Bernie's plan to pay for "Free College"

[Jiraiyathesannin]

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

Lets play a drinking game, drink every time slimdickreaper says "i win" "my intellect" "shit on", has a girl laugh at his penis, or other "i'm verbally declaring victory" retort. we'll be drunk in minutes.

They're cliche's for a reason. At the end of the day, you only care about public opinion seeing you as correct. you don't care if your argument is right, you care about "winning" and stumble into every pitfall of every internet troll.

Saying things like "i win" hoping that i'll end my argument and you'll get the last word. or "get rekt". Its not even about winning to you. Its about people SEEING you win. Being wrong on the internet is the single worst thing you can do. If you don't say "get shit on", someone else will say it to you. The bully psychology is so fúcking textbook.

You took a gamble. "let me try posting something that upon a glance seems irrefutable" and see if anybody gives you props. Best case scenario, nobody can argue and you look smart, worst case, someone calls you out and you are *gasp* wrong on the internet.

You are the only person out of nearly a dozen who agrees with you. Every single thing you've said has been countered by everyone here and are floundering. You gotta get that "i win" statement in so that if by some chance, this falls in to obscurity, all we'll remember is your victory.

You hope with every response that nobody answers your replies. I'm sorry but thats not happening. you don't get to make incorrect claims, site bad sources and get away with it.

But i'll go against the internet tropes now by giving you an out. here it is. Do not response to this, you'll end with no dignity. I will not brag that I won. But if you respond, this WILL never end. I can't speak for the others, but if i know passionate liberals like i think i do, they won't either. This will not go away. This will be a constant reminder of the time you posted a bad link that vaguely described the loose outline given by a popular politicians tax plan and that biased article funded by biased people said it "probably won't work" despite very similar plans currently working and how WRONG you were.

You must be registered for see links

 

[slimreaper]

Lets play a drinking game, drink every time slimdickraper says "i win" "my intellect" "shit on", has a girl laugh at his penis, or other "i'm verbally declaring victory" retort. we'll be drunk in minutes.

They're cliche's for a reason. At the end of the day, you only care about public opinion seeing you as correct. you don't care if your argument is right, you care about "winning" and stumble into every pitfall of every internet troll.

Saying things like "i win" hoping that i'll end my argument and you'll get the last word. or "get rekt". Its not even about winning to you. Its about people SEEING you win. Being wrong on the internet is the single worst thing you can do. If you don't say "get shit on", someone else will say it to you. The bully psychology is so fúcking textbook.

You took a gamble. "let me try posting something that upon a glance seems irrefutable" and see if anybody gives you props. Best case scenario, nobody can argue and you look smart, worst case, someone calls you out and you are *gasp* wrong on the internet.

You are the only person out of nearly a dozen who agrees with you. Every single thing you've said has been countered by everyone here and are floundering. You gotta get that "i win" statement in so that if by some chance, this falls in to obscurity, all we'll remember is your victory.

You hope with every response that nobody answers your replies. I'm sorry but thats not happening. you don't get to make incorrect claims, site bad sources and get away with it.

But i'll go against the internet tropes now by giving you an out. here it is. Do not response to this, you'll end with no dignity. I will not brag that I won. But if you respond, this WILL never end. I can't speak for the others, but if i know passionate liberals like i think i do, they won't either. This will not go away. This will be a constant reminder of the time you posted a bad link that vaguely described the loose outline given by a popular politicians tax plan and that biased article funded by biased people said it "probably won't work" despite very similar plans currently working and how WRONG you were.

You must be registered for see links

You have nothing. literally you're entire argument is trying to discredit a peer review paper as taking biased funding and therefore biased(even if this was true, the peer review process would negate their bias)



I guess all government research is also invalid as they all take personals donations aswell.


Instead of arguing the point you try to discredit it.


As for people disagreeing with me, have you noticed none have offered any argument other than

"free college works in europe, it can work here". Clearly not reading the op.


GO ahead prove the paper to be wrong. You can't, i win.

