Best President in terms of salaries for Physicians?

[Pisiform]

Lol just remember one thing. Vote democrat when you are a student and republican when you are a physician

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted731525]

Lol just remember one thing. Vote democrat when you are a student and republican when you are a physician

Honestly dems haven't done a ton for students and republicans don't give a damn about anybody who doesn't make their living through capital. Even as a high earning physician you are still a wage slave. Make no mistake you aren't in their club

 

[Wilf]

Sanders is a bum in a suit who lived off of welfare and didn't try getting a real job until he was 40 and utterly failed at that. He is idolized by idealistic college students who have never worked or paid taxes. He was broke his whole life and instead of trying to better himself and earn a decent living, he devoted the rest of his life to promoting socialist causes to try and punish those who accomplished what he did not. He is a loser who is supported by losers. Trump, even though he did inherit some money and could have lived the easy life, instead spent his entire life working very long days non-stop to build and create successful enterprises. The dichotomy is mind-boggling. A man with a lifetime of achievement running against an unskilled socialist. A winner vs. a loser. Luckily (or not) there is another character in play here: a crook, and what we will see is a winner vs. a crook. That will be interesting.

Eventually, even the intellectual elite that are still buying the media's campaign to smear Trump as a buffoon only supported by ignorant uneducated backwoods bigots will realize that he's actually a decent guy and that his platform is heads and shoulders better for our country than that of bum hellbent on punishing productivity and rewarding mediocrity and laziness in the name of redistributing privilege fairly. Or than that of a duplicitous criminal who would sell her own grandmother for a nickel.

To answer your question with another question, when you are an intern who took out massive student loans working 18 hour days 6 days a week, how are you going to feel knowing that when you finally get your first attending paycheck, it's going to be decimated in order to help support somebody who spent most of their life working part time at restaurants and smoking weed while taking 9 years to earn an associates degree in communications while accumulating debt they never had any attention of paying off?

This has to be one of the best posts I have ever seen on this site.

 

[Goro]

A little FYI:

com·mu·nist
ˈkämyənəst/
noun
noun: communist; plural noun: communists

1. 1.
   a person who supports or believes in the principles of communism.
   "I was very left-wing, but I was never a communist"
   synonyms: collectivist, leftist, (radical) socialist;More
   Soviet, Bolshevik, Bolshevist, Marxist, Leninist, Trotskyist, Trotskyite, Maoist;
   informal,commie, red, lefty, Bolshie
   "he describes himself as a communist"

adjective
adjective: communist

1. 1.
   adhering to or based on the principles of communism.
   "a French communist writer"

com·mu·nism
ˈkämyəˌnizəm/
noun
noun: communism; noun: Communism; plural noun: Communisms

1. a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/welfarism;More
radicalism, progressivism, social democracy;
communism, Marxism, labor movement
"my appreciation for certain aspects of socialism does not mean I'm a socialist"

• policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
  synonyms: leftism, welfarism;More
  radicalism, progressivism, social democracy;
  communism, Marxism, labor movement
  "my appreciation for certain aspects of socialism does not mean I'm a socialist"
• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

so·cial·ist
ˈsōSHələst/
noun
noun: socialist; plural noun: socialists

1. 1.
   a person who advocates or practices socialism.
   synonyms: left-wing, progressive, leftist, labor, anti-corporate, antiglobalization;More
   radical, revolutionary, militant;
   communist;
   informallefty, red
   "the socialist movement"
   left-winger, leftist, progressive, progressivist;
   radical, revolutionary;
   communist, Marxist;
   informallefty, red
   "a well-known socialist"
   antonyms: conservative

adjective
adjective: socialist

1. 1.
   adhering to or based on the principles of socialism.
   "the history of socialist movement"

Communism and socialism are economic and political structures that promote equality and seek to eliminate social classes. Sometimes, the two are used interchangeably, though they are quite different. In theory, socialism and communism sound appealing, with everyone doing their share and working together to provide for the greater good. Each utilizes a planned production schedule to ensure the needs of all community members are met. They are utopian economic structures that some countries have tried; however, most have failed or become dictatorships, making reform nearly impossible.
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100214/what-difference-between-communism-and-socialism.asp


In reality, Bernie Sanders is more like your typical European Social Democrat or Christian Democrat.

Great, so anyone who goes to school after Communist is elected will have a "free" education.

Oh, are you one of those suckers who stupidly decided to go to school before the Communist's ascension? Sucky for you, someone is going to have to pay for the "free" education, so you'll be paying back your student loans with paychecks decimated by Communist's taxes. Making college education "free" shifts the burden of tuition from students to taxpayers, so you'd basically be paying your own tuition via your student loans and the tuition of the college students who enrolled right after you. Serves you right you dummy, should have waited for Sanders!

But hey, at least by making college "free," we'll increase the number of college grads and raise the college grad unemployment/underemployment rate from today's unacceptably low 22%.
Winning! Bernie's got Tiger Blood.

 

[Law2Doc]

Salaries in a typical physician range would get taxed more...

This. When Bernie says the "rich" should pay more taxes he's not talking about (just)!the billionaires. He's talking about the Pediatrician pulling in around $150k a year while servicing his $250k student loans. In other words the poorest doctors will fit into this category.

