid higher taxes, the King would send more troops to help guard their property from criminals, Indians, and foreign powers. Whether that would have actually happened or not, is a good question to this day.

Another curious fact is the actual event. Anyone caught taking any of the tea for personal gain was clubbed by those around them and dragged off the ship immediately. The ship's crew was not attacked but simply contained (the crew was not paid enough to risk their lives for the cargo).


(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof - 11/1/2015 9:44:06 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Not a big deal but in fact the Boston Tea Party and the destruction of tea was of the East India Tea company that was in financial troubles. Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773 giving [it] alone an import duty advantage. The east India Tea company could undersell the colonialists and even smugglers and were granted a monopoly.

Mass. in scope and Boston specifically chose not to go along with the colonial refusal to take delivery of that tea. So Sam Adams arranged for the Sons of Liberty to board the ships and dump the tea overboard.


The residents in and around Boston believed if they paid higher taxes, the King would send more troops to help guard their property from criminals, Indians, and foreign powers. Whether that would have actually happened or not, is a good question to this day.

Another curious fact is the actual event. Anyone caught taking any of the tea for personal gain was clubbed by those around them and dragged off the ship immediately. The ship's crew was not attacked but simply contained (the crew was not paid enough to risk their lives for the cargo).



That may well have been true but the Boston tea party so-called, was...all about that tea and the advantages created by that act of parliament.

Plus yes, they didn't mess with the crew or the ship, just the tea.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 9
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Sanders/Reagan agree on the issues? Yep--here's proof Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.093