2016 president?

[bowly97]

1 hour ago, Verum said:

A small increase in income tax can bring a lot of money for the gov. during a year. Haven't you ever played Total War before? Also if Trump wins we will get nuked. If Hillary, we will get fucked. Any other GOP candidate can piss off because they remind me of Busch. If Bernie... well free college and shit if his plan works and Americans are willing to pay just a little more tax. Either way I view all candidates in the 2016 election season as absolute shit. But from my findings, Bernie in my opinion would do the best. But I digress, for you can never tell what will happen in that oval office. For the Trump supporters - How do you think he will pay for that massive fence? Don't say Mexico because that's the dumbest idea I have ever heard. It will be built with taxes!!!

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                       ~ Rant Over

honestly if it comes of taxes, it might pay off bringing back jobs after illegals are gone. Personally I dont think the national debt will be gone in 100 years so if that wall sets us back, at least the illegals are gone

[bowly97]

1 hour ago, Verum said:

A small increase in income tax can bring a lot of money for the gov. during a year. Haven't you ever played Total War before? Also if Trump wins we will get nuked. If Hillary, we will get fucked. Any other GOP candidate can piss off because they remind me of Busch. If Bernie... well free college and shit if his plan works and Americans are willing to pay just a little more tax. Either way I view all candidates in the 2016 election season as absolute shit. But from my findings, Bernie in my opinion would do the best. But I digress, for you can never tell what will happen in that oval office. For the Trump supporters - How do you think he will pay for that massive fence? Don't say Mexico because that's the dumbest idea I have ever heard. It will be built with taxes!!!

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                       ~ Rant Over

honestly if it comes of taxes, it might pay off bringing back jobs after illegals are gone. Personally I dont think the national debt will be gone in 100 years so if that wall sets us back, at least the illegals are gone

[bowly97]

1 hour ago, LoganPlays said:

 

 

...

small increases..?

he said that a 90% income tax wasn't unreasonable. trumps wall would cost only a few billion and would pay itself back in the amount of lesser deportation force needed on the border in a short amount of time. Bernie is willing to spend trillions and trillions of dollars on trivial shit like free college and paid holidays.. 

bernie is one of the economically retarded candidates. he has earned over 100k a year for decades and is only worth ~300k estimated today.

I think the wall is super smart. Bring back the jobs

[Donk]

You guys want to bitch about how Bernie would raise taxes to 90% blah blah blah and how democratic socialism is a bad thing blah blah blah, but do you realize that under the Eisenhower administration taxes WERE 90%, and we had some of the best economic growth during that time. Also, Bernie has stated that he doesn't plan to raise it that high, and if you look at the increase of taxes during Eisenhower it was on the top% of the bracket, because people that are in the top% don't pay their fair share as well as corporations who no one will admit but commit tax evasion due to overseas bank accounts. If corporations actually were made to pay their taxes we would get rid of the deficit and have plenty left over. Also, comparing EU to US in terms of economics and average well being of the citizens, we in no shape even compare to countries like Denmark, Finland, Switzerland etc...

http://www.demos.org/blog/10/20/15/united-states-vs-denmark-17-charts

You guys acting like being able to have everyone go to college is a bad thing. I would never think that allowing people to further their education and overall well being is such a bad idea even if taxes have to be raised by a small margin for us middle class. In the US we have been starting to see this prejudice against intelligence like being smart or having a relevant thought should be looked down upon. There isn't ingenuity in this country anymore, or the strive to do great things, break boundaries, it's just not there anymore because people would rather get their GED and work at mcdonalds all their life or collect welfare(and I only mean the ones that abuse the system, it's in place for people that really need it and not a bunch of drugged out shit lords).

Also, if you think Trump is anything but a fascist and that he will make America great again. You really need to do some reading on what radical authoritarian nationalism is, AND fascism in general and how Trump resembles qualities of a true fascist like his ancestor Hitler.

 

anywayssss rant over, don't be plebs come November

[Buckwalter]

8 hours ago, Verum said:

A small increase in income tax can bring a lot of money for the gov. during a year. Haven't you ever played Total War before? Also if Trump wins we will get nuked. If Hillary, we will get fucked. Any other GOP candidate can piss off because they remind me of Busch. If Bernie... well free college and shit if his plan works and Americans are willing to pay just a little more tax. Either way I view all candidates in the 2016 election season as absolute shit. But from my findings, Bernie in my opinion would do the best. But I digress, for you can never tell what will happen in that oval office. For the Trump supporters - How do you think he will pay for that massive fence? Don't say Mexico because that's the dumbest idea I have ever heard. It will be built with taxes!!!

