ok lets reduce the cost of college. there are 2-3 million open jobs that ppl arent going to

200k open manufacturing jobs too

bunch of nuclear technicians going to retirement

blue collar in huge shortages


also college is already affordable for poor ppl. theres FAFSA, bunch of scholarships, affirmative action, and reasonable student debt terms. however making it even more affordable is good 2


nice article on whether the poor save. ok i was wrong about that

your second article leaves out the fact that rich ppl bribe politicians to rig the system in their favor. plus they invest lot of their money in assets that dont get taxed the same as wages. they also have a diverse source of income

poor ppl on contrast are taxed higher cus of their wages and their wages go down cus they dnt hold skills that are valued by society

Edited 5/15/2016 01:40:09

In America? Really? I don't think so, I think it's something like 5%. Either way, it was their risktaking that got them what they got.

You got cash in the bank? if yes, you are in the stock market in the US, and most people in the US happen to have cash in the bank.

For the third point, I forgot to include the word more, sorry.
You can't advocate giving money by those who took those risks and lost by taking away money from those who took some risks and won - that'd just be taking away the choice of risk from folk.
I'm advocating for limiting the impacts of that risk, which may sound like removal of choice of said risk, but it isn't. I'm not a Marxist advocating for a classless society, I'm rather arguing for smaller gaps in between the classes.

I'm advocating for limiting the impacts of that risk, which may sound like removal of choice of said risk, but it isn't. I'm not a Marxist advocating for a classless society, I'm rather arguing for smaller gaps in between the classes.

You're advocating for taking away 20% that risk. 100% would be communist. 50% is socialist.

It's not necessarily a bad thing, but if even the bad hand of that risk doesn't even make anyone poor, then why "limit" that risk, as you say?

there are 2-3 million open jobs that ppl arent going to
Mostly due to lacking the technical skills for such positions, which could be much more easily achieved by reducing the cost of college, especially community/technical colleges, as well as removing unnecessary licensing.

also college is already affordable for poor ppl. theres FAFSA, bunch of scholarships, affirmative action, and reasonable student debt terms. however making it more affordable
Despite all this, college costs are at all time high, even adjusting for all these benefits and inflation. While it is technically affordable(http://www.ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/issue_brief_is_college_affordable_july_2012.pdf), I would argue that the costs are still excessive.
http://www.ed.gov/college

rich ppl bribe politicians to rig the system in their favor.
Another reason to support sander's, he is advocating for the overturn of citizen's united, which allows for much large influence of elections by the rich

plus they invest lot of their money in assets that dont get taxed the same as wages. they also have a diverse source of income
Things the poor generally lack the ability to due to their economic position.

but if even the bad hand of that risk doesn't even make anyone poor, then why "limit" that risk, as you say?
because historically there has been revolutions when too large of a gap emerges between the economic classes, and an economic crisis occurs(look at the French revolution, by that era's standards, no one in France was poor, however there is revolution following an economic crisis in 1788-1789.) before the gap is resolved. While I don't expect revolutions to arise in the US any time soon, and happened to be too young in 2008 to actually understand any of this, I still fear the possibility of open militaristic revolution in the US during the next recession, which has nearly occurred in the past, but generally adverted by a change in gov't, which I would expect, and a shift in the gov't too radically to the right would be disastrous for me, as I would probably get persecuted by a McCarthy-esque gov't in less than a minute.

Mostly due to lacking the technical skills for such positions, which could be much more easily achieved by reducing the cost of college, especially community/technical colleges, as well as removing unnecessary licensing.

also college is already affordable for poor ppl. theres FAFSA, bunch of scholarships, affirmative action, and reasonable student debt terms. however making it more affordable
Despite all this, college costs are at all time high, even adjusting for all these benefits and inflation. While it is technically affordable(http://www.ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/issue_brief_is_college_affordable_july_2012.pdf), I would argue that the costs are still excessive.
http://www.ed.gov/college

the current system can be worked around with. however we are pretty much in agreement. find ways to get poor ppl good paying jobs. and to do that is to make education even more affordable

trade schools however have a bunch of agreements u can do. like not paying for it until u land a job

Edited 5/15/2016 01:56:02

Japan you're blatantly lying gtfo you creepy kike commie.

the current system can be worked around with. however we are pretty much in agreement. find ways to get poor ppl good paying jobs. and to do that is to make education even more affordable

trade schools however have a bunch of agreements u can do. like not paying for it until u land a job

Yep. I wonder what the reaction would be to expand that trade school clause to cover all universities.

