Bernie's plan to pay for "Free College"

[slimreaper]

So everyone who says you're wrong is a moron?

That's what being delusional is Slimreaper.

You're grasping for straws just because you're so damn eager to look smart. Just face the facts that you're not that bright.

I'm correct because I'm correct.

It's funny I just quoted you being proven wrong yet you still deny it

[video=youtube;yJEX8IFNA1U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yJEX8IFNA1U[/video]

 

[Funky Tiger]

So they're morons like you.


You said

"So why are you comparing what the source says about the FTT (which isn't the same as the wall-street tax anyhow) in Europe and how it won't work in the U.S.A?"

I proved they're the same thing(correct) you have no counter and instead suggest that because these morons don't agree that I won.

You got shit on, you have no evidence, where as I do.

Even the dude who tried to discredit the study as biased, originally said it was the NYFCC that funded the study, but never provided any evidence, then suggested it was Exxon(from what amounts to wikipedia)

you lose, nice deflection attempt yet again though

You must be registered for see images

go get em op

if an entire forum is against u they are just dumb useless left wing morons, who only cite "known left wing sources" whereas you cite all the good beleievable right wing sources for a neutral, unbiased debate. your mum's gotta be soo proud.

its cite btw, sunshine. not site.

 

[slimreaper]

go get em op

if an entire forum is against u they are just dumb useless left wing morons, who only cite "known left wing sources" whereas you cite all the good beleievable right wing sources for a neutral, unbiased debate. your mum's gotta be soo proud.

its cite btw, sunshine. not site.

No one in the forum has addressed the op.

They all parrot "it's done in Europe it can be done in America"

I never denied that yet they still keep saying it. What I denied was Bernie's specific plan of paying for it.


When pressed the guy who questioned the credibility of the study on FTT's, presented false information that the NYFCC was responsible for funding the study then suggested it was exxon( it took serious pressing to get him to give up that source)


Would you let me cite wikipedia on here as fact? Because he cited a page that can be edited by literally anyone


In the post you quoted I provided a false statement made by lightbringer. You can go look at the post before that and see i cited sources suggesting a robinhood tax is the same whether you call it a speculation tax or a trade tax. It's the same thing.


Point out where i'm incorrect and why

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

No one in the forum has addressed the op.

They all parrot "it's done in Europe it can be done in America"

I never denied that yet they still keep saying it. What I denied was Bernie's specific plan of paying for it.

When pressed the guy who questioned the credibility of the study on FTT's, presented false information that the NYFCC was responsible for funding the study then suggested it was exxon( it took serious pressing to get him to give up that source)


Would you let me cite wikipedia on here as fact? Because he cited a page that can be edited by literally anyone


In the post you quoted I provided a false statement made by lightbringer. You can go look at the post before that and see i cited sources suggesting a robinhood tax is the same whether you call it a speculation tax or a trade tax. It's the same thing.


Point out where i'm incorrect and why

So you can't read. Glad to know. Here, let me break it down to you flow chart style since you can't follow basic rhetoric.

Several companies fund this right wing think tank (btw, i picked that citation because it was the clearest and had good links and definitions, on the same google search you'd find 3-4 other sites saying the same thing, including "tabaccotactics").

The primary backer of the company is called Earhart foundation. The nyfcc was just credited on that specific article but is only one of MANY funding third parties. There are several companies that fund the Earhart foundation as well. Namely fortune five hundred companies like exxon, who fund both the earhart foundation AND the iea directly. You can check all of my sources, i'm not making this up. burden of proof has been fulfilled.

And for those with poor reading skills, here you go

You must be registered for see links

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

No one in the forum has addressed the op.

They all parrot "it's done in Europe it can be done in America"

I never denied that yet they still keep saying it. What I denied was Bernie's specific plan of paying for it.


When pressed the guy who questioned the credibility of the study on FTT's, presented false information that the NYFCC was responsible for funding the study then suggested it was exxon( it took serious pressing to get him to give up that source)


Would you let me cite wikipedia on here as fact? Because he cited a page that can be edited by literally anyone


In the post you quoted I provided a false statement made by lightbringer. You can go look at the post before that and see i cited sources suggesting a robinhood tax is the same whether you call it a speculation tax or a trade tax. It's the same thing.


Point out where i'm incorrect and why

still waiting

 

[slimreaper]

still waiting

"The IEA accepts no tied funding for its research and publications from corporations. The independence of the editorial process is also guaranteed by a blind peer review process. IEA books, monographs and Discussion Papers are blind peer reviewed by independent academics or other experts in the field. Exceptions are made in particular cases, for example when lectures are published. Briefings and Current Controversies are only internally reviewed."