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                       ~ Rant Over

Normally I avoid taking a political position on the internet at all costs. But we're all friends here, why not discuss. 

Full disclosure, economic issues are my main concern in matters of politics. Social policy has little to do with individual candidates and ends up becoming a populist issue and with increasingly frequent instances of "legislating from the bench", I feel that social issues are generally outside of the purview of a president and are more a matter of public sentiment. Foreign policy is of course an important issue and one I certainly take into account when selecting a candidate, but still economic policy is my main concern. It is what affects me, my job, my future and my family most directly. 

This is why I am greatly concerned by Bernie Sanders' proposed policies. I don't think he is a bad guy, but I think he's an idealist with an over simplified view of economics. Here are some of my concerns.

1) 18 trillion in federal spending. This effectively doubles our national debt over a ten year span, largely in addition to existing and ongoing federal spending. A national debt which has already increased massively in recent years (See figure 1). And as we're seeing now, government spending can stimulate and economy for a time but once the stimulation stops problems arise. Obviously I don't want to oversimplify here or ignore the effects of tanking commodities prices, slowing global demand or strong dollar headwinds on international earnings, but it's my personal belief that government spending is a band-aide not a cure. I don't necessarily subscribe to the Austrian line of thought here, but they have a point when it comes to artificial growth predicated on government spending. 

2) Bernie's desire to tax all capital gains as income. I think this would only serve to slow growth. It's easy to stand up and rail against the corporate oligarchy, but the reality is that publicly traded companies are owned by the people. And the people should be encouraged to invest rather than penalized for doing so, which is why removing tax incentives for non-speculative trades doesn't make sense to me. This is in addition to the proposed tax on each trade. 

3) Bernie's corporate reform plans are also concerning. One of the most important factors in growth is the regulatory climate (fig 2), with major companies moving more and more business elsewhere, a more stringent corporate tax rate and harsher regulation will only accelerate this trend. Especially in a global economy where several large emerging markets are transitioning into advanced, industrialized economies, capable of competing with or surpassing the US in terms of operating costs, raw output and regulatory environment. And this is to say nothing of his views on repatriation of foreign earnings. He claims that large companies move money around in a "shell game" to avoid paying taxes, but it's more complex than that. Companies that have oversees subsidiaries pay taxes in the countries they operate in, then when profit is brought back to the US, they're taxed again. America is one of only a few nations to do this and as a result, many of these companies will either reinvest these international earnings in their international ventures or defer repatriation until the economic climate is better.

However some people consider this tax evasion. But in reality this income is taxed in the country in which it is earned, then taxed again if it's returning to the US economy. So in many ways, it makes better business sense to avoid double taxation by growing your overseas ventures. Many people (myself included) think that allowing lower rate of repatriation tax leads to foreign capital coming home and flowing through our economy, rather than languishing overseas to avoid being taxed twice and hit by a less than ideal exchange rate (varies by country). Also, on a side note, many Bernie supporters believe that by forcing companies to repatriate each year, that the US would reap a windfall of tax revenue. And in some sense, that is true.

There is currently about $2.1 trillion in foreign earned income being deferred right now. Using the top marginal corporate tax rate of 39% this comes out to $819 billion in tax revenue. However after deductions and all the crazy tax jujitsu it would be more like $588 billion (using world bank and finance commission's estimated 27.9% effective rate). This would cover 2015's budget deficit (which was an 8 year low of $439B, fig 3). However, this is a one time lump sum, the profit being taxed has been amassing for years. The average annual benefits going forward would be much smaller and would come at the cost of more business going overseas. 

The overarching point is that Bernie's ideas about commerce generally create an environment that isn't business friendly and as emerging markets become economic powerhouses, policies like this could cost us dearly. 

4) Income tax reform. To dispel a common myth, no Bernie Sanders has not advocated a 90% tax rate. He maxes out at 54% federal marginal tax rate. Many people have made the comparison to the Eisenhower years, however what many advocates for such high tax rates fail to account for is what actually happened to tax revenue at such a rate. First, this rate was only applied to income in excess of a specific figure (I believe it was anything in excess of a million, could be wrong), second it was designed this way to create an incentive for capital deployment rather than profit taking. But an interesting thing happened, in spite of such a high rate, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was actually lower than with a 28% marginal rate (figure 4 & 5).

I agree that income tax reform is necessary. The system is unnecessarily complicated and the deduction system is a menace in my view. I would prefer a lower marginal rate with no deductions, rather than a higher marginal rate with a lower effective rate. 

5) Raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour. My biggest concerns here are wage push inflation and bracket creep. Economics is a zero sum game, that's just the nature of scarcity. So greater payroll outlays directly translates to higher operating costs; these costs are then either transferred to the consumer in the form of higher prices or labor costs are managed by reducing the number of employees. Neither is a good thing. Worse yet, these costs are additive and their effects ripple through the entire economy. Because now, not only is it more expensive to employ people, but it's more expensive for your suppliers to employ people, so they raise prices and your per unit CGS increases, it's more expensive to ship your product, it's more expensive to market, package, design etc etc etc. Every element in the supply chain either raises prices or cuts labor and the effect is cumulative and far reaching.

In simple terms, free markets will only pay what the market can bear. As wages increase, prices follow. The market value of each element hasn't changed but the price has. This results in a stabilization of purchase power and goods but it also effectively shrinks the labor force and raises unemployment. There is also a supply and demand element here that I haven't addressed, but I think I've made my point. But if you're curious I'll follow up with that. 

6) College for everyone. I certainly understand the appeal, I too am frustrated with the fact that tuition rates have ballooned, outpacing inflation and doing so in a period of meager wage growth and increased cost of living. It's also appealing because the current system is a disaster waiting to happen. The default parade of federally guaranteed student loans has already begun. But at the end of the day, I don't believe it is the duty of the American people to pay for your liberal arts degree. I personally believe a better solution is lowering the cost of tuition in public institutions, streamlining the existing financial aid system and diverting public special interest scholarships to strictly merit based scholarships. 

As for the effects on an economy, there is some interesting data available on the subject. Though nothing conclusive enough to be germane here, but it's worth looking into if this is an area you're interested in. 

In summary, it is my feeling that Bernie Sanders would not help the American economy or the financial situation of the vast majority of Americans. Many of his ideas are of course, very appealing on an instinctual or emotional level but in my opinion aren't borne out by fact or history. People often point to Europe as a bastion of prosperity and a beacon to which we should look for guidance. But even if you set aside the very real economic struggles of the EU right now, this notion doesn't exactly hold water. The grass is always greener I suppose. Socialism, democratic or otherwise has a dubious track record at best and I feel like Bernie Sanders and his peers are exploiting the idealism of low information voters, the zeal of the youth and anger of the downtrodden to transform this country and mold it according to their ideology.

So for these reasons and around 10 others (left out here since this post is already too long) I won't be voting for Bernie Sanders come November. That being said, I could write a post every bit as long and every bit as critical about Donald Trump's foreign policy. It truly feels like a bad year to be someone who votes based on the issues rather than along party lines. 

Anyway, against my better judgement I posted some of my political views. I hope that if anyone disagrees we can engage in polite discourse about it and come to better understand why we think differently and have a respectful, honest and mature discussion of the issues.

Figures and sources:

Figure #1

Figure #2 

Figure #3

Figure #4 

Figure #5

Conceptual, not realworld data. 

Sources:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (worth looking at, fascinating and horrifying) 

http://www.thestreet.com/story/13460399/1/what-exactly-does-bernie-sanders-mean-when-he-says-he-wants-to-tax-wall-street-speculation.html

http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-falls-8-low-2015-194021330.html

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/sanders-corporate-tax-comparison/

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/new-study-corporate-tax-rate-most-important-single-factor-investment

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/GIAWB/Doing%20Business/Documents/Special-Reports/Paying-Taxes-2014.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304259304576375951025762400

https://berniesanders.com/issues/ (Used for all policy points and claims)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-sanderss-free-tuition-failed-a-cost-test-in-past-1456267301

Several IRS links that I closed out of prematurely, sorry. 

 

 

 

TL; DR: I have serious concerns about Bernie's economic policy. 

[Sneaky]

^^^ Dear fucking god. Someone get me a bookmark.

[Midamaru]

Sometimes i say to myself: Admins are just normal people... And then you see such things. 

Bravo Buck, politics would work so differently if they did their research before voting like you. 

[rngr]

@BuckwalterVery well written and incredibly informative.

I'm not an econ major, but I've taken quite a few econ classes in the past few years and I agree with you on Bernie.  He is largely an idealist who fails to recognize the far reaching impacts of some of his ideas.  I personally am not a fan of either democratic candidate from an economic standpoint. I will likely vote for the Republican nominee (likely Trump) given this.  While Trump may seem like an absolute idiot at times, I think that is largely him appealing to the voter base that he needs to capture in the primaries.  He is looking to garner the vote of the hardcore republics to win the candidacy.  I honestly don't think that he is an idiot.

