Keeping Bernie dry and healthy should require a raincoat that costs much more.  He’s being frugal using that one.  He’s a National Treasure and should be protected as such.

Because many people would rather bequeath their wealth to people they love instead of a bunch of people they don’t know.  It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

The average Splinter commenter spends about 50% of his time bitching about stereotypes and the other 50% actively employing them in exactly the same way they bitch about.  It’s great to see.

The power to censor people is enticing, isn’t it?  That’s why most leftist governments immediately seize control of the airwaves and always have.

No, I’m saying, and have always said throughout this discussion that (A) she knows she cannot deliver on any of her promises; (B) she has not proposed any realistic way to fund any of her promises; and (C) she’s a demogogue that’s appealing the ignorance of the base and is doing exactly what you claim Trump does,…

Not when you’re dealing with eminent domain.  In that instance, if the government will not pay me what I want, I can litigate the matter and, possible, get a court order forcing the government to pay more than it wants.

Like JFK?  There’s no guarantee any POTUS will live out his/her term.  You just gotta pick the best candidate.  I think letting age play a part in that decision is short-sighted.

Because you assume that the money private business currently pays for health care would be the same or equal as the tax assessed against them to fund MfA. Thus, your argument goes, the burden on private business will be no more, or no less, than what it currently is.

I don’t have any problem with the owner getting every dime he can.  After all, it’s his property being taken.  Why should he accept anything less than maximum value?

No, I shouldn’t.

Yawn.

My guess? If you’re opposed to any tax you’re out of line with the AOC crowd.

No, it’s not “totally wrong” because (A) there’s no definitive, reliable estimate of what MfA would cost; (B) to implement it fairly, the Feds would have to fund tons of hospitals in rural areas where health care is currently not provided and would cost a fortune to implement; (C) would likely end up being the target…

Well, this place is the left’s equivalent of Breitbart so anyone a step to the right of Che Guevara or Lenin himself are fucking right-wing nuts to this crowd.  

I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. Let them fight it out in the primary and the better candidate (maybe) wins.

OK, sure.  Here’s some more Yawning.

Since investments are included in an Estate’s value, and is subject to tax if the Estate qualifies for Estate Tax, why would you go in and confiscate the stock instead of just taking the tax payment and investing it?  Since the values would probably be close to the same, what possible reason exists to confiscate…

Yes, the president has more effect on the government in two years than a freshman congressman does in a month. Hot take.

“Just compensation” is fair-market value in every jurisdiction, as far as I know but I haven’t looked at it. And FMV is usually determined by agreement of the Governmental entity and landowner or else they fight it out in Court with their own experts. So, I don’t think its definition is necessarily written in stone.

How would they split the vote?  Is one of them running as a third-party candidate?