 

[Law2Doc]

Lol just remember one thing. Vote democrat when you are a student and republican when you are a physician

Unless you are planning to be a career student, this is being very short sighted.

 

[Law2Doc]

...
As far as Trump is concerned, I really just see an egotistical megalomaniac that wants to become President, he does have a point that the establishment cares little about the masses.

Even Robert Reich, who called Trump a "buffoon" recently penned a piece about the rise of non-establishment candidates like Sanders and Trump, thought it was interesting because Reich had a very low opinion of Trump.

The saving grace of Trump is nobody really knows what he believes or what positions he will back, including perhaps, himself. He is not really beholden to either party, and that probably will help him in this election where each party seems to be ignoring the vast majority of Americans in the middle rather than at the political extremes.

I did however like his wife's recent statement that under a Trump administration immigration would be limited to the highly educated "and to models".

 

[username456789]

If you went to a medical school interview or residency interview, and they asked why you wanted to be a doctor or x specialty, and you gave the reason 'to make as much money as possible', how do you think it would turn out?

With whatever due respect, please grow and shut up.

 

[sloop]

Universal healthcare and Bernie Sanders would probably decrease salaries of physicians (at least specialists' salaries).

Unfortunately, I also have a vision for America where all people are treated equally under a secular government, have a real say in their government, are afforded equal opportunities and aren't starving in the streets.

It is what it is.

 

[Cello]

This has to be one of the best posts I have ever seen on this site.

You terrify me.

 

[Cello]

A little FYI:

com·mu·nist
ˈkämyənəst/
noun
noun: communist; plural noun: communists

1. 1.
   a person who supports or believes in the principles of communism.
   "I was very left-wing, but I was never a communist"
   synonyms: collectivist, leftist, (radical) socialist;More
   Soviet, Bolshevik, Bolshevist, Marxist, Leninist, Trotskyist, Trotskyite, Maoist;
   informal,commie, red, lefty, Bolshie
   "he describes himself as a communist"

adjective
adjective: communist

1. 1.
   adhering to or based on the principles of communism.
   "a French communist writer"

com·mu·nism
ˈkämyəˌnizəm/
noun
noun: communism; noun: Communism; plural noun: Communisms

1. a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/welfarism;More
radicalism, progressivism, social democracy;
communism, Marxism, labor movement
"my appreciation for certain aspects of socialism does not mean I'm a socialist"

• policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
  synonyms: leftism, welfarism;More
  radicalism, progressivism, social democracy;
  communism, Marxism, labor movement
  "my appreciation for certain aspects of socialism does not mean I'm a socialist"
• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

so·cial·ist
ˈsōSHələst/
noun
noun: socialist; plural noun: socialists

1. 1.
   a person who advocates or practices socialism.
   synonyms: left-wing, progressive, leftist, labor, anti-corporate, antiglobalization;More
   radical, revolutionary, militant;
   communist;
   informallefty, red
   "the socialist movement"
   left-winger, leftist, progressive, progressivist;
   radical, revolutionary;
   communist, Marxist;
   informallefty, red
   "a well-known socialist"
   antonyms: conservative

adjective
adjective: socialist

1. 1.
   adhering to or based on the principles of socialism.
   "the history of socialist movement"

Communism and socialism are economic and political structures that promote equality and seek to eliminate social classes. Sometimes, the two are used interchangeably, though they are quite different. In theory, socialism and communism sound appealing, with everyone doing their share and working together to provide for the greater good. Each utilizes a planned production schedule to ensure the needs of all community members are met. They are utopian economic structures that some countries have tried; however, most have failed or become dictatorships, making reform nearly impossible.
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100214/what-difference-between-communism-and-socialism.asp


In reality, Bernie Sanders is more like your typical European Social Democrat or Christian Democrat.

A concise and accurate comparison between socialism and communism is as follows:

Communism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

Socialism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution.

Also, speaking broadly, socialism is more an economic construct, while communism is an entire sociopolitical system. You can have a democratic socialist state, but you can't have a democratic communist state (I know that China pretends to). Democracy and communism are both forms of social organization, while capitalism and socialism are both forms of economic organization which are not mutually exclusive.

This. When Bernie says the "rich" should pay more taxes he's not talking about (just)!the billionaires. He's talking about the Pediatrician pulling in around $150k a year while servicing his $250k student loans. In other words the poorest doctors will fit into this category.

Not by looking at the tax proposals I alluded to earlier he's not.

 

[Seth Joo]

The saving grace of Trump is nobody really knows what he believes or what positions he will back, including perhaps, himself. He is not really beholden to either party, and that probably will help him in this election where each party seems to be ignoring the vast majority of Americans in the middle rather than at the political extremes.

I did however like his wife's recent statement that under a Trump administration immigration would be limited to the highly educated "and to models".

He will most likely get the nomination but he will lose the general election, just do not see him getting elected. He has said things that will get minority voters out in droves to vote against him.

Also better educated conservatives and evangelicals won't support him, his own personal life just does not ring well with evangelicals, and with more educated conservatives his crude remarks don't sit well.

 

[Cello]

He will most likely get the nomination but he will lose the general election, just do not see him getting elected. He has said things that will get minority voters out in droves to vote against him.