[Midamaru]

I'm not American nor have any knowledge about politics. But my 2cents:

* Trump has his heart for power and money not for america. He's more selfish than diplomatic and i think alot of other countries despise him.

* Trump is not stupid, he plays the media brilliantly. (cough, maybe such strategies are for sale) 

* Politicians play the political game. They shape your mind into their beliefs, wrap media and events around you and act upon it to be in a spotlight to form your opinion.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Midamaru

[bowly97]

4 hours ago, Buckwalter said:

Normally I avoid taking a political position on the internet at all costs. But we're all friends here, why not discuss. 

Full disclosure, economic issues are my main concern in matters of politics. Social policy has little to do with individual candidates and ends up becoming a populist issue and with increasingly frequent instances of "legislating from the bench", I feel that social issues are generally outside of the purview of a president and are more a matter of public sentiment. Foreign policy is of course an important issue and one I certainly take into account when selecting a candidate, but still economic policy is my main concern. It is what affects me, my job, my future and my family most directly. 

This is why I am greatly concerned by Bernie Sanders' proposed policies. I don't think he is a bad guy, but I think he's an idealist with an over simplified view of economics. Here are some of my concerns.

1) 18 trillion in federal spending. This effectively doubles our national debt over a ten year span, largely in addition to existing and ongoing federal spending. A national debt which has already increased massively in recent years (See figure 1). And as we're seeing now, government spending can stimulate and economy for a time but once the stimulation stops problems arise. Obviously I don't want to oversimplify here or ignore the effects of tanking commodities prices, slowing global demand or strong dollar headwinds on international earnings, but it's my personal belief that government spending is a band-aide not a cure. I don't necessarily subscribe to the Austrian line of thought here, but they have a point when it comes to artificial growth predicated on government spending. 

2) Bernie's desire to tax all capital gains as income. I think this would only serve to slow growth. It's easy to stand up and rail against the corporate oligarchy, but the reality is that publicly traded companies are owned by the people. And the people should be encouraged to invest rather than penalized for doing so, which is why removing tax incentives for non-speculative trades doesn't make sense to me. This is in addition to the proposed tax on each trade. 

3) Bernie's corporate reform plans are also concerning. One of the most important factors in growth is the regulatory climate (fig 2), with major companies moving more and more business elsewhere, a more stringent corporate tax rate and harsher regulation will only accelerate this trend. Especially in a global economy where several large emerging markets are transitioning into advanced, industrialized economies, capable of competing with or surpassing the US in terms of operating costs, raw output and regulatory environment. And this is to say nothing of his views on repatriation of foreign earnings. He claims that large companies move money around in a "shell game" to avoid paying taxes, but it's more complex than that. Companies that have oversees subsidiaries pay taxes in the countries they operate in, then when profit is brought back to the US, they're taxed again. America is one of only a few nations to do this and as a result, many of these companies will either reinvest these international earnings in their international ventures or defer repatriation until the economic climate is better.

However some people consider this tax evasion. But in reality this income is taxed in the country in which it is earned, then taxed again if it's returning to the US economy. So in many ways, it makes better business sense to avoid double taxation by growing your overseas ventures. Many people (myself included) think that allowing lower rate of repatriation tax leads to foreign capital coming home and flowing through our economy, rather than languishing overseas to avoid being taxed twice and hit by a less than ideal exchange rate (varies by country). Also, on a side note, many Bernie supporters believe that by forcing companies to repatriate each year, that the US would reap a windfall of tax revenue. And in some sense, that is true.

There is currently about $2.1 trillion in foreign earned income being deferred right now. Using the top marginal corporate tax rate of 39% this comes out to $819 billion in tax revenue. However after deductions and all the crazy tax jujitsu it would be more like $588 billion (using world bank and finance commission's estimated 27.9% effective rate). This would cover 2015's budget deficit (which was an 8 year low of $439B, fig 3). However, this is a one time lump sum, the profit being taxed has been amassing for years. The average annual benefits going forward would be much smaller and would come at the cost of more business going overseas. 

The overarching point is that Bernie's ideas about commerce generally create an environment that isn't business friendly and as emerging markets become economic powerhouses, policies like this could cost us dearly. 

