Taxing the wealthy is only part of it. At this point the top 10% make almost half of the total income in this country. So the top 10% makes as much income as the entire bottom 90% Then the top 1% spends less then than 50% of their income and the top 10% doesnt spend over 40% of their income. So that is half of the total economy that doesnt reinvest about half of their incomes into the economy in any way (except giving banks more liquid to gamble or create more private debt) So every year around 25% of our total income in non-productive. 25% isnt consumed, isnt creating jobs, isnt used to raise wages, etc. That amounts to about 4 trillion (or more than a third China's entire economy) dollars of unproductive money per year in the US. The way to help people out of poverty is to increase wages to a respectable wage that people can live off of, help them to spend less on health services so they can stay healthy, provide them with the secondary education they need without also piling up debt, etc. It would take a fraction of that unproductive 4 trillion dollars a year to pay for these things. And if the wealthy are already not spending 4 trillion dollars a year, what evidence is there that reducing their tax liabilities is going to result in anything more than them just hording even more money and not reinvesting in the economy? It is hard to comprehend when there is 4 trillion dollars being unproductive yet 25% of US children are living in relative poverty.
He hasn't been freelancing, he has been reading and reacting to the QB. And when he is peeking they are either A - in a zone defense B - in off coverage C - has safety help over the top He is playing fantastic football right now. And played fantastic football last season. Rivera who apparently isnt a big fan of Norman was on the radio the other day talking about how much work Josh Norman has put in after practice and how disciplined he is playing while still making plays. I am not sure where all this stuff is coming from, but the guy has the best stats in the entire NFL right now. Not just INTs but also opposing QB rating. Dude has been lights out for a while. I hope other teams keep trying him. I will thank them later for the extra points.
I predict the Hillary will get asked tough questions then her supporters will come out and whine about it being unfair and Bernie will just stick to the script and bring everything back to his talking points. I expect Bernie will stay clear of attacking Hillary, but will make the point very clear that he was right first, and Hillary has flip flopped on everything
Obama got about a 20 point swing after just winning Iowa. If Sanders swept the two it would likely be a huge swing. I think the second part is definitely part of it, especially in some southern states. But I also think that a lot are just not paying that much attention yet. Sanders still has relatively high unkown numbers in a lot of polls. So I think there are still a lot of unknowns to come. The debates for instance will be big and he will get a lot of exposure there. The first two primaries is another. He is about where Obama was in 2007 coming out of the summer. So I think he has a chance. And if African American vote changes it becomes very difficult for Hillary. And Bernie might do better with working class white people than Obama did, so he might have a different coalition to overtake her. I am not saying you are wrong, but I do think he has more room to grow his numbers than Hillary does. We will see. I am a big fan of Nate Silver and he isnt giving him much of a chance. But I think if a couple things break his way he has a good chance to win this thing.
The way this would likely work if they were made illegal is that, you are correct that many simply wont turn them in. Maybe most won't. So much so that I dont even think a buy back option would be worthwhile. But if you could just outlaw new guns. No more manufacturing or importing of guns in US. Law enforcement seize tens of thousands (maybe over 100,000) of guns every year. For instance, the TSA confiscated 2,200 guns in US airports alone in 2015. So if no (or very few) new guns are coming into circulation and lets say 50,000 are getting pulled out of circulation annually, then we can start seeing the mumber of guns in circulation going down annually. But also, the people who are getting their guns taken are the ones committing crimes. So the law abiding citizens arent having their guns taken, but just the criminals. Also, think of it ecomomically, after a period of several years or more likely several decades as supply is sucked out of circulation, prices go up and up. It isnt a perfect solution, and is one of those things that would be a long term solution and probably wouldn't have much of a short term affect. But is it would slowly deaw down the number of guns in circulation and the guns being taken out of circulation would be the ones confiscated by law enforcement from criminals