In November Bernie was polling better than Hillary with a net favorability of +3 among general voters (Hillary is -8) despite the fact that he was trailing her heavily back then. Today, Bernie is edging Hillary in national polls, though I don't know what their current net favorability ratings are. Donald Trump's net favorability with the general public is the worst of the GOP contenders at... wait for it... -25. Among independents Trump is doing miserably.

Here is the GOP breakdown:

EDIT: Up-to-date favorability ratings from the Huffington Post pollster aggregator:

Trump: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating
Clinton: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
Sanders: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/bernie-sanders-favorable-rating

Bernie is still far ahead of either Clinton or Trump in terms of favorability.

 

[Seth Joo]

In November Bernie was polling better than Hillary with a net favorability of +3 among general voters (Hillary is -8) despite the fact that he was trailing her heavily back then. Today, Bernie is edging Hillary in national polls, though I don't know what their current net favorability ratings are. Donald Trump's net favorability with the general public is the worst of the GOP contenders at... wait for it... -25. Among independents Trump is doing miserably.

Here is the GOP breakdown:

EDIT: Up-to-date favorability ratings from the Huffington Post pollster aggregator:

Trump: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating
Clinton: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
Sanders: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/bernie-sanders-favorable-rating

Bernie is still far ahead of either Clinton or Trump in terms of favorability.

Hope Bernie can back up his talk about beating Trump by 10 points in the general election, otherwise I am going back to Japan in 2017.

 

[sloop]

Communism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

Socialism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution.

You can have a democratic socialist state, but you can't have a democratic communist state (I know that China pretends to). Democracy and communism are both forms of social organization, while capitalism and socialism are both forms of economic organization which are not mutually exclusive.

This is not factually correct. Communism is not a political system. It is an economic one. Is it really impossible for you to conceive of a state where people initiate equal distribution of wealth via a democratic process? If your objection is that statist communism uses state violence to achieve wealth redistribution, my objection is "so what?" Democratic states have a monopoly on violence just like totalitarian ones do. Every law in every country is enforced in part through the threat of violence by the state.

 

[Stagg737]

He will most likely get the nomination but he will lose the general election, just do not see him getting elected. He has said things that will get minority voters out in droves to vote against him.

Also better educated conservatives and evangelicals won't support him, his own personal life just does not ring well with evangelicals, and with more educated conservatives his crude remarks don't sit well.

All he has to do is advertise that he has never used drugs or alcohol and the he'll pull many of the conservative christians back into his corner. He'll say plenty of other things to gain their favor and as long as he talks loud enough many people will believe him.

In November Bernie was polling better than Hillary with a net favorability of +3 among general voters (Hillary is -8) despite the fact that he was trailing her heavily back then. Today, Bernie is edging Hillary in national polls, though I don't know what their current net favorability ratings are. Donald Trump's net favorability with the general public is the worst of the GOP contenders at... wait for it... -25. Among independents Trump is doing miserably.

Here is the GOP breakdown:

EDIT: Up-to-date favorability ratings from the Huffington Post pollster aggregator:

Trump: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating
Clinton: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
Sanders: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/bernie-sanders-favorable-rating

Bernie is still far ahead of either Clinton or Trump in terms of favorability.

Your initial data on the candidates is outdated and the 'favorability' is pointless. None of that matters if they can't get their voters to the polls. And you're being both naive and shifty with the tax data. There are a lot more taxes in that plan other than just the income tax which will pull significantly from most physicians (aka estate taxes and limiting itemized deductions) and your data actually shows it will have negative impacts on the economy. Plus,if you really think he's going to be able to just pass all these changes through congress without resistance then you're just kidding yourself. Part of why I originally liked him was because he'd have an attitude that would make people care about politics while not being able to push anything extreme through a gridlocked congress.

Edit: Also, here's some direct quotes from the article you posted. Might want to read your sources in the future so you don't post something that destroys your own argument.

"On a static basis, the Sanders tax plan would reduce the after-tax incomes of taxpayers in every income group. The bottom 50 percent of taxpayers would see their after-tax incomes decrease by at least 4.87 percent. The top 50 percent of taxpayers would see their after-tax incomes decrease by at least 8.57 percent. Finally, the top 1 percent of taxpayers would see their after-tax incomes fall by 17.91 percent. After accounting for economic effects, taxpayers in all income groups would see their after-tax incomes decrease by at least 12.84 percent. The top 1 percent of taxpayers would see their incomes decrease by 24.88 percent."

"According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, Senator Bernie Sanders’s tax plan would reduce the economy’s size by 9.5 percent in the long run. The plan would lead to 4.3 percent lower wages, an 18.6 percent smaller capital stock, and 6.0 million fewer full-time equivalent jobs. The smaller economy results from higher marginal tax rates on capital and labor income."

And my personal favorite statement:

"The Taxes and Growth Model does not take into account the fiscal or economic effects of interest on debt. It also does not require budgets to balance over the long term, nor does it account for the potential macroeconomic or distributional effects of any changes to government spending that may accompany the tax plan."

 

[DrMason]

I say, always VOTE and speak democrat,
While you Think and live normally.