4) Income tax reform. To dispel a common myth, no Bernie Sanders has not advocated a 90% tax rate. He maxes out at 54% federal marginal tax rate. Many people have made the comparison to the Eisenhower years, however what many advocates for such high tax rates fail to account for is what actually happened to tax revenue at such a rate. First, this rate was only applied to income in excess of a specific figure (I believe it was anything in excess of a million, could be wrong), second it was designed this way to create an incentive for capital deployment rather than profit taking. But an interesting thing happened, in spite of such a high rate, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was actually lower than with a 28% marginal rate (figure 4 & 5).

I agree that income tax reform is necessary. The system is unnecessarily complicated and the deduction system is a menace in my view. I would prefer a lower marginal rate with no deductions, rather than a higher marginal rate with a lower effective rate. 

5) Raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour. My biggest concerns here are wage push inflation and bracket creep. Economics is a zero sum game, that's just the nature of scarcity. So greater payroll outlays directly translates to higher operating costs; these costs are then either transferred to the consumer in the form of higher prices or labor costs are managed by reducing the number of employees. Neither is a good thing. Worse yet, these costs are additive and their effects ripple through the entire economy. Because now, not only is it more expensive to employ people, but it's more expensive for your suppliers to employ people, so they raise prices and your per unit CGS increases, it's more expensive to ship your product, it's more expensive to market, package, design etc etc etc. Every element in the supply chain either raises prices or cuts labor and the effect is cumulative and far reaching.

In simple terms, free markets will only pay what the market can bear. As wages increase, prices follow. The market value of each element hasn't changed but the price has. This results in a stabilization of purchase power and goods but it also effectively shrinks the labor force and raises unemployment. There is also a supply and demand element here that I haven't addressed, but I think I've made my point. But if you're curious I'll follow up with that. 

6) College for everyone. I certainly understand the appeal, I too am frustrated with the fact that tuition rates have ballooned, outpacing inflation and doing so in a period of meager wage growth and increased cost of living. It's also appealing because the current system is a disaster waiting to happen. The default parade of federally guaranteed student loans has already begun. But at the end of the day, I don't believe it is the duty of the American people to pay for your liberal arts degree. I personally believe a better solution is lowering the cost of tuition in public institutions, streamlining the existing financial aid system and diverting public special interest scholarships to strictly merit based scholarships. 

As for the effects on an economy, there is some interesting data available on the subject. Though nothing conclusive enough to be germane here, but it's worth looking into if this is an area you're interested in. 

In summary, it is my feeling that Bernie Sanders would not help the American economy or the financial situation of the vast majority of Americans. Many of his ideas are of course, very appealing on an instinctual or emotional level but in my opinion aren't borne out by fact or history. People often point to Europe as a bastion of prosperity and a beacon to which we should look for guidance. But even if you set aside the very real economic struggles of the EU right now, this notion doesn't exactly hold water. The grass is always greener I suppose. Socialism, democratic or otherwise has a dubious track record at best and I feel like Bernie Sanders and his peers are exploiting the idealism of low information voters, the zeal of the youth and anger of the downtrodden to transform this country and mold it according to their ideology.

So for these reasons and around 10 others (left out here since this post is already too long) I won't be voting for Bernie Sanders come November. That being said, I could write a post every bit as long and every bit as critical about Donald Trump's foreign policy. It truly feels like a bad year to be someone who votes based on the issues rather than along party lines. 

Anyway, against my better judgement I posted some of my political views. I hope that if anyone disagrees we can engage in polite discourse about it and come to better understand why we think differently and have a respectful, honest and mature discussion of the issues.

Figures and sources:

Figure #1

Figure #2 

Figure #3

Figure #4 

Figure #5

Conceptual, not realworld data. 

Sources:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (worth looking at, fascinating and horrifying) 

http://www.thestreet.com/story/13460399/1/what-exactly-does-bernie-sanders-mean-when-he-says-he-wants-to-tax-wall-street-speculation.html

http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-falls-8-low-2015-194021330.html

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/sanders-corporate-tax-comparison/

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/new-study-corporate-tax-rate-most-important-single-factor-investment

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/GIAWB/Doing%20Business/Documents/Special-Reports/Paying-Taxes-2014.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304259304576375951025762400

https://berniesanders.com/issues/ (Used for all policy points and claims)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-sanderss-free-tuition-failed-a-cost-test-in-past-1456267301

Several IRS links that I closed out of prematurely, sorry. 

 

 

 

TL; DR: I have serious concerns about Bernie's economic policy. 

I agree with every point made by you and bernie and his plans. 

[bowly97]

1 hour ago, Midamaru said:

I'm not American nor have any knowledge about politics. But my 2cents:

* Trump has his heart for power and money not for america. He's more selfish than diplomatic and i think alot of other countries despise him.

