Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders?

SSG Jason Penn - Perhaps it would interest you to know that during the largest post-war periods of economic growth in the US, the highest tax bracket approached 70%. As such, your prediction that job creation would stagnate under the stifling pressure of extreme taxation, well, it just doesn't come true.

CPT Jason Mitchell, MBA - Sorry that I've taken so long to write back, Sir. I somehow missed your comment until now. Your concerns about offshoring are highly valid. As you pointed out, it is already an epidemic that is destroying our manufacturing base at a unsustainable rate. Before I begin delving into ideals too deep, I should point out that I do not by any means expect Sanders or any other presidential candidate to accomplish any more than 50% of their agenda while in office, even if they had a matching set of Houses to accompany their two terms in the White House.

Now, big business follows a path of least resistance to profits, so if a corporation can eliminate the “resistance” of labor laws, health and safety regulations, environmental controls, and labor unions, even if it adds the logistical nightmare of shipping across an ocean or two, it is worth it in the long run to make a few extra (million) bucks. To prevent this, the path of least resistance must be that your product should be manufactured with as many domestic components as possible, by legal American workers, and in accordance with all applicable regulations (health and safety, environmental concerns, labor laws, etc.)

My wages cost my company approximately 0.0003% of the purchase price of any of our products, whereas my CEO’s salary accounts for nearly 1% of the purchase price. And with other corporations and industries, the stretch is even more exaggerated. My point here is, I believe they can afford to take a small cut in pay. After all, the middle class has been falling behind inflation since the 1980s. It won’t be fun for them, or easy to make happen, but it may be necessary for them to take a pay cut if their workforce is to see a pay increase.

The college plan is paid for through several avenues, starting with controls on tuition costs, which have risen nearly 400% faster than the rest of the economy. Some reports put tuition as having increased by nearly 1200% in the last 30 years. The money is essentially already there, it just isn’t being used properly. It’s all getting to the universities, but much of it is staying in the executives pockets and not really helping students. Also, it’s not free for everybody. There will still be grade point averages and academic standards. Sander’s plan would also control the financing terms that can be imposed upon a graduating student to prevent excessive interest rates. Any remaining balances owed by the system would be covered by a tax on Wall Street trades, which I can’t think of a single reason why I should be upset about that. Also, his college plan states that it is for Public Colleges and Universities, which precludes some, but nowhere near all of the liberal arts.

SFC (Join to see) - I will say it again, with information based off of an Economics course I took in college, A CEO will take extra profits and reinvest into his company as well as invest in other companies, this will help expand those companies allowing for job growth. When the Government taxes the hell out of a company (or the rich CEO) then they don't have as much money to invest resulting in job stagnation. When at this point of taxation, the government hits those companies with "over-taxation" then the company suffers a loss of profit resulting in the company laying off, or firing employees to make up for lost profits. Just like if you started to make extra money, and then decided to hire a maid (job growth), but then the Government decides to hit you where it counts (pocketbook) and raises your tax rate, now you can't afford to keep the maid on the pay roll, so you lay her off (job loss). You are saying that I don't understand economics? I profess that I am no expert, but it is quite obvious that you are the one who is lacking in the knowledge of the workings of economics!

SSG Jason Penn - I can see that you're trying to make an argument, but history and reality doesn't agree with what you're saying. Profits have not correlated to jobs, or at least not domestic jobs. If what you're saying was true, Roosevelt and Eisenhower would have destroyed the economy, Reagan would have kicked off an explosion of job creation and Bush would have had us sitting pretty in 2008. But it wasn't so. It was the exact opposite. Liberal policy of the 40s and 50s brought us out of the depression and into the Boom. Reagan, GHW Bush, Bill Clinton, and GW Bush have all collectively done their part to hold back the middle class in one way or another.

MCPO Roger Collins - Master Chief; I rather suspect that a significant number or Republicans would NOT vote for Jesus if he were running on the Democrat ticket and vice versa.

Equally, I rather suspect that Jesus would say "What do you mean 'My Church owns a bank.'?"

I shudder to think about what He might say to some of the Televangelists (actually that should include the leaders in most religions) about their life style.

COL Ted Mc - Speaking for myself, I voted twice for Democrat Governor in my state, who won twice in a predominantly conservative political bent. If he ran for President, he would get my vote.

well I am having RP issues again lol.
Its funny how liberals like to claim Jesus was a liberal. The underlying belief behind all of Jesus's philosophies stemmed from his belief in a God, something that is not present in the modern " Progressive' liberal democrat. You remove the God behind the humanitarian and you are left with a disillusioned atheists who cannot deal with the utter nothingness they have chosen as their world view. Take God out of Jesus's philosophy makes the entire thing meaningless, its kind of like when you correctly remove the notion that humans are ' community' animals from Marx's philosophy and you are left with a heap of nonsense. Jesus's belief in a God is the reason for all of his teachings. The modern liberal doesn't believe in a God so they must deal with what is left, the amoral, random, utter meaningless natural law, the only reality left in a world view that doesn't include a God. So I say accept the nothingness and stop pretending that humanism is a real thing. Humanism is simply a man made religion with no basis in reality. They claim to be scientific but no scientific discipline lends any weight to their beliefs whatsoever. Jesus would not be a democrat, prob not a republican either, but most definitely not an atheist Marxist. The nothingness was not a belief Jesus held and I would love to see a liberal argument try and say that it was. You see the problem with so many liberals today is that they live in a society that was created by a 2-5 thousand year old monotheistic belief system. The things we all claim to be right and wrong stem from this heritage. you want to see a truly atheist society then study Rome, pre catholic Rome. If you would like a better idea what a truly atheist society can produce as far as human rights and day to day existence...look to Rome. And look at their leaders and their slaves, and their daily atrocities in the arenas as you will have a more clear picture of a power driven political system like we see in our modern 'progressive' liberal democrats.

SrA Art Siatkowsky -
Luke 12:33-34 says to
“Sell your possessions, and give to the needy.”
1 John 3:17 says
“But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?”
Matthew 19:21 says
"Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

I also find it most interesting that you claim atheists have no morals, but in fact, atheists have the lowest rate of incarceration (0.1% of the nationwide prison population) of nearly any demographic you could possible name. I guess Atheists just are really, really, really good at not getting caught while committing crimes? What you're saying is without theism there can be no morals. I have more highly developed moral compass now as an atheist and humanist then I ever did when I was being raised in an ultra-conservative, highly religious home. If you must have a deity and a risk/reward situation to make you do the right thing, then you're just not a very good person to begin with...

Chief, you seem to have socialism confused with communism and marxism. They each have different definitions, as they are not the same systems of economy. We have been breaking out as a socialist economy for the last 80 years, but the GOP keeps trying to shove us back into the late 1920's. For the last couple of decades, every time we get a Republican POTUS, we see a period of economic downturn. But still, Republicans blame anyone and everyone else.