Nothing more needs to be said about Republicans.
They will ALWAYS remain idiots and selfish incompetents, IMHO.

The democratic system is simply turned into a populist monarchy,
where the king is the politician and the pawns are in the parliament.

Andrej Sakharov was correct and at the same time,
you prefer to live under Jasper Kent's "the 12" era.

There used to be a time when physicians cared more,
about what they thought than what they did.

If you live and let your thoughts follow your actions,
your mind will always lag behind.

While the MD will call the Chinese acupuncturist that doesn't speak English or lisps a Quack,
a Chinese acupuncturist at home will simply tell people to avoid you.

 

[Cello]

This is not factually correct. Communism is not a political system. It is an economic one. Is it really impossible for you to conceive of a state where people initiate equal distribution of wealth via a democratic process? If your objection is that statist communism uses state violence to achieve wealth redistribution, my objection is "so what?" Democratic states have a monopoly on violence just like totalitarian ones do. Every law in every country is enforced in part through the threat of violence by the state.

I did not say that communism does not have an economic component to it. And you'll find that communism is in fact a sociopolitical system (or as Wikipedia defines it, an economic, social, and political ideology). What I said is that socialism does not have a sociopolitical component to it anymore than does capitalism. Neither socialism nor capitalism concern themselves with governance, raising armies, taxing citizens, passing laws, etc. Democracy and communism on the other hand do consider these things. Basically, I'm saying that if you want to make comparisons then the apt comparison is communism vs democracy, and socialism vs capitalism. Though, as I stated earlier, capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive, and both may exist in tandem with either communism or democracy.

 

[Cello]

Your initial data on the candidates is outdated and the 'favorability' is pointless. None of that matters if they can't get their voters to the polls. And you're being both naive and shifty with the tax data. There are a lot more taxes in that plan other than just the income tax which will pull significantly from most physicians (aka estate taxes and limiting itemized deductions) and your data actually shows it will have negative impacts on the economy. Plus,if you really think he's going to be able to just pass all these changes through congress without resistance then you're just kidding yourself. Part of why I originally liked him was because he'd have an attitude that would make people care about politics while not being able to push anything extreme through a gridlocked congress.

So long as there are swaths of people making $15,000 annually in this country then I am not concerned that someone's estate tax exemption was reduced from $5,000,000 to $3,500,000. Cry me a river. That's why I don't bother mentioning it. Besides, what exactly does the estate tax have to do with a physician's salary?

If we want someone to make a real difference in this country, they will unsuckle the military industrial complex from the teat of the US Treasury. Unfortunately, we haven't had such a candidate since Ralph Nader (and possibly the Pauls to a lesser extent).

 

[Stagg737]

So long as there are swaths of people making $15,000 annually in this country then I am not concerned that your estate tax exemption was reduced from $5,000,000 to $3,500,000. Cry me a river. That's why I don't bother mentioning it. Besides, what exactly does the estate tax have to do with a physician's salary?

And under Bernie's proposed plan they'll be making even less. See my edits to the last post. Also, as someone currently living off of under 15k/year, I can say honestly say I feel that individuals who struggle to live off of 15-20k in many cities have just as much of an attitude problem as a financial problem (and if they fixed the former, the latter wouldn't be an issue).

 

[Law2Doc]

He will most likely get the nomination but he will lose the general election, just do not see him getting elected. He has said things that will get minority voters out in droves to vote against him.

Also better educated conservatives and evangelicals won't support him, his own personal life just does not ring well with evangelicals, and with more educated conservatives his crude remarks don't sit well.

Um Trump was called "not a Christian" by the friggin Pope and still did well with evangelicals in SC and Nevada. He did well with the Hispanic vote in Nevada after calling Mexicans "mostly rapists" despite running against two guys with some degree of Hispanic lineage. I unfortunately think he's going to surprise everyone and capture more votes than just the Joe Dirt crowd.

 

[deleted731525]

And under Bernie's proposed plan they'll be making even less. See my edits to the last post. Also, as someone currently living off of under 15k/year, I can say honestly say I feel that individuals who struggle to live off of 15-20k in many cities have just as much of an attitude problem as a financial problem (and if they fixed the former, the latter wouldn't be an issue).

A lot of people have an attitude problem then. I think the median wage for adults in this country is something under 30k.

 

[Stagg737]

A lot of people have an attitude problem then. I think the median wage for adults in this country is something under 30k.

I was making 2 points. Both that it is completely possible to live off of 15-20k in many areas of the U.S. and that if people had a different attitude (aka hard-working for both money and self-improvement) they'd be making more than 15-20k/year. You're right about the median income, but surprisingly the ratio of median to mean has decreased: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html

 

[Doudline]

I was making 2 points. Both that it is completely possible to live off of 15-20k in many areas of the U.S. and that if people had a different attitude (aka hard-working for both money and self-improvement) they'd be making more than 15-20k/year. You're right about the median income, but surprisingly the ratio of median to mean has decreased: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html

Your first point is correct, your second obviously not so.

If an omnipotent fairy gave PhD-level human capital to every single American citizen in their sleep tonight, we would still need people working as cashiers and garbageman and so on. The need for low-skill and low-compensation labor is part of the economic system.