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

You have nothing. literally you're entire argument is trying to discredit a peer review paper as taking biased funding and therefore biased(even if this was true, the peer review process would negate their bias)



I guess all government research is also invalid as they all take personals donations aswell.


Instead of arguing the point you try to discredit it.


As for people disagreeing with me, have you noticed none have offered any argument other than

"free college works in europe, it can work here". Clearly not reading the op.


GO ahead prove the paper to be wrong. You can't, i win.

*takes shot of Cognac* There are politicians too who take donations. Recall when the United State House of Representatives Committee of Science Space and technology, how a Mr. Bucshon had the renowned scientist John Holdron explain to him the evidence that exists for global climate change, and Bucshon said "if there were no global warming, climatologists would have nothing to get paid for, so its in your best interest to say that there is no climate change. A politician telling a scientist that he has monetary bias. Come to find out, Bucshon's largest campaign contributor was big oil. So bias happens on all levels. Thats why you pick and chose accordingly your sources.

Your source comes from a paper published by a think tank. A think tank PARTICULARLY KNOWN for being very right wing (anyone calling themselves the institute of economic affairs should be neutral, but thats none of my business) and has their primary backers as fortune 500 companies (who would benefit from an article condemning taxes on wallstreet and similar taxing systems) and another NOTORIOUSLY right wing propaganda machine known for financing ANTI LIBERAL NEWS PAPERS.

I'd sooner read from the National Enquirer than from anything put forward by these "companies".

Peer review has about as much credibility as being in good standing with the Better Business Bureau. Or one of those coins they sell on infomercials coming with a "certificate of authenticity". Or a criminal "solemnly swear[ing| to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".

It creates the illusions of having a minimum bar of credibility. So many horribly discredited and biased publications passed a blind peer review.

As does saying "the money from our backers has nothing to do with what we publish". Its a load of horse shit. Just like Bucshon making a big stink about global warming being a myth while being backed by oil companies.

Your source isn't credible. I've provided citations showing the chain of funding throughout the channels to get to the paper you showed, but even if this was an unfunded private article written by a loan economist, his word isn't law.

Bernie has given the outlines of a plan he's going to implement, not details. more than any other candidate, but still nothing specific. It falls in line with what other governments have implemented successfully despite this author condemning a very particular method of taxing in this nature.

You say that I have no ground to call your sources into question, but YOU have no right to call RESULTS into question. I can rant all ****ing day that orange juice is toxic and one glass can kill you, but at the end of the day, it DOESN'T. This system has worked for hundreds of years. Systems falling perfectly in line with the outline bernie has given us. I reviewed bernie's tax outline and I agree with it. As does everyone here, and as do dozens of other nations doing far better than we are right now.

"I win"

 

[slimreaper]

*takes shot of Cognac* There are politicians too who take donations. Recall when the United State House of Representatives Committee of Science Space and technology, how a Mr. Bucshon had the renowned scientist John Holdron explain to him the evidence that exists for global climate change, and Bucshon said "if there were no global warming, climatologists would have nothing to get paid for, so its in your best interest to say that there is no climate change. A politician telling a scientist that he has monetary bias. Come to find out, Bucshon's largest campaign contributor was big oil. So bias happens on all levels. Thats why you pick and chose accordingly your sources.

Your source comes from a paper published by a think tank. A think tank PARTICULARLY KNOWN for being very right wing (anyone calling themselves the institute of economic affairs should be neutral, but thats none of my business) and has their primary backers as fortune 500 companies (who would benefit from an article condemning taxes on wallstreet and similar taxing systems) and another NOTORIOUSLY right wing propaganda machine known for financing ANTI LIBERAL NEWS PAPERS.

I'd sooner read from the National Enquirer than from anything put forward by these "companies".

Peer review has about as much credibility as being in good standing with the Better Business Bureau. Or one of those coins they sell on infomercials coming with a "certificate of authenticity". Or a criminal "solemnly swear[ing| to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".

It creates the illusions of having a minimum bar of credibility. So many horribly discredited and biased publications passed a blind peer review.