You must be registered for see links

SHIT ON

 

[slimreaper]

still waiting

Still waiting

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

"The IEA accepts no tied funding for its research and publications from corporations. The independence of the editorial process is also guaranteed by a blind peer review process. IEA books, monographs and Discussion Papers are blind peer reviewed by independent academics or other experts in the field. Exceptions are made in particular cases, for example when lectures are published. Briefings and Current Controversies are only internally reviewed."

You must be registered for see links

SHIT ON

Oh I'm sorry, they SAY they're not biased. I'm sorry, I guess we need to go into jail and ask everyone if they're guilty so we can let them go.

They are a private company, they can literally say whatever they want. Fox news says that they are, and I quote "fair and balanced". The enquirer boasts peer reviews too.

It literally means absolutely nothing that their biased paper gets reviewed by other people. They can say " oh that money we got from those fortune 500 companies and right wing media groups, that money isn't "tied funding" is the same as "officer that's not drug money, somebody uh... Owed me money on a bet". They don't have to disclose how the money is earned.

I'm sorry but " we're innocent, I pinky promise " actually means nothing.

If that's your "shit on" response, I think we're done here

 

[Lightbringer]

Still waiting

Man you're such a loser.

 

[slimreaper]

Oh I'm sorry, they SAY they're not biased. I'm sorry, I guess we need to go into jail and ask everyone if they're guilty so we can let them go.

They are a private company, they can literally say whatever they want. Fox news says that they are, and I quote "fair and balanced". The enquirer boasts peer reviews too.

It literally means absolutely nothing that their biased paper gets reviewed by other people. They can say " oh that money we got from those fortune 500 companies and right wing media groups, that money isn't "tied funding" is the same as "officer that's not drug money, somebody uh... Owed me money on a bet". They don't have to disclose how the money is earned.

I'm sorry but " we're innocent, I pinky promise " actually means nothing.

If that's your "shit on" response, I think we're done here

I win. You obviously don't understand what blind peer reviewing is.


With the bolded quote, IT's clear you were never going to concede either way.


It makes no difference that their papers are blind peer reviewed? Then all studies ever done are worthless also. If peer reviewing isn't the standard we set for research quality? What is?

That's the definition of peer reviewing. If a paper is "biased" The peer reviewing process will find faults in this paper.


What would be enough?

 

[Punk Hazard]

I find it adequate that SlimReaper likes to say he's shit on his debate opponents, since what he spouts can only be compared to excrement.

 

[slimreaper]

I find it adequate that SlimReaper likes to say he's shit on his debate opponents, since what he spouts can only be compared to excrement.

SO take over the debate for them. They're clearly being shit on.


Not even peer reviewed research papers convince these people. There is no amount of evidence that ever would


Here's another site suggesting an FTT wouldn't work to fund "free college"

You must be registered for see links

 

[slimreaper]

In case you need education in basic peer review protocol

You must be registered for see links

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

In case you need education in basic peer review protocol

You must be registered for see links

Lets look at the definition of peer review. "Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to..." Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to
similar competence to

In case you need education in what "peer" means

 

[Lawlermelon]

On Bernie Sanders plans to pay for things he cites

"Paid for by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators that would generate about $300 billion in revenue." As his solution for his "College for All" Plan.


But According to the institute of Economic Affairs, this tax would be unproductive for generation of revenue

You must be registered for see links

Key findings of the report:
:The FTT looks like an exercise in European Commission self-interest. This is an excuse for the Commission to get more money directly in a way that will make it less accountable. A high proportion of that money will come from Britain.
:It is highly likely, that no net revenue would be raised by the FTT as it would shrink the overall economy, according to the Commission's own estimates, by nearly 2%
:The costs of the FTT would ultimately be borne by consumers of financial products – future pensioners, mortgage customers and so on.
:The FTT is likely to increase volatility by reducing liquidity and the ability to hedge – the opposite of what proponents claim.
:It would not help address any of the Eurozone’s current problems – it is a deliberate distraction from them.
:An FTT would not help reduce the likelihood of a future financial crash.
:If the FTT is not agreed on a global scale we would see trading relocate to other areas of the world.