 

[Stagg737]

Your first point is correct, your second obviously not so.

If an omnipotent fairy gave PhD-level human capital to every single American citizen in their sleep tonight, we would still need people working as cashiers and garbageman and so on. The need for low-skill and low-compensation labor is part of the economic system.

True, but there are many people who work minimum wage jobs that either get second jobs or find ways to educate themselves or do extra work on the side in order to improve their current and future prospects. I'm not trying to imply a different attitude will magically make things better, but it certainly leads to better opportunities and better odds to improve one's life.

 

[jqueb29]

So long as there are swaths of people making $15,000 annually in this country then I am not concerned that someone's estate tax exemption was reduced from $5,000,000 to $3,500,000. Cry me a river. That's why I don't bother mentioning it. Besides, what exactly does the estate tax have to do with a physician's salary?

If we want someone to make a real difference in this country, they will unsuckle the military industrial complex from the teat of the US Treasury. Unfortunately, we haven't had such a candidate since Ralph Nader (and possibly the Pauls to a lesser extent).

Estate tax is flat out theft. It is robbery and should not exist.

 

[deleted646902]

I used to be one of those that thought "if I am going through all of this education and sacrifice I DESERVE to be compensated". While I still believe that physicians SHOULD make more than the average job due to education and work put in...my perspective has changed by listening to some doctors and doing their charting as a scribe. One will always come to my mind that has made me become more humble in the way I wish to practice. He told me, quite proudly, that " I am the best biller in this Emergency Room for a reason and I'm going to keep it that way ".... and he made sure of this by, even if he gave a simple piece of advice for a PA's fast track patient like what sling to use or what drug he would prescribe he would make me write an entire chart on the pt like he actually did the work up and he would complete imaging that was completely worthless and he made it a point for me to make his charts Level 5 by putting critical care or procedures that really skirted the line of truth. If you want to see one of the main two reasons that the health care field is looked at with disdain from people and is inefficient when compared to the rest of the world, become a scribe and you'll be forced to have a first hand experience. I will never forget the look of that mans face when he told me how proud he was of "being the best biller". Pretty disgusting


*Sorry about the bad grammar. Writing on an old brick phone.

 

[Wilf]

You terrify me.

And you disgust me.

Seriously though, pseudo-intellectuals are the most annoying people out there. I honestly think stupid people who don't try are less obnoxious than those who try to be more than they are. And pseudo-intellectuals are just as dangerous.

 

[Cavs5284]

Sure she's not neutral (no media is anymore) but even ignoring her narrative she's still showing clips of him as governor that prove he's not quite who he pretends to be. She directly addresses his supposed acceptance of same sex marriages showing that his words don't really match his actions / stances as governor. Bottom line, he's been extremely far right conservative in his actions (which don't really match up with everything he says now) and might be a better second choice after Cruz, not a moderate who should be appealing to a democrat who doesn't like Hillary.

Kasich has never pretended to be pro-choice, he has not denied his opposition to gay marriage, he has always called himself a conservative. You can always cherry-pick video clips of politicians (and edit/cut them) to make them seem worse than they are, especially politicians with decades-long careers.

As governor, he expanded medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, increased state funding to treat mental illness and addiction in Ohio and, despite his personal beliefs on marriage, has accepted it as law of the land and personally attended a gay wedding. On foreign policy he is less hawkish than Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and even Hillary Clinton.

It's funny, I don't think I've ever see people like Samantha Bee or John Oliver ever talk about Hillary Clinton's record on social issues. You know, with her opposition to marriage equality until it became politically expedient or her tacit support of her husband's policies such as DOMA and his role of increasing mass incarceration of minor drug offenders in the 1990's (which disproportionately affected blacks and latinos).

 

[jordansetron]

Im not so much concerned about physician salaries as I am about cost of education. Medical schools across the country are finding new and creative ways to pump their students (or potential students) for money and its getting ridiculous. I want to know which president will try to curb the outrageous costs for medical education.

 

[Seth Joo]

Um Trump was called "not a Christian" by the friggin Pope and still did well with evangelicals in SC and Nevada. He did well with the Hispanic vote in Nevada after calling Mexicans "mostly rapists" despite running against two guys with some degree of Hispanic lineage. I unfortunately think he's going to surprise everyone and capture more votes than just the Joe Dirt crowd.

He will still lose the general election and even in the chance that he wins the President he will fail miserably in the office. He has boasted about Obama and Bush being terrible leaders, but he will take the cake and cement America's falling status in the world. The man filed for bankruptcy four times in his life.

Also if in case you did not know he is likely to be facing fraud charges in May based upon his activities with the real estate program that he suckered thousands of people into thinking they could make money with his program.

He has fooled so many people into thinking that he is going to be one of the greats, another Eisenhower, Reagan, Kennedy, Truman, someone who will make America resemble a society that existed in the 1950s to 1960s, those days will never return.

I initially liked him but upon further study realized he was just hot air. Trump even thinks very low of his own supporters.

 

[BobbyB]

This. When Bernie says the "rich" should pay more taxes he's not talking about (just)!the billionaires. He's talking about the Pediatrician pulling in around $150k a year while servicing his $250k student loans. In other words the poorest doctors will fit into this category.

this

Bernie wants to destroy physician revenue and increase our tax burden without the subsidized med school tuition, decreased work hours, or increased malpractice physician rights.

