Singling out what he dubs the "top 10 corporate tax dodgers," Bernie Sanders on Friday pledged to close loopholes that let huge corporations avoid paying their fair share in taxes.
its Bernie or the Establishment ..easy choice! Go Bernie!
How many times have we heard this about how these corporations avoiding taxes. I think every presidential election. I guess in all the horse trading to get things passed in Washington this must be one of those things that the Democrats give the Republicans to get some program funded to help people. If Bernie can close these loopholes hats off to him.
Cue Jeff Bezos (net worth: $59+ billion), founder/CEO Amazon.com, owner Washington Post:
NO WE CAN'T!
Meanwhile in Japan, today, a sign of things coming to America...and why the stock market rose 400 points:
Japan announced negative interest rates on savings.
Let's hear it for Wall Street and the world's banksters!
And let''s all stay the course, let's stop this silly Bernie Sanders radicalism, and let's be happy that things are working out for everybody except the vast majority of us.
Those bastards were sent to ivy league schools then given massive salaries, stock options, huge bonuses, golden parachutes and much more precisely for doing what they do, find ways to fleece the people LEGALLY. It's a small price to pay for the enormous returns however damaging even to their own longer term survival.
How long has it been since there has been a presidential candidate, that has gotten the support that Sanders has and has challenged the wealthy of this country..... A pretty long time, and I am no spring chicken.
Negative interest rates in Europe, Japan and other nations are the direct result of the 2008 crash that was caused by three decades of Democrats and Republicans decriminalizing New Deal financial industry regulations.
The banks love it because they can charge depositors exhorbitant fees for bank deposits.
If we even hope to have a sliver of a chance to cut down on corporate malfeasance in every shade & meaning of the term, we must work our butts off to promote BERNIE. You silly people who want Hillary: I ask you a great big "WHY?' She is so deeply inside the pockets of the banksters she won'' t repeat,"Cut it out!" her feeble, ridiculous and childish debate retort.
Furthermore, her oft-repeated great foreign policy experience turns out to be disastrous. She never met a weapons system she didn't love nor a war she didn't enthusiastically champion. I'm referring not to her nuckleheaded Iraq War vote, but the zeal w/which she caused Libya, Honduras, and other countries to tumble into madness and chaos. I'll take wisdom over experience any day. While I am obviously not in Congress, I saw through the Cheney-Bush cabal's lies and so did Senator Sanders. All "experience" is thus obviously not worth bragging rights.
Folks, if u really wanna help BERNIE in what has turned into all-out war, u will visit www.citizensagainstplutocracy.org & take the pledge "BERNIE or Green." I've done so. It's a fun, EZ way to stand up for your candidate; it will give him leverage @ the Democratic Convention. Hundreds, thousands of Americans have seen the wisdom of this tool to propel BERNIE to the nomination. Join us--just do it!
he can if WE THE PEOPLE vote OUT the Establishment in Congress
EARTH NEEDS SYSTEM OVERHAUL
Foundations of Wildist Ethics
Abstract—Wildism is an ethical philosophy that stresses the importance of wildness in conserving and restoring nature. It could be considered part of the deep ecology movement, but was largely borne out of the perceived need for something more focused and well-suited to wildlands advocacy and other wildness-centered conservation work, especially in this age of revisionist conservation ideologies like the one of the Anthropocene boosters. This piece examines the foundational ideas of the resulting philosophy. The first part examines the epistemological and metaphysical principles undergirding wildism, while the second part outlines the ethical principles and ideas. Apart from the section on ethical discourse, the main ideas are as follows: (1) the Cosmos is a proper object of worship, as men such as Einstein and Carl Sagan have also asserted, and conservation work in this context can properly be conceived of as a sacred duty; (2) the dominant mythologies of progress are false, which includes social progressivism; (3) the conservation imperative must be extended to human nature; (4) industry is almost certainly incompatible with wild nature, leaving the collapse of industry as the only viable solution to our moral problems; (5) wildlands conservation is a foremost duty for wildists. In conclusion, the threats posed by revisionism are restated, as well as some necessary work for elaboration beyond this piece’s foundational ideas.
John Jacobi, The Wildist Institute...
veganarchoprimitivism dot com
A long time. Lets see: probably 1960.
Glad to know that you care...but instead of fearing for him, let's just elect him. He's not naive, he knows what he signed up for -- that's just how deeply he believes in his mission.
Your endless status quo propaganda is tiresome.
With negative interest rates... it pays to put your cash in your mattress!
Here is a clear statement by Bernie Sanders of his proposed direction and who the candidate serves.
We are meant to believe that the so-called "pragmatism" possessed/sold by Hillary will "deliver" for us, that the reality is there is such overwhelming opposition to any issue "that's the best we can/could get". That mindset is a lie, a fabrication only marginally accurate. The truth is when politicians offer up the "half" an already very small loaf they claim is in the public interest and we agree, that is ALL we will get, the so-called "compromise" is designed to maintain the status quo and agenda of those creating the illusion, and the critical needs and priorities of the nation and people will continue to be sold to the highest bidder. "Compromise" has become collusion and complicity, it is not "compromise" in any real sense.
We are also meant to believe that somehow the much touted "experience" Hillary possesses is a thing to be respected and lauded, that she is "in the loop" and understands nuance of many issues. That too is a lie, the record of politicians and why they vote one way or another is manipulated to serve existing power and profits - all decisions that turn up rotten or exposed as incompetent or disastrous are swept under the carpet, as so many of Hillary's are.
In the "debates" questions are asked but usually not fully or truthfully answered, candidates rehearse the deflections they employ to evade, distort, or ignore and speak in such generalities, voters can glean little but that there has in fact been a diversion and non-answer - that too should be seen as a revealing "answer". Contrast answers from Hillary and Sanders for clear examples of evasions and forthrightness, of generalities and specifics.
This election, as many have noted, represents a crossroads, either we accept the lies and deceit of politicians who serve profits and self-interest above all else, or seek a renewal of the promise of America, a political revolution demanding government begin serving the needs and priorities of the nation and people rather than the 1%, and greed as "all we can/could get".
And the crooks in congress have the galls to cut food stamp for the poor, increase Medicare copay, increase interest on student loans, cut social security benefits, destroy the postal worker's pensions and shut down the government. All in the name of reducing the deficit, never a peep about fair taxation, the pentagon budget or reforming the banking system.
I am all for the Bern and think that a change in the corporate tax structure is a good move. At the same time another $100 billion in revenue is just a small step in the right direction. After all the country is running annual deficits of $400-500 billion and real economic growth is about half of what it was in the 70's. Reigning in the dodgers is a good first step, especially if it leads to some shift in the power balance that gets companies to invest in productive capacity in the domestic economy.
You are way off topic, and your comment can be considered to be spam.
First of all, you are confusing tax evasion with tax avoidance. Avoidance is legal, evasion is illegal.
Second, he may get a tax write off, but the donation is much bigger than the write off.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.