Commenting on the report, Mark Littlewood, Director General at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said:
“This tax was conceived through resentment, then supported by narrow self-interest and is now being considered in desperation. It offers nothing to improve the security, stability or profitability of financial services, a crucial sector of the United Kingdom’s economy.
“Of all the things you could tax, to choose to penalise the goose that lays the golden egg is utterly wrongheaded. We must not let anger about the financial crisis lead us to adopt policies in a blind fury with serious, negative consequences on the economy for years to come.”



Prof. Philip Booth, Editorial Director at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said:
“A transactions tax is the worst kind of tax imaginable. Eating away at its own base it will undermine financial markets and leave consumers, including pensioners, to pick up the tab.
“It is a self-interested gimmick that is being pushed by the European Commission at the worst possible time. By the Commission’s own estimates it would probably raise no money but would divert resources from the nation states to Brussels.”


This leaves us with a question


How is Bernie Going to pay for college for all?

Wall street executives literally make so much money and the majority of it it's basically stealing from others. Wall street is and was always a scam. If you don't understand that, you're a fuc king idiot. Those executives make such a gross amount of unnecessary amount of money and spend it on bullshit, I don't give a **** if Bernie wants to tax them. Good. The world of huge corporate businesses will literally be the fall of mankind. If youre too blind to see that then you might as well gouge your eyes out and smash them between to cinder blocks.

 

[paratise]

Lets look at the definition of peer review. "Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to..." Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to
similar competence to

In case you need education in what "peer" means

He probably does not acknowledge the possibility of their incompetence though because only his sources are right and something that is practiced in many countries from various population/economy rates is just impossible in USA for some reason.

 

[slimreaper]

He probably does not acknowledge the possibility of their incompetence though because only his sources are right and something that is practiced in many countries from various population/economy rates is just impossible in USA for some reason.

You really can't ****ing read can you?

This is the last time I'm saying this. I never said it's impossible to implement in America. This thread is about the specific plan Bernie Sanders is planning to implement in America and how it won't generate any money.

Please learn how to ****ing read

Wall street executives literally make so much money and the majority of it it's basically stealing from others. Wall street is and was always a scam. If you don't understand that, you're a fuc king idiot. Those executives make such a gross amount of unnecessary amount of money and spend it on bullshit, I don't give a **** if Bernie wants to tax them. Good. The world of huge corporate businesses will literally be the fall of mankind. If youre too blind to see that then you might as well gouge your eyes out and smash them between to cinder blocks.

But that tax won't generate any money, they'll just adjust their practices. If you'd read.

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

You really can't ****ing read can you?

This is the last time I'm saying this. I never said it's impossible to implement in America. This thread is about the specific plan Bernie Sanders is planning to implement in America and how it won't generate any money.

Please learn how to ****ing read


But that tax won't generate any money, they'll just adjust their practices. If you'd read.

We fúcking read it. Its literally all speculative gibberish. And it isn't even particularly about bernie's plan, bernies plan (while deeper than any other candidates at the moment especially cruze and trump) is not very deep yet, and this 2011 piece about a specific plan that he believe would fail is not evidence that bernies plan isn't sound, especially given that its been done all over the world.

 

[Lightbringer]

We fúcking read it. Its literally all speculative gibberish. And it isn't even particularly about bernie's plan, bernies plan (while deeper than any other candidates at the moment especially cruze and trump) is not very deep yet, and this 2011 piece about a specific plan that he believe would fail is not evidence that bernies plan isn't sound, especially given that its been done all over the world.

No matter how wrong he is, he always has to justify himself to being right. It's pointless to argue with him. Just leave him in his safe space.

 

[slimreaper]

We fúcking read it. Its literally all speculative gibberish. And it isn't even particularly about bernie's plan, bernies plan (while deeper than any other candidates at the moment especially cruze and trump) is not very deep yet, and this 2011 piece about a specific plan that he believe would fail is not evidence that bernies plan isn't sound, especially given that its been done all over the world.

here is your answer about the writer not specifically talking about bernie's plan

You must be registered for see links

What has been done all over the world? Financial trade taxes(or as bernie likes to label them wall street speculation taxes)


Yes and with disastrous effects

"An FTT can be imposed with varying effects depending upon how many other governments do so at the same time. A
purely EU FTT would see much trading leaving the EU, as happened to Sweden when it unilaterally imposed such a
tax in the 1980s and 90s. A global tax would not have the problem of trading moving but would still have all of the other
associated problems."


So For Bernie to prevent large amounts of trade leaving the United States, there would need to be a global implementation of this specific tax. It's the same principle as minimum wage. Unless the wage in China matches what we want to pay our workers here, Business owners are always going to send jobs to the cheaper production area.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images