 

[Seth Joo]

this

Bernie wants to destroy physician revenue and increase our tax burden without the subsidized med school tuition, decreased work hours, or increased malpractice physician rights.

Trump is going to devalue the Dollar so we can compete with China again, so our salaries will fall anyway, its kind of a double edged sword at this point. He wants the US minimum wage down to a $1 a hour!!! Can you say Shantytown USA?

 

[Cello]

And you disgust me.

Seriously though, pseudo-intellectuals are the most annoying people out there. I honestly think stupid people who don't try are less obnoxious than those who try to be more than they are. And pseudo-intellectuals are just as dangerous.

Oh, you have a smartest guy in the room complex. That makes more sense now. You and Trump are cut from the same cloth. Being the true intellectual here, would you care to explain why you support a candidate who favors universal health care coverage which will be paid for by the government?

He will still lose the general election and even in the chance that he wins the President he will fail miserably in the office. He has boasted about Obama and Bush being terrible leaders, but he will take the cake and cement America's falling status in the world. The man filed for bankruptcy four times in his life.

Also if in case you did not know he is likely to be facing fraud charges in May based upon his activities with the real estate program that he suckered thousands of people into thinking they could make money with his program.

He has fooled so many people into thinking that he is going to be one of the greats, another Eisenhower, Reagan, Kennedy, Truman, someone who will make America resemble a society that existed in the 1950s to 1960s, those days will never return.

I initially liked him but upon further study realized he was just hot air. Trump even thinks very low of his own supporters.

It's not that he has declared bankruptcy personally, rather that his businesses have declared bankruptcy. He has defrauded his investors out of billions using existing bankruptcy laws. It is completely disgraceful. And yes, the man is being sued for running a shame university which defrauded hundreds of people and loan providers out of millions.

 

[Seth Joo]

Oh, you have a smartest guy in the room complex. That makes more sense now. You and Trump are cut from the same cloth. Being the true intellectual here, wold you care to explain why you support a candidate who favors universal health care coverage which will be paid for by the government?



It's not that he has declared bankruptcy personally, rather that his businesses have declared bankruptcy. He has defrauded his investors out of billions using existing bankruptcy laws. It is completely disgraceful. And yes, the man is being sued for running a shame university which defrauded hundreds of people and loan providers out of millions.

One of the graduates his real estate system is a greeter at Walmart, I guess more people will be Walmart greeters if he is President, I am not defending Obama or Bush on job creation because they both suck on that department. Clinton was great, and I mean Bill Clinton was great in that department, but jobs over the last 15 years have been abysmal.

 

[Cello]

Estate tax is flat out theft. It is robbery and should not exist.

One could just as easily make this argument about any form of taxation. Why is the estate tax theft anymore than income taxes or sales taxes are?

 

[Law2Doc]

He will still lose the general election and even in the chance that he wins the President he will fail miserably in the office. He has boasted about Obama and Bush being terrible leaders, but he will take the cake and cement America's falling status in the world. The man filed for bankruptcy four times in his life.

Also if in case you did not know he is likely to be facing fraud charges in May based upon his activities with the real estate program that he suckered thousands of people into thinking they could make money with his program.

He has fooled so many people into thinking that he is going to be one of the greats, another Eisenhower, Reagan, Kennedy, Truman, someone who will make America resemble a society that existed in the 1950s to 1960s, those days will never return.

I initially liked him but upon further study realized he was just hot air. Trump even thinks very low of his own supporters.

Trump isn't going to even try and run the country. He is all about delegation. I think the concerns that he is full of hot air, though absolutely true, won't translate to a lack of management per se -- he will hire people to manage and run the government much as Ronald Reagan (who was likely severely demented by Alzheimer's throughout his entire second term, if not much of his first) had others dealing with the details. Trump presumably has 1-2 issues he cares about, and panders to the masses on everything else. So we have no clue what he believes or what his mandates will be. On many issues (abortion, gay marriage) there is suggestion he may even be as liberal as the democrats, which is likely driving the GOP core nuts. On other issues (immigration, isolationism) he makes everyone else look moderate. On things like gun control I suspect he just says what he thinks his constituents want to hear -- he hasn't been known to be a gun range/ hunting/outdoorsman type prior to this campaign. He has groups voting for him that he's not going to cater to -- the poor, racists, uneducated. They like him because he plays into the whole "they took our jobs" mentality, but in fact with his "lets get away from those New York liberal values" comments I suspect Cruz is more racially and ethnically insensitive.

The short answer is, nobody knows what he stands for, other than that he will spout out whatever comes to mind at the moment. And that makes him a true wildcard. Sometimes I think he doesn't even know what he's going to say until he says something and people cheer. But in an election where people feel the two parties are each trying to force feed them recycled garbage candidates who are party loyalists, Trump will have great appeal. He may not be better but he is different. If you want change, this is change.

Nobody thinks Trump will be a good president. But that's not even something he needs to prove in his campaign -- he just has to seem like a better option than the other guys/gal. When you are running from a bear you don't have to outrun the bear, just the other campers. Trump understands this point better than most of the others, and showed it when he more or less fed Jeb! to the bear right at the outset.

