EXCUSE ME?!..The OFFICIAL Bernie Sanders For President 2016 Thread

[NLXSK1]

That Bush's disaster is still with us after all these years should serve as a warning not to let people like that into the halls of power.

And Mrs Warren has excellent points, including those about how the factory the business owner built being made possible by the society he lives in. Don't like it? Move your business to Singapore and see what happens when you duck THOSE taxes!

The government did not create the society we live in and the poor sure as shit didnt do it. Your argument essentially is that because the government taxed the rich in the past and built infrastructure that now it is the responsibility of the rich to pay MORE because of the rich that have paid to create society in the past. It is insanity....

 

[pnwmystery]

The government did not create the society we live in and the poor sure as shit didnt do it. Your argument essentially is that because the government taxed the rich in the past and built infrastructure that now it is the responsibility of the rich to pay MORE because of the rich that have paid to create society in the past. It is insanity....

Uh, government did. You need to reread your US history books. If government had no hand to play in the development of the US, we'd be working 140 hour work weeks with no vacation, health insurance, or work safety.

 

[NLXSK1]

Uh, government did. You need to reread your US history books. If government had no hand to play in the development of the US, we'd be working 140 hour work weeks with no vacation, health insurance, or work safety.

And this helped the rich out how? Your reasoning is because the Rich now have to pay benefits and other costs due to safety regulations that somehow it means they have to pay even more???

This is getting more insane as we go!!!

 

[Fogdog]

And before you jump in with


Same bullshit. No, "we" aren't paying to fix the roads and keep marauding bands at bay because 49% of "us" don't pay taxes. The goal is to get more people making money and paying taxes. Growing the pie, not taking away the piece I've earned. And not emplacing disincentives for hiring people or disincentives for working.

She's a demagogue. A librarian/granny demagogue but a demagogue nonetheless.

And I'll get right on building that wayback machine to undo the Iraq war. So take away two fingers. And I'll renegotiate the prescription drug deal to NHS levels but that'll take back 1/3 of a finger.

The Bush tax cuts are indefensible. They can have the middle finger.

The Bush regime was a fucking disaster, mostly from the geopolitical standpoint. But you know what? He's out of office. Has been for 7 years. Time to start dealing with the hand we've been dealt and stop bitching about what could have been. That's loser talk.

Again spoken with half-truths/half lies. Yes practically everybody says the Bush administration in hindsight was a fucking disaster. I recall at the time that if anybody criticized the Bush Jr administration, their loyalty to the country was suspect. The GOP dropped Bush like a hot rock when it could no longer use him to get access to public funds. Oh, and seven years is not the distant past, you know.

It wasn't just geopolitical disasters either. You can't run away from how -- for most of a decade -- the Christian religious right cut taxes, increased spending, ballooned debt and launched foreign wars funded completely by debt under a belligerent nationalist policy. I say this not bitch but to point out that there are no changes in rhetoric coming from the current batch of wing nuts. Does the party of the Tea Party have a believable plan for balancing the budget and eliminating debt? Oh, and you want to use the rising tide floats all boats meme. Exactly how well has that Reaganesque model worked over the past 50 years?

Didn't McCain sing Bomb, Bomb, Bomb...Bomb, Bomb Iran a few years before he gained his party's nomination? Didn't Sarah Palin just say that under Trump, this country would unleash its warriors to "kick ass" in the middle east? This was said to cheers at some rally in Hooterville, I might add. Didn't you just suggest that we send our troops to liberate the people of Saudi Arabia? I see no difference between Bush's GOP and the current party of the Christian religious right. The GOP is a party of belligerent nationalism. It was belligerent before Bush left office, after Bush left office (nominated McCain) and is unthinkingly belligerent to this day.

Clinton promises more of the same too.

Sanders has a track record of supporting national defense and not supporting foreign wars. You can poke at the few times that Sanders voted for bills that contained funding for foreign war but those bills were tied to funding national defense.

 

[NLXSK1]

Sanders has a track record of supporting national defense and not supporting foreign wars. You can poke at the few times that Sanders voted for bills that contained funding for foreign war but those bills were tied to funding national defense.

So he is willing to compromise his principals... Got it!! Another Washington politician, same ole same ole...