As does saying "the money from our backers has nothing to do with what we publish". Its a load of horse shit. Just like Bucshon making a big stink about global warming being a myth while being backed by oil companies.

Your source isn't credible. I've provided citations showing the chain of funding throughout the channels to get to the paper you showed, but even if this was an unfunded private article written by a loan economist, his word isn't law.

Bernie has given the outlines of a plan he's going to implement, not details. more than any other candidate, but still nothing specific. It falls in line with what other governments have implemented successfully despite this author condemning a very particular method of taxing in this nature.

You say that I have no ground to call your sources into question, but YOU have no right to call RESULTS into question. I can rant all ****ing day that orange juice is toxic and one glass can kill you, but at the end of the day, it DOESN'T. This system has worked for hundreds of years. Systems falling perfectly in line with the outline bernie has given us. I reviewed bernie's tax outline and I agree with it. As does everyone here, and as do dozens of other nations doing far better than we are right now.

"I win"

So provide examples of this tax system working for hundreds of years

You cited what amounts to wikipedia. It can literally be edited by anyone. What proof have you actually provided that exxon funds two institutes back a think tank that published a paper written by an Adam Smith institute fellow?

here is the exact word of the European Commission(The executive body of the european union)

"‘With a tax rate of 0.1% the model shows drops in GDP (-1.76%) in the long-run. It should be noted that these strong
results are related to the fact that the tax is cumulative and cascading which leads to rather strong economic reactions in
the model.’ (Vol. 1 (Summary), p. 50)
Revenue estimates are as follows:
‘[A] stylised transaction tax on securities (STT), where it is assumed that all investment in the economy are financed with
the help of securities (shares and bonds) at 0.1% is simulated to cause output losses (i.e. deviation of GDP from its longrun
baseline level) of up to 1.76% in the long run, while yielding annual revenues of less than 0.1% of GDP.’ (Vol. 1 (Summary),
p. 33)"

AKA people take their money elsewhere so you make no money


Dude find away around that. Go ahead,call them biased.


Bernie's plan is larger than that, thus will have greater negative effects.

 

[GaaraXSakura4eva]

Lets play a drinking game, drink every time slimdickraper says "i win" "my intellect" "shit on", has a girl laugh at his penis, or other "i'm verbally declaring victory" retort. we'll be drunk in minutes.

They're cliche's for a reason. At the end of the day, you only care about public opinion seeing you as correct. you don't care if your argument is right, you care about "winning" and stumble into every pitfall of every internet troll.

Saying things like "i win" hoping that i'll end my argument and you'll get the last word. or "get rekt". Its not even about winning to you. Its about people SEEING you win. Being wrong on the internet is the single worst thing you can do. If you don't say "get shit on", someone else will say it to you. The bully psychology is so fúcking textbook.

You took a gamble. "let me try posting something that upon a glance seems irrefutable" and see if anybody gives you props. Best case scenario, nobody can argue and you look smart, worst case, someone calls you out and you are *gasp* wrong on the internet.

You are the only person out of nearly a dozen who agrees with you. Every single thing you've said has been countered by everyone here and are floundering. You gotta get that "i win" statement in so that if by some chance, this falls in to obscurity, all we'll remember is your victory.

You hope with every response that nobody answers your replies. I'm sorry but thats not happening. you don't get to make incorrect claims, site bad sources and get away with it.

But i'll go against the internet tropes now by giving you an out. here it is. Do not response to this, you'll end with no dignity. I will not brag that I won. But if you respond, this WILL never end. I can't speak for the others, but if i know passionate liberals like i think i do, they won't either. This will not go away. This will be a constant reminder of the time you posted a bad link that vaguely described the loose outline given by a popular politicians tax plan and that biased article funded by biased people said it "probably won't work" despite very similar plans currently working and how WRONG you were.

You must be registered for see links

Even if you disagree with slimreaper on this topic, DO NOT joke about rape. It is a serious crime! I am tired of seeing people use this word as a joke. No rape victim will EVER see the humor in these tasteless jokes. Stop!