IMHO he is not going to be charged with fraud-- this was floated just as Rubios gay bathhouse rumors were floated a few weeks ago -- we are watching some extremely dirty politics (much of it originating from the Cruz headquarters). Expect to hear more similar stories that nothing will come of.

 

[Seth Joo]

Trump isn't going to even try and run the country. He is all about delegation. I think the concerns that he is full of hot air, though absolutely true, won't translate to a lack of management per se -- he will hire people to manage and run the government much as Ronald Reagan (who was likely severely demented by Alzheimer's throughout his entire second term, if not much of his first) had others dealing with the details. Trump presumably has 1-2 issues he cares about, and panders to the masses on everything else. So we have no clue what he believes or what his mandates will be. On many issues (abortion, gay marriage) there is suggestion he may even be as liberal as the democrats, which is likely driving the GOP core nuts. On other issues (immigration, isolationism) he makes everyone else look moderate. On things like gun control I suspect he just says what he thinks his constituents want to hear -- he hasn't been known to be a gun range/ hunting/outdoorsman type prior to this campaign. He has groups voting for him that he's not going to cater to -- the poor, racists, uneducated. They like him because he plays into the whole "they took our jobs" mentality, but in fact with his "lets get away from those New York liberal values" comments I suspect Cruz is more racially and ethnically insensitive.

The short answer is, nobody knows what he stands for, other than that he will spout out whatever comes to mind at the moment. And that makes him a true wildcard. Sometimes I think he doesn't even know what he's going to say until he says something and people cheer. But in an election where people feel the two parties are each trying to force feed them recycled garbage candidates who are party loyalists, Trump will have great appeal. He may not be better but he is different. If you want change, this is change.

Nobody thinks Trump will be a good president. But that's not even something he needs to prove in his campaign -- he just has to seem like a better option than the other guys/gal. When you are running from a bear you don't have to outrun the bear, just the other campers. Trump understands this point better than most of the others, and showed it when he more or less fed Jeb! to the bear right at the outset.

IMHO he is not going to be charged with fraud-- this was floated just as Rubios gay bathhouse rumors were floated a few weeks ago -- we are watching some extremely dirty politics (much of it originating from the Cruz headquarters). Expect to hear more similar stories that nothing will come of.

He is very liberal, some people compare him to the character of Biff from Back to the Future, which is he is not, Biff was kind of a Jock, Trump is a fat out of shape old man. That being said, if he wins, he is just going to be a loud windbag and nothing more, he will be a one term deal.

Maybe the fraud thing was just some smear tactic, who knows, his real estate education deal probably had legal disclaimers anyway. That being said is promise to "Make America Great Again" is just to get his message out to the simpletons, and Trump knows his supporters are fools. He even boasted that he could pull out a gun and randomly shoot someone in a crowd of supporters and he still would not lose support assuming he would not be charged with murder.

 

[jtm0021]

And a tottenham badge?

What can I say? I like to cheer for underdogs. Although Spurs are hardly an underdog this year. I wish more people would look at Gary though considering there is a lot of uncertainty this election year.

 

[petrosgp]

One could just as easily make this argument about any form of taxation. Why is the estate tax theft anymore than income taxes or sales taxes are?

Well, you are right there. But I can say that a movie was terrible and should not exist, that does not mean I do not believe there are other terrible movies, just that this particular one was brought up.

 

[jqueb29]

One could just as easily make this argument about any form of taxation. Why is the estate tax theft anymore than income taxes or sales taxes are?

Because the only transaction that occurred was death. For a given sum of money, it adds an extra layer of taxation (with the money also being taxed upon death in addition to being taxed when earned and taxed when spent). If you're going to charge an estate tax, it should be the exact same amount for every single person. Why should someone who worked mind-boggingly hard all their life to build up a $100 million estate have to get screwed out of almost $40 million they could leave to their family for no reason other than "welp, you died, so we're gonna have to tax that"?

 

[Cello]

Because the only transaction that occurred was death. For a given sum of money, it adds an extra layer of taxation (with the money also being taxed upon death in addition to being taxed when earned and taxed when spent). If you're going to charge an estate tax, it should be the exact same amount for every single person. Why should someone who worked mind-boggingly hard all their life to build up a $100 million estate have to get screwed out of almost $40 million they could leave to their family for no reason other than "welp, you died, so we're gonna have to tax that"?

I understand your argument, but it still applies to any tax. The only transaction that occurred when I earned a paycheck was my rendering of services and personal time to earn a salary. Why should the government have the right to charge me for providing a service? To apply your reasoning, 'welp, you sacrificed your time and effort to your employer, so we're gonna have to tax that.' Also, the assumption that someone had to work 'mind-bogglingly' hard to earn $100 million is a big assumption. Do some people work very hard to save that kind of money? Absolutely. But, most people with that kind of money will tell you that if you are working hard, then you aren't doing it right. Becoming rich is all about putting your money (or, preferably, someone else's money) to work for you and not relying upon earned hourly wages or set salaries.

 

[Stagg737]

And you disgust me.