 

[Fogdog]

Sanders has a track record of supporting national defense and not supporting foreign wars. You can poke at the few times that Sanders voted for bills that contained funding for foreign war but those bills were tied to funding national defense.

So he is willing to compromise his principals... Got it!! Another Washington politician, same ole same ole...

Its called working with other people to get things done. Refresh my memory for me. How well did it go for the GOP the last time they shut down the govt based upon their uncompromising attitude?

 

[Madagascar]

I'm voting Sanders, seems the most competent to hold a world power seat.

 

[Fogdog]

Uh, government did. You need to reread your US history books. If government had no hand to play in the development of the US, we'd be working 140 hour work weeks with no vacation, health insurance, or work safety.

This part of US history is glossed over in our public education or at least it was in mine. When I had to rest up after a surgery, I spent time reading about the history or the US between 1870 and 1910. Tremendous change during that time. Things Barney takes for granted, like a pay day, accurate time keeping records for those on hourly wages, the five-day, forty-hour work week, worker's rights to collective bargaining were all developed and implemented during that time. People died for those rights in clashes with the 1%. These are under attack today.

 

[Queece]

Here's the one glaring problem with Bernie and his social spending plans: He has to come after rich people with the long and very inarticulate arm of bureaucracy. Single rich individuals and free market forces have much more dexterity than government. If Bernie were to start winning popular polls closer to November, you'd see capital flight like no one has ever seen. It's like telling the rich guy you are going to steal the Ferrari out of his garage a week in advance. What does he do? Moves the Ferrari. Duh.

There is something known as the "Law of Unintended Consequences". There will be knock-on effects for every piece of legislation that will counteract anything it tries to accomplish by diluting it with structural rubber stamps. Look at the ACA, it made healthcare less affordable. Or Liberating Iraq, we enslaved them. Gun control, panic buying immediately ensues. Free college? How isn't that going to backfire?

Bernie might have the right ideas, but his vision is so lofty that it will be polluted by regulatory capture and gridlock. What he's talking about is structural reforms in huge parts of government simultaneously and the government proved that it couldn't handle a healthcare bill rollout that really didn't change ANYTHING structurally.

There is a rule. Bureaucracy gets bigger every year. You inflate your numbers to authorize more spending and keep your job. One of the biggest criticisms of the Bush Jr administration was their creation of the DHS. What happens when the homeland is secure? Shutter the office and tell everyone to go home? No... we'll manufacture another boogey-man to fight. What happens to the VA system with free healthcare (not really concerned, couldn't get much worse)? What happens to the Pell Grant? "Good job guys, clear out your desks you can go home now." Not likely. What will most likely happen is that these existing bulwarks will receive huge authorizations of tax-payer money to re-name and obfuscate their wrong-doing to a point where they can continue to operate in the way they are most accustomed. This, historically, will be the outcome.

It sounds insane, but Bernie clearly believes in the political process. This makes him a dinosaur in today's terms. Donald Trump does not and will use the authority and extended powers of the Executive against these criminal bureaucrats like Obama uses them to vaporize peasants. We are not living in a democracy people, the powers of state and corporate are one and the same. This is fascism (not necessarily a bad thing), and you need a madisonian strong-man at the top. Bernie will try to do things the right way, but the right way stopped working when congress became a daycare for millionaires.

 

[ttystikk]

This part of US history is glossed over in our public education or at least it was in mine. When I had to rest up after a surgery, I spent time reading about the history or the US between 1870 and 1910. Tremendous change during that time. Things Barney takes for granted, like a pay day, accurate time keeping records for those on hourly wages, the five-day, forty-hour work week, worker's rights to collective bargaining were all developed and implemented during that time. People died for those rights in clashes with the 1%. These are under attack today.

Under attack or already lost to the enemy's blind greed.

After al, once they've succeeded in impoverishing the middle class, where are they going to find customers?

 

[Fogdog]

Its not an excellent point, it's blindingly obvious and infuriatingly irrelevant. It's a Duh! argument. It's an argument for folks who don't understand what a nation is and how an economy works.

