(Quote shortened for brevity)
This bit of (incorrect) conventional wisdom that has been allowed to fester, for some reason, despite simple evidence to the contrary. Heck, you can find folks who think that Reagan negotiated with Iran (seriously). Folks don’t realize that talks were going on in July of '80, and after many fits and starts, became fruitful in September-especially after Iran was invaded by Iraq that month.
So which part of the Algiers Accords were predicated on Reagan winning?
What happens, theoretically, if Sanders and Trump win the primaries?
What happens if Sanders wins and Trump loses but then runs as a third party candidate (something he seemingly refuses to rule out).
President Carter famously addressed the nation wearing a sweater, encouraging the people to conserve fuel by finding other ways to stay warm. With global warming, this should not be an issue for the next administration. Instead, we should expect President Sanders to regularly address the nation while shirtless.
In Bermuda shorts. And sandals. And black socks with garter belts. 
Which would be awesome.
Because we know all too well that Vlad could never pull that look off.
They run against each other, and I vote for someone else.
Then Sanders is trounced by whoever the Republicans pick.
Regards,
Shodan
Yeah? How are the polls right now? Last I saw, Sanders was only a percentage point behind ¡jeb! and ahead of everyone else. “Trounced” seems unlikely.
Regards, Shodan
Sanders is going to go all Mondale and promise to raise taxes on everyone. There’s just no other way he can pay for all his promises. And he’s too honest to lie about it once the math is made clear to him.
Actually it seems more his style to exempt the first $50k of a household’s income entirely–so poor folks can spend their money on surviving, and then implement a progressive tax with some exemptions on $50-$150k, and then increasing & exponentially draconian taxes on income, and on net worth in excess of $10 mil.
Easy enough to support taxing huge net worth–get that money flowing into jobs, or give it to the government so IT can create jobs rebuilding infrastructure. And only a vanishingly small portion of the constituency would be adversely affected.
You are totally right. My original statement about Carter not ending the hostage crisis related to his electability. The accords and the release were likely timed by Iranians NOT to give Carter a win heading into the elections.
And I totally agree with you: the mythology that Reagan scared Iranians so much they released the hostages ten minutes into his presidency is complete bullshit. I’m kind of surprised anyone still believes that bit of fabricated history.
Wherein it gets kind of tricky, because the US, unfortunately, has no system in place to tax assets/property. And if it did, would it be possible to implement such a system in a fair way, so that Cayman Island (et al) assets are included in the assessment? Could/should there be a rising tax on second, third, eighth homes? What exactly is “fair”, and how fair can we get?
I suspect one of the things he might pursue would be a tax on instrument trading, which makes a huge amount of sense, because it reduces financial market activity, and financial market activity tends to correlate with economic instability. AIUI, Frankie got a trading tax of 0.5% put in place, and the revenue went a long way toward balancing the budget.
This is the sort of thing that should make The Very Rich very nervous. Back when they were merely “Rich People” everyone tolerated them, and kind of revered them as gods. Still do to some extent. But as we get more people living in poverty, and more middle class becoming less certain about its own future the rich are more likely to be seen in a less sympathetic light–they risk becoming a marginalized minority. And then, who the hell cares what’s fair? They will be lucky to be just heavily taxed and not literally beheaded.
Which leads to the same problem for liberals as usual - either tax only the rich, and not raise enough money to make any difference or enable any new spending (or eliminate the deficit), or tax the middle classes too.
Regards,
Shodan
The Sanders campaign has its first bumper sticker.
Regards,
Shodan
I like it. “Fair” is a four-letter F-word anyway.
[QUOTE=The Great Sun Jester]
Actually it seems more his style to exempt the first $50k of a household’s income entirely–so poor folks can spend their money on surviving, and then implement a progressive tax with some exemptions on $50-$150k, and then increasing & exponentially draconian taxes on income, and on net worth in excess of $10 mil.
Easy enough to support taxing huge net worth–get that money flowing into jobs, or give it to the government so IT can create jobs rebuilding infrastructure. And only a vanishingly small portion of the constituency would be adversely affected.
[/QUOTE]
I assume Sanders’ suggestino of an estate tax on the richest is the same as the “wealth tax” described above. Has Sanders explained how this would work?
Suppose I have $10 million in an IRA. Now I want to draw on it. Do I get taxed on the whole $10M, or just on the portion I withdraw? ISTM that it wouldn’t be legal for the IRS to change the agreement under which IRAs were created back in 1974 now. If I just get taxed on the amount I withdraw, does it matter what the amount is? If I draw, say, $100K a year, do I pay the same income tax as someone who earns $100K, or more because I invested it?
And does the value of my house (if I have one) get counted against my total wealth?
Or suppose it is a Roth IRA. Do I have to pay taxes on it again?
The devil is in the details, as usual.
Regards,
Shodan
No idea how it would work. Would never take a bite out of me or anyone I know anyway, so I also don’t care. 
But a wealth tax ultimately leads to same conclusion: better to send your money overseas, burn it in a big pyre or secretly bury it in the backyard to give it to people who hate you and used democratic processes to take it from you. It also causes rich and powerful people to realize that maybe democracy isn’t the best form of government for them and to start advocating for something else.
Or what is easier and more likely - hire a good tax attorney to shield your wealth from the tax man.
Of course, it wastes a lot of time and effort on tax-avoidance activities instead of something productive, but as long as it saves me money in the long run, so it must be.
[QUOTE=The Great Sun Jester]
No idea how it would work. Would never take a bite out of me or anyone I know anyway, so I also don’t care
[/QUOTE]
And we have the second bumper sticker.
As well as a great deal of insight into the source and nature of the support for Sanders and his ideas.
Regards,
Shodan