* Trump is not stupid, he plays the media brilliantly. (cough, maybe such strategies are for sale) 

* Politicians play the political game. They shape your mind into their beliefs, wrap media and events around you and act upon it to be in a spotlight to form your opinion.

I love him because he speaks his mind. He doesn't cover anything up and that's why he's appealing to majorities of states. 

[bowly97]

4 hours ago, Buckwalter said:

Normally I avoid taking a political position on the internet at all costs. But we're all friends here, why not discuss. 

Full disclosure, economic issues are my main concern in matters of politics. Social policy has little to do with individual candidates and ends up becoming a populist issue and with increasingly frequent instances of "legislating from the bench", I feel that social issues are generally outside of the purview of a president and are more a matter of public sentiment. Foreign policy is of course an important issue and one I certainly take into account when selecting a candidate, but still economic policy is my main concern. It is what affects me, my job, my future and my family most directly. 

This is why I am greatly concerned by Bernie Sanders' proposed policies. I don't think he is a bad guy, but I think he's an idealist with an over simplified view of economics. Here are some of my concerns.

1) 18 trillion in federal spending. This effectively doubles our national debt over a ten year span, largely in addition to existing and ongoing federal spending. A national debt which has already increased massively in recent years (See figure 1). And as we're seeing now, government spending can stimulate and economy for a time but once the stimulation stops problems arise. Obviously I don't want to oversimplify here or ignore the effects of tanking commodities prices, slowing global demand or strong dollar headwinds on international earnings, but it's my personal belief that government spending is a band-aide not a cure. I don't necessarily subscribe to the Austrian line of thought here, but they have a point when it comes to artificial growth predicated on government spending. 

2) Bernie's desire to tax all capital gains as income. I think this would only serve to slow growth. It's easy to stand up and rail against the corporate oligarchy, but the reality is that publicly traded companies are owned by the people. And the people should be encouraged to invest rather than penalized for doing so, which is why removing tax incentives for non-speculative trades doesn't make sense to me. This is in addition to the proposed tax on each trade. 

3) Bernie's corporate reform plans are also concerning. One of the most important factors in growth is the regulatory climate (fig 2), with major companies moving more and more business elsewhere, a more stringent corporate tax rate and harsher regulation will only accelerate this trend. Especially in a global economy where several large emerging markets are transitioning into advanced, industrialized economies, capable of competing with or surpassing the US in terms of operating costs, raw output and regulatory environment. And this is to say nothing of his views on repatriation of foreign earnings. He claims that large companies move money around in a "shell game" to avoid paying taxes, but it's more complex than that. Companies that have oversees subsidiaries pay taxes in the countries they operate in, then when profit is brought back to the US, they're taxed again. America is one of only a few nations to do this and as a result, many of these companies will either reinvest these international earnings in their international ventures or defer repatriation until the economic climate is better.

However some people consider this tax evasion. But in reality this income is taxed in the country in which it is earned, then taxed again if it's returning to the US economy. So in many ways, it makes better business sense to avoid double taxation by growing your overseas ventures. Many people (myself included) think that allowing lower rate of repatriation tax leads to foreign capital coming home and flowing through our economy, rather than languishing overseas to avoid being taxed twice and hit by a less than ideal exchange rate (varies by country). Also, on a side note, many Bernie supporters believe that by forcing companies to repatriate each year, that the US would reap a windfall of tax revenue. And in some sense, that is true.

There is currently about $2.1 trillion in foreign earned income being deferred right now. Using the top marginal corporate tax rate of 39% this comes out to $819 billion in tax revenue. However after deductions and all the crazy tax jujitsu it would be more like $588 billion (using world bank and finance commission's estimated 27.9% effective rate). This would cover 2015's budget deficit (which was an 8 year low of $439B, fig 3). However, this is a one time lump sum, the profit being taxed has been amassing for years. The average annual benefits going forward would be much smaller and would come at the cost of more business going overseas. 

The overarching point is that Bernie's ideas about commerce generally create an environment that isn't business friendly and as emerging markets become economic powerhouses, policies like this could cost us dearly. 

4) Income tax reform. To dispel a common myth, no Bernie Sanders has not advocated a 90% tax rate. He maxes out at 54% federal marginal tax rate. Many people have made the comparison to the Eisenhower years, however what many advocates for such high tax rates fail to account for is what actually happened to tax revenue at such a rate. First, this rate was only applied to income in excess of a specific figure (I believe it was anything in excess of a million, could be wrong), second it was designed this way to create an incentive for capital deployment rather than profit taking. But an interesting thing happened, in spite of such a high rate, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was actually lower than with a 28% marginal rate (figure 4 & 5).