Yes, I live in the United States. I and everyone else has access to the roads, utility infrastructure, legal system, and workforce, even if they don't pay a cent to maintain them. For that privilege I pay the highest corporate taxes in the developed world.

It's what you do with the opportunity that matters.

I have a fucking business in Singapore, thank you very much, and I have access to better infrastructure, an excellent legal system, and a better trained workforce than in the USA! USA! I don't dodge taxes there and I don't dodge taxes here.

You don't fucking know me but I think I have your measure, now.

I'm out. Good luck with your grievances.

Falling back on the old "I pay too much in taxes" complaint. I agree that a serious conversation to revisit corporate taxation is in order after we redress the idea that corporations are people and can finance political campaigns. I understand the argument that this country has a tax policy that puts it at a disadvantage to others. I'm not sure I believe it, however. At this time, corporations and the 1% have too much influence and too much self interest in this issue. I don't believe that we can have an honest discussion and implement a fair change to the policy at this time.

One thing we should have learned over the past 10-20 years is that its easy to cut taxes but hard to cut spending. No to unfunded tax cuts.

Under attack or already lost to the enemy's blind greed.

After al, once they've succeeded in impoverishing the middle class, where are they going to find customers?

Once they've succeeded in impoverishing the middle class, they will have all the power in their hands. Isn't that what its all about?

 

[ttystikk]

Once they's succeeded in impoverishing the middle class, they will have all the power in their hands. Isn't that what its all about?

...at which point the people will have nothing to lose. That's called revolution and I'm not a fan.

It's officially time to tame the corporate monster... AGAIN. We did it a hundred years ago, we need to do some constitutional house cleaning.

 

[Fogdog]

Here's the one glaring problem with Bernie and his social spending plans: He has to come after rich people with the long and very inarticulate arm of bureaucracy. Single rich individuals and free market forces have much more dexterity than government. If Bernie were to start winning popular polls closer to November, you'd see capital flight like no one has ever seen. It's like telling the rich guy you are going to steal the Ferrari out of his garage a week in advance. What does he do? Moves the Ferrari. Duh.

There is something known as the "Law of Unintended Consequences". There will be knock-on effects for every piece of legislation that will counteract anything it tries to accomplish by diluting it with structural rubber stamps. Look at the ACA, it made healthcare less affordable. Or Liberating Iraq, we enslaved them. Gun control, panic buying immediately ensues. Free college? How isn't that going to backfire?

Bernie might have the right ideas, but his vision is so lofty that it will be polluted by regulatory capture and gridlock. What he's talking about is structural reforms in huge parts of government simultaneously and the government proved that it couldn't handle a healthcare bill rollout that really didn't change ANYTHING structurally.

There is a rule. Bureaucracy gets bigger every year. You inflate your numbers to authorize more spending and keep your job. One of the biggest criticisms of the Bush Jr administration was their creation of the DHS. What happens when the homeland is secure? Shutter the office and tell everyone to go home? No... we'll manufacture another boogey-man to fight. What happens to the VA system with free healthcare (not really concerned, couldn't get much worse)? What happens to the Pell Grant? "Good job guys, clear out your desks you can go home now." Not likely. What will most likely happen is that these existing bulwarks will receive huge authorizations of tax-payer money to re-name and obfuscate their wrong-doing to a point where they can continue to operate in the way they are most accustomed. This, historically, will be the outcome.

It sounds insane, but Bernie clearly believes in the political process. This makes him a dinosaur in today's terms. Donald Trump does not and will use the authority and extended powers of the Executive against these criminal bureaucrats like Obama uses them to vaporize peasants. We are not living in a democracy people, the powers of state and corporate are one and the same. This is fascism (not necessarily a bad thing), and you need a madisonian strong-man at the top. Bernie will try to do things the right way, but the right way stopped working when congress became a daycare for millionaires.

Its not fascism -- and oh yes fascism is a bad thing. The system is heading towards something that looks more like modern China than Italy of 80 years ago. Its the rule by an Oligarchy of the ultra rich.

I saw complaints about Sanders in your posting and many tangents in your discussion that end with why you don't think he will be able to stem the tide to rule by the oligarchy. I saw no alternatives from you that made any sense.