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

Even if you disagree with slimreaper on this topic, DO NOT joke about rape. It is a serious crime! I am tired of seeing people use this word as a joke. No rape victim will EVER see the humor in these tasteless jokes. Stop!

I 100% disagree on every fathomable level and would argue that at a different time and place, however in this instance, I was typing on mobile and it was a typo and missed an e in reaper. Disengage. Its fixed

 

[Prince Lucifer]

That reminds me of the late Gaddafi who also offered free education.

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

That reminds me of the late Gaddafi who also offered free education.

And hitler was known to give to charity. relevance?

 

[Prince Lucifer]

And hitler was known to give to charity. relevance?

You can't compare Hitler to Gaddafi.

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

You can't compare Hitler to Gaddafi.

Again, a complete nonsequiter in this topic, but I'll endulge. Why can't you compare them

 

[Prince Lucifer]

Again, a complete nonsequiter in this topic, but I'll endulge. Why can't you compare them

Search it up.

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

Search it up.

You're not making any sense. Look WHAT up? I'm not disputing anything. You said "this one person did something you suggested" as if to use it as evidence of a trend, I shared an equally valid statement showing how little your input mattered. Fascist italy had a mail system. Therefore mail is evil. Pickin up what i'm puttin down kid?

 

[Prince Lucifer]

You're not making any sense. Look WHAT up? I'm not disputing anything. You said "this one person did something you suggested" as if to use it as evidence of a trend, I shared an equally valid statement showing how little your input mattered. Fascist italy had a mail system. Therefore mail is evil. Pickin up what i'm puttin down kid?

Don't be lazy, look up the figures and see the differences.

 

[slimreaper]

You're not making any sense. Look WHAT up? I'm not disputing anything. You said "this one person did something you suggested" as if to use it as evidence of a trend, I shared an equally valid statement showing how little your input mattered. Fascist italy had a mail system. Therefore mail is evil. Pickin up what i'm puttin down kid?

I'm guessing you're conceding defeat then

 

[Jiraiyathesannin]

I'm guessing you're conceding defeat then

Are you mental? read what this guy's saying. he is saying "giddafi had free education" and i'm not disputing that. its not relevant. Also nice job going back to this whole defeat victory thing, i swear you are an amalgamation of everything wrong with your average youtube comment section.

Hitler gave to charities, therefore charities are bad is equally as valid. he's saying "look it up, look it up". ****ing look up what. That giddafi had healtcare? i'm not ****ing disputing it.

 

[slimreaper]

Are you mental? read what this guy's saying. he is saying "giddafi had free education" and i'm not disputing that. its not relevant. Also nice job going back to this whole defeat victory thing, i swear you are an amalgamation of everything wrong with your average youtube comment section.

Hitler gave to charities, therefore charities are bad is equally as valid. he's saying "look it up, look it up". ****ing look up what. That giddafi had healtcare? i'm not ****ing disputing it.

So you're conceding defeat then?

 

[ZK]

So you're conceding defeat then?

I don't know about the financing, but tax-funded college is an extremely useful investment. It lowers costs overall and it would lead colleges away from their current path of massive financial investments. Educational institutions should be just that, not shareholders.
...plus, you know, more people would go to college and get better jobs.

 

[slimreaper]

I don't know about the financing, but tax-funded college is an extremely useful investment. It lowers costs overall and it would lead colleges away from their current path of massive financial investments. Educational institutions should be just that, not shareholders.
...plus, you know, more people would go to college and get better jobs.

not the point of the thread

 

[madvictory]

Ask Europe. It has a population of 742.5 million people yet can afford free/affordable college and healthcare for all, and it's MANY levels above the US when it comes to lifestyle.

 

[slimreaper]

Ask Europe. It has a population of 742.5 million people yet can afford free/affordable college and healthcare for all, and it's MANY levels above the US when it comes to lifestyle.

why can't yall read? This thread isn't about the possibility of paying for free college.

It's about bernie's specific plan to do so