Jew

because historically there has been revolutions when too large of a gap emerges between the economic classes, and an economic crisis occurs

There are never revolutions if the folk are (well) told that their government is great. There are revolutions if there are folk dying on the streets, but I mean, not in Ireland, nor in Ukraine, just in France (which, yes, definitely by today's standards they would be poor - annoyed and literally starving by being taxed on bread?). There's not going to be a revolution in America, for America's lived through far worse. The closest there was, was when Smedley Butler (the real fellow) stopped the fascist overthrow, and that revolution started from the top-down. Any revolution today probably would be started by foreign agents (see Donetsk).

a shift in the gov't too radically to the right would be disastrous for me, as I would probably get persecuted by a McCarthy-esque gov't in less than a minute.

Rightness in itself would not do that, just authoritarianism and more government. Anyhow, you have the freedom to move to lefter Britain or even lefter Malta (if Libyan refugees give you a fetish).

There was no tax on bread X, you lying Jew.

Yep. I wonder what the reaction would be to expand that trade school clause to cover all universities.

that would be pretty good. student debt terms have that clause as well

Valid points. However, I plan on living in the US for at least another 10 years, and any shift to the far radical fringes on either side has historically resulted in persecution of the people on the other side of the political spectrum starting from the radicals, which some people would place me part of them(Fascists in Italy, Nazis in Germany, The terror in France, Communists in the USSR, etc.). While I expect the middle to generally hold in the US due to it being a democratic republic that has historically done so, there have been cases where it has not held in other countries(Obvious example: Spanish civil war). I would probably move if gov't became too radical in a way that is a threat to me, but I also generally don't like having a gov't enact policies I entirely disagree with, and due to my position on the political spectrum makes it basically impossible if the right takes over, for the most part.

The Federal Reserve is a Jewish trick and its the reason we're in such dire financial times

Japan you're a communist Jew liar leave the country asap.

u need to shut up

anyway stop demonizing da rich and let work on proper POLICY to make poor ppl less poorer

Stay mad Jew

However, I plan on living in the US for at least another 10 years, and any shift to the far radical fringes on either side

It's not what side they're on, just how authoritarian there are. There's little economically differing Singapore from Hongkong, but one of them is ruled by a way more oppressive government than the other. Although Hongkong is a special setting, same deal with America. Same with Sweden and Belarus.

At any rate, I really truly doubt that war will come to America, and I doubt picking one of the most economically extremist mainstream candidates would do much for keeping it middle in America.

I also generally don't like having a gov't enact policies I entirely disagree with

In my thought, it's truly terrible how folk make their picks on candidate. Charisma, yes, but the problem doesn't stop there. They weigh what happens there like what happens here, and there, they don't get to vote. What this means: vote for the candidate that would have the lowest death count. Sanders is probably the mainstream candidate with the lowest death candidate, but Libertarians all the way, for they're way lower - imagine ending all wars America's in.

Anyhow, just don't be selfish. It's awful that 325 million folk pick policies not just for themselves, but for 7k million other folk, who don't have a vote and usually suffer graver consequences then, say, gays having to be paying higher taxes or Muslims and Jews not being allowed to be presidents (both bad things, but as bad as one death? NO.).

Alright, let's go through this karl:
1. I'm atheist not Jewish
2. I'm not communist, I'm a believer in Keynesian economics, Utilitarianism, and Democratic Socialism(There are some disagreements between the 3 groups, if you want my specific stances on those disagreements, just ask about them), which is not communist.
3. I'm not a liar. you can't be a liar when there happen to be opinions floating around. You can lie about the facts backing your statements, or your sources, but in this sort of environment, we tend to try to avoid both those cases, and generally acknowledge when me made a mistake or were misinformed.

nice try JIDF, ik you're Jewish racially. You're lying about the rich staying rich and the poor staying poor. You're too Jewish to acknowledge it but deep down you know you're a lying Jew.

Edited 5/15/2016 02:30:05