 

[Queece]

Its not fascism -- and oh yes fascism is a bad thing. The system is heading towards something that looks more like modern China than Italy of 80 years ago. Its the rule by an Oligarchy of the ultra rich.

I saw complaints about Sanders in your posting and many tangents in your discussion that end with why you don't think he will be able to stem the tide to rule by the oligarchy. I saw no alternatives from you that made any sense.

Impose import tariffs, devalue the dollar (or better yet, adopt a bitcoin fundamental), gut welfare, take the money and put it towards public works with programs to place people in those jobs, jail bankers, stop mucking around the middle-east, jail war profiteers, jail the worst actors on Wall Street, remove illegal immigrants undermining the labor market, and penalize companies for tax-inversions. Sort of simple stuff, all of which has been Donald Trump's platform.

You are just being young and contrarian. Trump is no true Scottsman, but no one is, including Sanders. Rule by Oligarchy is fascism, kings of industry and their lobbies make up the oligarchy. You aren't thinking, you are just disagreeing.

Trump has a plan, with numbers and the logistical faculties to implement them. Sanders is a demagogue offering you free treats at the expense of "nebulous evil rich guy". It's like the class president being elected for promising free lobster for lunch. It's just a bluff, he's just a career politician trying to mollify the huddled masses with shiny objects. Pretty patronizing. I'm an American and fiercely proud of that, I don't want free anything, I just want a fair shot. The government that is big enough to give you everything is the government that is big enough to take it all away.

 

[Queece]

Yes, welfare is not good. It rewards failure and has destroyed the family unit. We sponsor women to leave their boyfriends. Now we have a huge problem with divorce rates and single mothers. Wonder how that happened. You ever hear the old adage: "if you want more of something, subsidize it"?

There has to be some social safety net, that is absolutely necessary to protect vulnerable individuals and promote prosperity as a nation. That safety net is not designed to act as a refuge from work or unemployment due to labor being outsourced en mass. We do not need welfare expansion, we need labor expansion. The fact that everyone reading this can take their shirt off and check the tag that says "made by slaves" is an enormous problem morally and financially. Welfare is a demoralization tool, they want you to want bigger government, and it seems the poor have set the price of their votes below the poverty line.

 

[pnwmystery]

And this helped the rich out how? Your reasoning is because the Rich now have to pay benefits and other costs due to safety regulations that somehow it means they have to pay even more???

This is getting more insane as we go!!!

Woooosh right over your head.

No I was just pointing out you may want to brush up on your US history.

 

[Fogdog]

Impose import tariffs, devalue the dollar (or better yet, adopt a bitcoin fundamental), gut welfare, take the money and put it towards public works with programs to place people in those jobs, jail bankers, stop mucking around the middle-east, jail war profiteers, jail the worst actors on Wall Street, remove illegal immigrants undermining the labor market, and penalize companies for tax-inversions. Sort of simple stuff, all of which has been Donald Trump's platform.

You are just being young and contrarian. Trump is no true Scottsman, but no one is, including Sanders. Rule by Oligarchy is fascism, kings of industry and their lobbies make up the oligarchy. You aren't thinking, you are just disagreeing.

Trump has a plan, with numbers and the logistical faculties to implement them. Sanders is a demagogue offering you free treats at the expense of "nebulous evil rich guy". It's like the class president being elected for promising free lobster for lunch. It's just a bluff, he's just a career politician trying to mollify the huddled masses with shiny objects. Pretty patronizing. I'm an American and fiercely proud of that, I don't want free anything, I just want a fair shot. The government that is big enough to give you everything is the government that is big enough to take it all away.

Haaaahaaahaa, I've just been told to shut up and listen to my elders. Just what I expect from a typical aging European American male Trump supporter.

Well, maybe you should listen to somebody that can still remember his education. I don't want to pick every one of Trump's positions apart. That would make me sound like you. I just suggest that Trump's policies, starting with deporting 11M workers within a year of his taking office and moving on to tariffs and quite possibly a trade war with China would shock this country's economy into deep recession. But hey, the 1% did quite well coming out of the most recent recession, maybe that's what they want.

