Jump to content

Foraker

Great American Tower 665'
  • Content Count

    1,215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Foraker last won the day on February 18

Foraker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

187 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Trump lies, Biden "misspeaks" Trump bullies, Biden mocks Very familiar faces on those two coins, eh? Although I really would like to see Biden and Trump go at it on the debate stage in a push up competition....
  2. Where? To compete with Phoenix in Cedar-Lee or Starbucks at Mayfield-Lee?
  3. I agree that this is a terrible policy. But I also think that we have a societal problem where after the boomers left colleges were fighting over a smaller population of students and reasonable student loans were pretty easy to get -- so colleges became country clubs and resorts in a competitive environment. Some responsibility lies with families to say "enough" -- it's not worth going into that kind of debt. Consumers of college education need to be more selective. Weaker colleges need to fail. On the slush-fund supply side, federal student loans should be available at a near-prime rate to everyone, useful for any college or trade school, but only up to a four-years-of-community-college kind of amount. If you want to pay for an expensive private school like Oberlin those cheap federal loans aren't going to get you very far.
  4. Totally agree that the US is not the dominant power that we were in the 1950s. There are a LOT of Americans who don't want to face that fact any more than they want to face their own unavoidable death, particularly on the right. And that makes Trump's alienation of our allies all the more worrisome. Countries still control who can live within their borders. Renounce your US citizenship and you'll lose the right to vote in the US. Countries also control the flow of currency across their borders (although that may be changing it still isn't easy). So you might make a lot of money in the US, but getting it out of the US is going to take some effort. There will always be millionaires who decide to decamp to the French Riviera or wherever and can hire the attorneys and accountants to make it work. But I still think that will be a minority. I think we've allowed taxes at the top end to drop too far, and we've given away too much revenue in tax breaks to corporations and the wealthy. At the end of the day, raising taxes on the wealthy is necessary to increase the quality of life of the poorest Americans -- yes, the wealthy pay more tax than anyone, but they also gain more from our system and have more to lose in its absence. Get rid of the cap on SS/Medicare so that we don't slide back to a high elderly poverty rate and homeless disabled rate and provide low cost medical insurance for everyone. Impose high tax rates on estates. I want an America that is a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps, everyone has a relatively equal chance at success kind of country -- not a country where Daddy Warbucks allows several generations to slack off and slowly drain grandpa's wealth while the majority struggles to avoid poverty and class mobility is nil. So I align more with Sanders and Warren, although I'm probably more fiscally conservative (I want social benefits over a mighty war machine, but we have to be able to afford them) but I think even Klobuchar would move us in the right direction.
  5. Putting aside the question of whether all college should be free, although I actually agree with you that two-year community colleges and trade schools should be, but four-year colleges should not (and yet, a better funding mechanism IS needed there) --- a 90% tax bracket in the 1950s did not lead to droves of the wealthiest Americans leaving the country (because after all America is the greatest country, like, ever!), and wouldn't do so again. As long as this country remains a great place to make money, wealthy people will want to be here. Remember that that 90% bracket is only on the income earned above a certain amount. If you make $100M your tax is going to be far less than $90M because the 90% tax rate only applies to the last $10M or so of your earnings. I also don't believe that wealthy people are going to stop trying to build more wealth if they reach that 90% bracket. Greed got them there, and it isn't going to let go just because they reached some stratospheric income level that almost no one else can ever hope to reach.
  6. And several states are requiring disclosure of tax returns to be eligible for the ballot. It will be a wild ride, for sure.
  7. I completely agree. If the nominee runs a race like Hilary's and fails to energize the base, that is exactly what I would expect. Even if a couple of WI, MI, and PA, traditionally democratic states, switch their EC votes this time around it might not be enough unless more Democrats show up to vote.
  8. First, I applaud and encourage your participation in this forum even if you are not a fan of the Democratic candidate, for all of the reasons you listed. But second, if Trump is as much of a danger to our republic as you (rightly) fear, you really need to hold your nose and vote for the Democratic Party nominee rather than not vote (or write in a vote for Mickey Mouse). I am confident that Congress will pull back the biggest excesses of even Sanders and you should be too. Yes, you make a good point. I think that Trump's novelty has worn off for some of his voters who either will not vote or will switch to the Democratic Party nominee -- so I think he's starting in a headwind. As a result, it seems unlikely that he will increase his vote total on this second round even if he attracts some of those disaffected former Democratic Party voters. Best case he manages to attract as many as he loses and receives about the same 63Million votes, and I'd bet that his total actually drops. (I just watched the speech he gave at the NATO summit and he really seemed unhinged; it will be interesting to see him on a debate stage again.) If there are approximately 250 million voting-age citizens, and there's the usual 55% turnout, that's 137million votes. take out Trump's 63million and that leaves 74million for the Democratic nominee. I think it ultimately will depend on a Democratic nominee who can run a good campaign and motivate the base to show up -- because if they are motivated and show up the nominee should easily surpass Hilary's vote total and gain the needed 38 EC votes. Three out of the four of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio would do it.
  9. If you're not calling for the impeachment and removal of the President, then you're arguing for watering down the definition of bribery for future presidents -- Congressional Republicans seem to want to read into the Constitution "impeachable bribery" as distinguishable from "non-impeachable bribery" when the Constitution makes no such distinction. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bribery (emphasis added) Mulvaney, budget director and acting White House Chief of Staff, has already said essentially "Yes, we did it. Get over it." The argument that THIS bribery was not of the impeachable kind seems to fail the literal interpretation test -- the Constitution does not distinguish. Article II, Section 4. (emphasis again added) If the crime has already been acknowledged, on what basis would you not convict? And what would be the precedent you want to set for future presidents?
  10. Thank you Cavalier Attitude. Mondragon Corp. is the most prominent and successful co-op business model. And you're right, worker ownership is not the same as worker-managed. Just as US citizens have ownership in this country and have a voice to say how we want the country run, we hire professionals (elect representatives who hire experts in various agencies) to actually run the country. Hopefully the Evergreen group of cooperatives in Cleveland continue to be successful and inspire more co-ops. As Gramarye suggested, they can struggle like any business, and they can be easier to start in less capital-intensive settings. Here's a home health care agency in NYC as another example -- http://www.chcany.org/ Not far from Cleveland, there are thriving cooperative businesses in Ann Arbor. https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-build-a-great-company-zingermans-ari-weinzweig-2014-6 And just now I found this interesting quote from 2014: http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/9/why-co-ops-are-thefutureoftheamericaneconomy.html
  11. https://community-wealth.org/content/cleveland-model-how-evergreen-cooperatives-are-building-community-wealth
  12. Seems like a potential House ethics violation
  13. Foraker