I agree that income tax reform is necessary. The system is unnecessarily complicated and the deduction system is a menace in my view. I would prefer a lower marginal rate with no deductions, rather than a higher marginal rate with a lower effective rate. 

5) Raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour. My biggest concerns here are wage push inflation and bracket creep. Economics is a zero sum game, that's just the nature of scarcity. So greater payroll outlays directly translates to higher operating costs; these costs are then either transferred to the consumer in the form of higher prices or labor costs are managed by reducing the number of employees. Neither is a good thing. Worse yet, these costs are additive and their effects ripple through the entire economy. Because now, not only is it more expensive to employ people, but it's more expensive for your suppliers to employ people, so they raise prices and your per unit CGS increases, it's more expensive to ship your product, it's more expensive to market, package, design etc etc etc. Every element in the supply chain either raises prices or cuts labor and the effect is cumulative and far reaching.

In simple terms, free markets will only pay what the market can bear. As wages increase, prices follow. The market value of each element hasn't changed but the price has. This results in a stabilization of purchase power and goods but it also effectively shrinks the labor force and raises unemployment. There is also a supply and demand element here that I haven't addressed, but I think I've made my point. But if you're curious I'll follow up with that. 

6) College for everyone. I certainly understand the appeal, I too am frustrated with the fact that tuition rates have ballooned, outpacing inflation and doing so in a period of meager wage growth and increased cost of living. It's also appealing because the current system is a disaster waiting to happen. The default parade of federally guaranteed student loans has already begun. But at the end of the day, I don't believe it is the duty of the American people to pay for your liberal arts degree. I personally believe a better solution is lowering the cost of tuition in public institutions, streamlining the existing financial aid system and diverting public special interest scholarships to strictly merit based scholarships. 

As for the effects on an economy, there is some interesting data available on the subject. Though nothing conclusive enough to be germane here, but it's worth looking into if this is an area you're interested in. 

In summary, it is my feeling that Bernie Sanders would not help the American economy or the financial situation of the vast majority of Americans. Many of his ideas are of course, very appealing on an instinctual or emotional level but in my opinion aren't borne out by fact or history. People often point to Europe as a bastion of prosperity and a beacon to which we should look for guidance. But even if you set aside the very real economic struggles of the EU right now, this notion doesn't exactly hold water. The grass is always greener I suppose. Socialism, democratic or otherwise has a dubious track record at best and I feel like Bernie Sanders and his peers are exploiting the idealism of low information voters, the zeal of the youth and anger of the downtrodden to transform this country and mold it according to their ideology.

So for these reasons and around 10 others (left out here since this post is already too long) I won't be voting for Bernie Sanders come November. That being said, I could write a post every bit as long and every bit as critical about Donald Trump's foreign policy. It truly feels like a bad year to be someone who votes based on the issues rather than along party lines. 

Anyway, against my better judgement I posted some of my political views. I hope that if anyone disagrees we can engage in polite discourse about it and come to better understand why we think differently and have a respectful, honest and mature discussion of the issues.

Figures and sources:

Figure #1

Figure #2 

Figure #3

Figure #4 

Figure #5

Conceptual, not realworld data. 

Sources:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (worth looking at, fascinating and horrifying) 

http://www.thestreet.com/story/13460399/1/what-exactly-does-bernie-sanders-mean-when-he-says-he-wants-to-tax-wall-street-speculation.html

http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-falls-8-low-2015-194021330.html

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/sanders-corporate-tax-comparison/

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/new-study-corporate-tax-rate-most-important-single-factor-investment

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/GIAWB/Doing%20Business/Documents/Special-Reports/Paying-Taxes-2014.pdf

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304259304576375951025762400

https://berniesanders.com/issues/ (Used for all policy points and claims)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-sanderss-free-tuition-failed-a-cost-test-in-past-1456267301

Several IRS links that I closed out of prematurely, sorry. 

 

 

 

TL; DR: I have serious concerns about Bernie's economic policy. 

So you mind if I share this in my gov class? Giving you all credit and sources etc 

[Bersabee]

So basically what you're saying here is if you vote Bernie hes gonna fuck up the economy and if you vote Trump he's probably gonna kill allot of people.