Seriously though, pseudo-intellectuals are the most annoying people out there. I honestly think stupid people who don't try are less obnoxious than those who try to be more than they are. And pseudo-intellectuals are even more dangerous.

Ftfy.

Because the only transaction that occurred was death. For a given sum of money, it adds an extra layer of taxation (with the money also being taxed upon death in addition to being taxed when earned and taxed when spent). If you're going to charge an estate tax, it should be the exact same amount for every single person. Why should someone who worked mind-boggingly hard all their life to build up a $100 million estate have to get screwed out of almost $40 million they could leave to their family for no reason other than "welp, you died, so we're gonna have to tax that"?

I'd add that a large percentage of the time the money stays within the family, and I personally find it ridiculous to tax people for giving money to each other within a family. We don't tax parents when they pay for their kids college, or when they buy them Christmas presents. We don't tax people who pay for their parents healthcare or living situations in nursing homes, so why do we tax it when a parent dies and passes their money to their children? It's just another greedy law set up so the gov. can get their fingers into another cookie jar.

 

[Med Ed]

Because the only transaction that occurred was death. For a given sum of money, it adds an extra layer of taxation (with the money also being taxed upon death in addition to being taxed when earned and taxed when spent). If you're going to charge an estate tax, it should be the exact same amount for every single person. Why should someone who worked mind-boggingly hard all their life to build up a $100 million estate have to get screwed out of almost $40 million they could leave to their family for no reason other than "welp, you died, so we're gonna have to tax that"?

A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.

-Adam Smith

 

[jqueb29]

I understand your argument, but it still applies to any tax. The only transaction that occurred when I earned a paycheck was my rendering of services and personal time to earn a salary. Why should the government have the right to charge me for providing a service? To apply your reasoning, 'welp, you sacrificed your time and effort to your employer, so we're gonna have to tax that.' Also, the assumption that someone had to work 'mind-bogglingly' hard to earn $100 million is a big assumption. Do some people work very hard to save that kind of money? Absolutely. But, most people with that kind of money will tell you that if you are working hard, then you aren't doing it right. Becoming rich is all about putting your money (or, preferably, someone else's money) to work for you and not relying upon earned hourly wages or set salaries.

Extreme libertarian as I may be, even I admit that we need government for a moderate number of things, and these things require taxes in order to be funded. I don't think most taxes are remotely fair, but, since we do need some taxation, we have to tolerate a little unfairness. So the goal isn't to a find a tax is completely fair, but instead is the least unfair. Which is why I think we need to switch to either a flat tax or the FairTax program. They're as close to non-theft as possible.

 

[Med Ed]

Ftfy. so why do we tax it when a parent dies and passes their money to their children? It's just another greedy law set up so the gov. can get their fingers into another cookie jar.

The inheritance (or, if you prefer, death) tax is a mechanism to prevent the intergenerational accumulation and concentration of wealth into the hands of the few. It was widely supported by the Founding Fathers and proponents of the American Revolution, who saw it as a means for the country to avoid devolving into another European-style aristocracy. In that regard, the inheritance/death tax is as American as mom and apple pie.

You're not un-American, are you?

 

[deleted731525]

The inheritance (or, if you prefer, death) tax is a mechanism to prevent the intergenerational accumulation and concentration of wealth into the hands of the few. It was widely supported by the Founding Fathers and proponents of the American Revolution, who saw it as a means for the country to avoid devolving into another European-style aristocracy. In that regard, the inheritance/death tax is as American as mom and apple pie.

You're not un-American, are you?

I think the estate tax(with some amount exempt) is the best tax. You only pay it when you die. I understand wanting to leave money to your next of kin but most plans have some amount of millions exempt. Seems like a much more fair way to fund the government than taxing income or capital gains. And much less disastrous to economic growth than taxing consumption. The only downside(if you aren't legit aristocratic old money) is that some people who inherit things like farm land get screwed by the tax.

 

[jqueb29]

Seems like a much more fair way to fund the government than taxing income or capital gains.

But it's just a surrogate way of taxing income or capital gains considering that's what creates the estate.

 

[sloop]

I did not say that communism does not have an economic component to it. And you'll find that communism is in fact a sociopolitical system (or as Wikipedia defines it, an economic, social, and political ideology). What I said is that socialism does not have a sociopolitical component to it anymore than does capitalism. Neither socialism nor capitalism concern themselves with governance, raising armies, taxing citizens, passing laws, etc. Democracy and communism on the other hand do consider these things. Basically, I'm saying that if you want to make comparisons then the apt comparison is communism vs democracy, and socialism vs capitalism. Though, as I stated earlier, capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive, and both may exist in tandem with either communism or democracy.

No, communism is not a political ideology in itself. Communism has been adopted by all types of people from anarchist thinkers like Kropotkin to the Bolsheviks. It has been practiced and espoused in situations ranging from small anarch0communist collectives/consensus-based communities to huge authoritarian states. Communism itself does not imply anything about political organization. If anything, the strongest argument for communism having inherent political implications would be that since the overriding value of communism is equal distribution of capital, political capital should likewise be equally distributed—i.e. direct/consensus democracy or even anarchy.

 

[docdragon]

I'm just going to leave this here...

This is the single best campaign piece I've seen for Trump. Ever.