    Immigration

    I know what the law says, and that is that it is illegal for him to be here. For this discussion it doesn't matter whether he entered the country legally and overstayed his visa, or came across the border between checkpoints, illegally. Yes, under the current law he should be deported. My point was that one of the functions of immigration law seems to be about keeping track of criminals and keeping criminals out -- that's the basis for The Wall, right? Our immigration law also seeks to restrict the flow of immigrants so that American workers aren't undercut by workers willing to work for less (excess labor supply). Since we currently are at nearly full employment, our immigration law should account for that and provide an easier legal path for workers so that the hotel, meatpacking, and construction industries wouldn't be so infamous for their "illegal" employment practices. AND at the same time, we should stop pretending that shipping workers back to their home countries is going to solve the "illegal" immigration problem (am I missing some other problem caused by immigrants?). Until it's a death sentence for employers to hire illegal workers, capitalism will continue to encourage them to do so. And if the guy was working here for 18 years he must have been doing something right -- so we're kicking out a productive worker because of paperwork. Obviously there is a demand for his services, so why are we decreasing the supply? That's all.
  14. Foraker

    Immigration

    I completely understand the desire to keep track of criminals, but this idea of your mere presence in a country being illegal seems wrong. Having said that, if the whole being-here-illegally is such a problem, we really should be seeing some significant penalties (criminal penalties for executives of repeat-offenders!) on all the employers who hired this guy for the past 18 years. Otherwise, they just hire another person here illegally (probably for less than a "legal" American or American immigrant, or at least one who isn't going to complain about safety concerns). If it's just a fine -- the cost of doing business -- the demand for low-wage, afraid-to-rock-the-boat illegal immigrant workers will continue.
  15. At least one African-American commentator has basically said that the Republican Party is so dangerous to African-Americans that getting a democrat into office is the only thing that matters, they cannot afford a loss, so many in that community are simply looking at Joe Biden as someone who can win. Paraphrasing: “for voters of color, there is no conversation of interest to talk about uniting” because Trump poses an “imminent danger” “to people who look like me.” https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/reid-black-or-brown-people-acutely-feel-the-danger-of-donald-trump-73804357713
×
×
  • Create New...