Tulsi Gabbard came out swinging in her campaign announcement speech. She's the devil coming for the disembodied heads the Olde Guard.

@Burnley123 I guess so. It's gonna be hard for me to choose between them. I think if he chose her as a VP, that would be the best option, but that doesn't look likely.

Looking from the outside, it seems that Bernie is the only one on the left who can win. Warren has damaged her chances with the DNA test.

Its a shame AOC can't stand because I think she'd be in with a real shot.

@Burnley123 If I'm not mistaken she's too young to run for office. Presidential candidates must be 35 and she's only in her 20's. Gabbard is just barely old enough at 37 years.

@BlueMetalChick Yes I believe that's the rule. Its ridiculous.

On the Labour left we have a similar problem in which our best people are all younger or older than would be ideal. Most MPs now in their 40s and 50s came through under Blair and the left barely even existed then. It means Corbyn will be hard to replace.

@Burnley123 She's a clueless socialist with pie in the sky ideas that won't work. She will destroy any economy.

@GunSmoke9 Yeah cos pulling out of the nine different wars we're in, funding infrastructure, and not giving tax breaks to the rich while increasing taxes on everyone else is "destroying the economy."

And if these ideas are "pie in the sky" then how does every single other developed nation in the world successfully use them, with better outcomes than we do?

Why do you so staunchly defend corporatism and the wealthy owner class, and their ability to take advantage of the rest of America?

@GunSmoke9 I'd probably be a DSA member if I was in America.lol

@Burnley123 Democratic socialist? Isn't the tax rate about 45 percent?

@BlueMetalChick Check out how high the tax rates are in other countries. The protest in France has to do with high taxes. Where will the money come from to pay for everything AOC wants? Just taxing only the rich won't work.

@GunSmoke9 The protest in France is not to do with high taxes on the rich. Macron has actually cut those. Its about a regressive consumption tax which disproportionately affects lower income people who need a car. Its a tax which socialists in France are against.

@Burnley123 Do the socialist in France think only the rich should pay for a socialist society?

@GunSmoke9 Depends on who they are.

A 'true' socialist society would have no rich people.

Social democratic parties (inc. the policies of the French left) are about taxing the rich more. In the Nordic Model, which this is based on, the rich pay a lot more tax and the middle class also pays a bit more. The big difference is that people get benefits back. Middle-class people actually save because they have healthcare and college provided by the Government and these countries also have much better community facilities and social services. It's a politics based on the idea of community, rather than just the individual.

@GunSmoke9 And yet look how much less they pay. Remember the "golden age of economic expansion" in America? The wealthy had anywhere from a 75-90% marginal tax rate (keep in mind that says MARGINAL) and we had the strongest economy possible.

@BlueMetalChick They don't pay less, they pay more. What happens when the rich alone can't pay for what the socialist want?

@Burnley123 How much more should the rich pay? The more the government provides the more money is needed. One way or another high taxes on the rich gets passed on to everyone else.

@GunSmoke9 Both the people and the government pay less money for their healthcare than the US does. This isn't my opinion, this is verifiable fact that has been covered in multiple studies and investigations carried out by the World Health Organization, the Commonwealth Fund, and similar institutions.

The rich don't pay for what the socialists want. That's what you don't seem to get. Socialism is not "take money away from rich people." Socialism is "stop letting rich people take money that doesn't belong to them." What percentages do you pay for your tax bracket? I guarantee you the wealthy pay a lower percentage. A suggestion for a 3% tax on people with an annual income of one billion dollars or more was proposed and FBN called it communist. Three percent. For people who make a billion or more per year. You and I pay a much larger portion of the money we earn.

@BlueMetalChick You are talking about healthcare, I'm talking about taxes countries pay. Switzerland 40 percent, France, Spain, England, 45 percent. Denmark 57, Sweden 61. America, 37 percent.
I said that the rich alone can't pay for what socialist like AOC want.

@GunSmoke9 The rich aren't supposed to pay for what socialists want. What socialists want is for the rich to stop taking money that they didn't earn and that they don't have a right to. No part of any socialist policy requires the rich alone to pay for it. How many times do I have to explain this to you.

Let's try something else. Do you think it is acceptable for people who make over one billion dollars a year to pay a much lower percentage in taxes than people who make forty thousand dollars a year? Because that is currently the scenario. And, a large portion of the taxes that a person who makes forty thousand dollars a year pays goes to the person who makes one billion per year. Do you think that's a good thing?