Celebrities in Politics

Not to further the derail, but some people inherit an amount of money that makes this look like spending cash. That alone stops a ludicrous number of people from ever having the ability to be a 1%'er

Agreed, but friendly neighborhood reminder that this is in no way exclusively a “dems are doing this” issue. All of Congress and every POTUS (recent past and present) are guilty of this being such a huge problem.

Yes, the republicans are far from perfect and I’ve said it many times…but…

…You are an astute guy and pay attention to Presidential campaigns both current and historical. What did the democrats say about the Reagan tax cuts? What did they say about the GW Bush tax cuts? What are they now saying about President Trump’s proposed tax cuts?

Answer: They are only helping the rich.

This is pure fantasy and as I said “the politics of envy”

Obviously, if someone makes 200-k per year and receives a 5% tax reduction they are going to save more than someone who makes 50-k per year and receives a the same 5% tax cut. But that’s not how the dems play it. And they do this for political purposes. As they know they would never have a chance without two factors: 1. using the politics of envy and 2. keeping people addicted to government handouts.

To be fair, when megacorps buy politicians like we buy candy bars you can’t say PURE fantasy. With the immense amount of corporate welfare handed out every year Republicans spend quite a bit of time and effort keeping people addicted to govt handouts.

The unfortunate truth is people will ALWAYS look for an easier way. Whether that be success in finances, sports, etcetcetc. In the same way that lower class individuals vote for those that make their lives easier, so do higher class individuals. It’s no mystery why Republicans dominate the upper class in spite of their stances on social issues that are going the way of the dinosaur. I don’t particularly blame these people, as they’d have to be pretty stupid to not act in their best interests.

I’m sure you’re aware republicans do the exact same thing, but to a different clientele. It’s shitty, but effective.

I’m not talking about corporations. Why do bring up corporations? I am talking about helping the little guy become what he/she wants to become in a free country by reducing the size of the tax burden. Simple.

I never said that I blame the people did I? I did however blame the Bernie Sanders and crazy Lizzie Warrens of the world. And the left’s game of “the politics of envy.”

You forgot who you were talking to. I am the one who brought the concept to T Nation that it’s all a big game. Some didn’t want to hear that but that is what it is.

I am however specifically against pitting one group of people against another. The left does this all the time. Rich vs. poor…black vs. white…on and on. It’s a game they are very good at.

Because (and I may be wrong) there hasn’t been a major tax reform in modern history that ONLY impacted the individual. People see “my taxes are going down 5%” and blindly ignore “Fortune 500 company taxes goes down 5%” and then wonder why we’re always operating at a deficit.

This wasn’t pointed at you. Was moreso a statement of my opinion.

Which I wholeheartedly agree with. It’s important to note that republicans do this exact same thing, but from the other side of the argument. In regards to pitting groups against each other, both sides are guilty AF.

1 Like

Let the corporations taxes go down 5%…as long as average Joe’s go down 5% who cares? By the way that’s not how it works. Corporate taxes are different than individual taxes as you know.

Refresh my memory and inform me exactly how republicans actively politic by pitting different groups and races against each other.

People that scream about the deficit. There’s quite a few of them.

The percents were more of a concept comparison than a real world example.

Any talking point you can find complaining about “welfare queens” or “lazy liberals.” How about Christian vs non christian (gay marriage). How about all the talking points of how “young people are stupid and vote for Dems because they’re stupid.” Romney’s watercooler’d 47% quote seems fitting here. Trump’s entire Muslim ban is predicated on the fact that Islam preaches violence and we should fear them.

Take your pick. Again, not to say Dems DON’T do this (because they clearly do), but let’s not pretend like the poor ole republicans are fighting the good fight and Dems just won’t fight fair.

2 Likes

How so?[quote=“pfury, post:15, topic:228769”]
Of course everyone has the opportunity. But to say everyone has an EQUAL opportunity to become a 1%'er is just silly.
[/quote]

Everyone one starts differently some poor some rich but where you start doesn’t mean that you will end in the same place. America and the UK have incredibly high income mobility.

If you are poor and living on benefits for 80 years you are not good with money nor are you hard working.

People need a driving motivation to get out of there situation which is why in communism/socialism/Bernie’s policies no one is motivated.