[CyanogenCX]

From what I learned in Econ, the laffer curve shows that taxing at a high percent is actually detrimental to tax revenue. You could get more money at a lower rate.Also, as taxes increase, social welfare goes downhill. This is due to deadweight losses. Therefore 90% tax rate is a no go.

Not to mention that people will have a lower incentive to work as hard as they currently do seeing as they will get less money for the same amount of work.

Edited February 25, 2016 by CyanogenCX

[Verum]

@Buckwalter/     I commend you for your in depth analysis of Economic policy in accordance to Bernie Sanders. Very well written. I disagree about your view on corporations avoiding tax in the states. I agree on minimum wage increases, because it does encourage businesses to outsource their workforce because they won't  be making profits, or worse hitting the profit margins that they have set. This is my first time voting. But your right that this year is a pretty hectic election for us young, and maybe even old voters. Maybe I won't vote. I don't know anymore. Too much radicalism in my opinion from both sides.

[Midamaru]

8 minutes ago, Bersabee said:

So basically what you're saying here is if you vote Bernie hes gonna fuck up the economy and if you vote Trump he's probably gonna kill allot of people.

I keep thinking someone that arrogant and extreme as Trump would just get assasinated.. I certainly don't agree with his ideas ect but that would be horrible and cause alooot of fuzz depending on "Who attacked America"

[bowly97]

There will never be a perfect candidate. Just someone who isn't as bad as all the rest

[Buckwalter]

7 hours ago, Verum said:

@Buckwalter/     I commend you for your in depth analysis of Economic policy in accordance to Bernie Sanders. Very well written. I disagree about your view on corporations avoiding tax in the states. I agree on minimum wage increases, because it does encourage businesses to outsource their workforce because they won't  be making profits, or worse hitting the profit margins that they have set. This is my first time voting. But your right that this year is a pretty hectic election for us young, and maybe even old voters. Maybe I won't vote. I don't know anymore. Too much radicalism in my opinion from both sides.

Just to clarify, I'm not against taxing profit from foreign ventures, however I think it should be done at a more reasonable rate. Something that still generates tax revenue but gets rid of the main reason to leave that profit sitting overseas. Or at least introducing tax incentives to reinvest domestically, rather than growing their international ventures. Something like that could stimulate wage growth, manufacturing capability, and our domestic business infrastructure. 

8 hours ago, bowly97 said:

There will never be a perfect candidate. Just someone who isn't as bad as all the rest

That increasingly seems to be the case. What really disturbs and depresses me is that each election cycle this feeling of having two terrible candidates gets worse. 

It seems like each cycle the party trenches get twice as far apart and we're so far beyond the center that we may never be able to walk it back. It feels like the level of division in America has been growing at an incredible rate. Everyone is so completely bought in to their favorite brand of low information/high vitriol, ready-fire-aim, partisan garbage that the issues never get discussed. It's become so ugly and so devoid of substantive discourse that we might as well be choosing our candidates via a game of darts. And if you ever want an example of what I'm talking about, read the comment section of any political news story. You'll see these strange, school-yard pejoratives getting tossed around. ReThuglican, democrap, libtard, conservatwat. It's appalling. The discussion of our country's future has literally devolved into name calling. 

Even more frightening is that fact that this troglodytic discourse is emblematic of a larger issue. Partisanship has gone so far, that people literally hate people who think differently. Liberals despise conservatives, conservatives abhor liberals. And that hatred is growing stronger, bolder, and being institutionalized in the youth especially. "You hold different political opinions than I do, thus invalidating you as a human being. You're guilty of wrongthink." Shit just bums me out. 

And the media and the politicians see that, exploit that and propagate that. 

Anyway, I'm off to toast the media demagogues with my finest victory gin. Then bicker with people on the internet because they get their opinions from the wrong pundits. Cheers. 

[LaGrange]

I am not really a fan of anyone this time around. I also don't consider myself a supporter of any party completely because I disagree and agree with a lot of both. However, with all of these presidential candidates, I always think "out of everyone in America, somehow these idiots are the ones running?"

[explicit]

33 minutes ago, LaGrange said:

However, with all of these presidential candidates, I always think "out of everyone in America, somehow these idiots are the ones running?"

I think the same way.

[Verum]

Lets just all become anarchist and have a beer or two!!!

[JonSnow]

We are doomed this time around. Just have to sit down and think who can handle everything best for 4 years until someone better surfaces. 

I am still for #hilliaryforprison though. 

The founding fathers of this nation had warned us long ago about what the two party system could do to this country. And we are "lucky" enough to see it first hand. 

I am sure there are better candidates out there but they just cannot run because of how the system works.