Now, lets talk about a couple of words that you throw around without understanding what they mean. "Fascism" is something that a lot of people do this with. Fascism has three key fundamental elements -- a single party-state, under a single leader with absolute power over military and government and finally, belligerent nationalism. Rule by oligarchy is as unsavory as Fascism but they are very different. In any case, neither Trump or any other relevant politician in this country are truly Fascist.

The other word you misuse is demagogue. A demagogue is a politician that takes advantage of fear and prejudice in order to appeal to the uneducated and lower economic classes of a population. Trump, by his racist description of Latino illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists, by his bigoted description of Muslims refugees as terrorists, by claiming to take on China in a trade war, is a demagogue. He even went so far as to joke about serving Muslims at the Republican Convention. At least I am hoping he was joking. Anyway, Trump proclaims himself as the leader this country needs ... again and again. Trump is practically the definition of a demagogue.

Sanders, on the other hand is a Populist, not a Demagogue. Sanders also makes sweeping statements but they mostly describe how he wants to take power and money away from the 1% and return it to the people of this country. It IS populism but I'm more for that than roasting Muslims for a convention that will be mostly attended by the 1%.

 

[ttystikk]

Haaaahaaahaa, I've just been told to shut up and listen to my elders. Just what I expect from a typical aging European American male Trump supporter.

Well, maybe you should listen to somebody that can still remember his education. I don't want to pick every one of Trump's positions apart. That would make me sound like you. I just suggest that Trump's policies, starting with deporting 11M workers within a year of his taking office and moving on to tariffs and quite possibly a trade war with China would shock this country's economy into deep recession. But hey, the 1% did quite well, coming out of the most recent recession, maybe that's what they want.

Now, lets talk about a couple of words that you throw around without understanding what they mean. "Fascism" is something that a lot of people do this with. Fascism has three key fundamental elements -- a single party-state, under a single leader with absolute power over military and government and finally, belligerent nationalism. Rule by oligarchy is as unsavory as Fascism but they are very different. In any case, neither Trump or any other relevant politician in this country are truly Fascist.

The other word you misuse is demagogue. A demagogue is a politician that takes advantage of fear and prejudice in order to appeal to the uneducated and lower economic classes of a population. Trump, by his racist description of Latino illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists, by his bigoted description of Muslims refugees as terrorists, by claiming to take on China in a trade war, is a demagogue. He even went so far as to joke about serving Muslims at the Republican Convention. At least I am hoping he was joking. Anyway, Trump proclaims himself as the leader this country needs ... again and again. Trump is practically the definition of a demagogue.

Sanders, on the other hand is a Populist, not a Demagogue. Sanders also makes sweeping statements but they mostly describe how he wants to take power and money away from the 1% and return it to the people of this country. It IS populism but I'm more for that than roasting Muslims for a convention that will be mostly attended by the 1%.

Indeed, I'm one of those who stands corrected. I too used the fascist term, but words have definitions. So instead, America is a tyrannical oligarchy with lots of propaganda to distract the masses and let them feel 'free'!

The only presidential candidate I can take seriously is Mr Sanders. His brand of populism seems too well researched (and thus likely to succeed) for most politicians who fall under that label.

Can we instead call him reformist, perhaps?

 

[NLXSK1]

Indeed, I'm one of those who stands corrected. I too used the fascist term, but words have definitions. So instead, America is a tyrannical oligarchy with lots of propaganda to distract the masses and let them feel 'free'!

The only presidential candidate I can take seriously is Mr Sanders. His brand of populism seems too well researched (and thus likely to succeed) for most politicians who fall under than heading.

Can we instead call him reformist, perhaps?

He is not talking about reforming anything. He is talking about increasing taxes on the rich to pay for trillions more dollars in givaway programs. Same ol same ol....

 

[Fogdog]

Indeed, I'm one of those who stands corrected. I too used the fascist term, but words have definitions. So instead, America is a tyrannical oligarchy with lots of propaganda to distract the masses and let them feel 'free'!

The only presidential candidate I can take seriously is Mr Sanders. His brand of populism seems too well researched (and thus likely to succeed) for most politicians who fall under than heading.

Can we instead call him reformist, perhaps?

For some reason, being a populist has a bad connotation. So, OK, reformist. What is that?