If your only qualification at the end of your education is a degree in Lesbian Dance Theory instead of something useful that you can make a living on like in a STEM field then you have no right to complain about income inequality.

If we want to make this a new thread I’ll do so.

Statistically, the more wealth you’re born into, the greater chance you have of being wealthy. Hell some people inherit enough money to make the 1% cut automatically. Saying we all have an equal opportunity is idealist and doesn’t hold up to the real world.

Agreed. But starting rich undeniably makes it easier to stay rich.

What does the deficit have to do with lowering taxes? Giving money back to the people will grow the economy. Not treating corporations like bad guys and giving them lower taxes will also grow the economy. The US has the highest corporate tax rates…has it helped us or hurt us?

Trump’s “Temporary” Muslim ban was predicated upon the fact that a high rate of killings have been perpetrated by Muslims. This is not something that pops up every four years like…Ready? “The Rich Are Not paying Their Fair Share” And there are other’s the dems use every four years. How about this one “The republicans are going to cut your social security” Oh my I have been hearing that one for decades.

Their entire campaign is usually predicated on pitting one group against another…scare tactics.

Being born rich just means that you are born rich, it doesn’t determine what you are doing while you are alive.
The reason why those born rich tend to stay rich is because they are good with money as they are taught.

It’s also these rich people who employ the majority of the population and pay them. It’s not as if Bill Gates has made loads of money through a criminal activity and hordes it to himself, he hires loads of people and pays them fairly.

Lowering taxes is a direct cut to govt revenue. Lets not pretend like every dollar that corps save in taxes actually goes back into the economy. We’re both smarter than that.

When I say republicans, I mean republicans, not just POTUS candidates with an R next to the name on the ballot ticket. Never did I say these things were exclusive to presidential candidates, and since you brought up Elizabeth Warren I assumed you weren’t either?

How in the world are these 2 things different? “Threatening the sanctity of marriage” is and has been a major republican talking point for years. You really want to believe that it’s not pitting those 2 groups against each other it’s all you.

He said it to a room full of people. How is he not directly pitting those people against another group of people. Wot…?

But it greatly increases your chances of being a 1%'er, which is what you said everyone has as equal opportunity to do, yes?

1 Like

Bachelor’s degree holders from low-income backgrounds start their careers earning about two-thirds as much as those from higher-income backgrounds, but this ratio declines to one-half by mid-career.

You largely build a career through networking.

I don’t care about celebrity. If they are a candidate that has beliefs closest to mine they get my vote. That being said, I don’t think celebrity helps and it may even hurt in some cases. It may hurt because people associate celebrity with extreme-leftist ideas. Clearly, most of the country is not extreme left so they have to distance themselves from that, while not aleinating their friends.
Celebrity didn’t make a damn in 2016 when virtually all of Hollywood supported Hillary. Didn’t make a damn bit of difference. I think the point made is that unless a celebrity has a true civic calling; a call to serve. They would serve themselves best by shutting the fuck up.

This is most likely because high income kids are a pretty good makeup of high cost colleges. High cost colleges look much better on a resume to land a high paying job. Wealth breeds wealth.

While I understand what you’re saying, I have to chuckle at this post coming in the aftermath of a President who had never held public office and became President largely on the basis of his own celebrity. Do you think DJT had a true civic calling?

Ha! You know I wasn’t even thinking about him at all in that context, but you have a point.
To answer your question, an remember you are asking an opinion question, yes I actually do think he had a calling to serve. I do not think he knew what he was getting himself into, going strait to president.
I am watching as he starts to learn the job. I think it is possible to learn that job while on the job. I don’t think the job itself is all that complicated. I think it’s hard and tedious, but not complex. It’s mainly learning what not to do. You have a whole staff of experts, so if you have a question you just have to ask. “Can I do this?”, “Am I allowed to do that?”, etc.

Actually, what I was think about is how is it possible that Hillary lost with all the support she had… When thinking about celebrities, I was thinking about all the celebrities stumping for her, she had 2 Presidents campaigning for her, a host of other VIP’s campaigning for her and supporting her publicly, complete support from the media and in the end, whatever difference it made, it still wasn’t enough for her to win what was predicted to be a landslide for her.
That’s what I had in mind when talking about how little celebrity influence really mattered.