Bernie Sanders - Make America Socialist!

[SteelChip]

I would bet serious money that you would need an abacus to count all the wedgies this dofis got in High School.

Chicago police officers carry protester Bernie Sanders, 21, in August, 1963 to a police wagon from a civil-rights demonstration at West 73rd Street and South Lowe Avenue in Chicago. He was arrested, charged with resisting arrest, found guilty and fined $25. He was a University of Chicago student at the time.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

When you guys think of Bernie, you think of Trotsky, Marx, Lenin, Engels whatever scary boogieman you choose. Nothing could be further from the truth, but I know it's an easy narrative to demonize him. Bernie neither wants Communism, nor Socialism. He believes in democratic socialism, HUGE difference. When you think of Bernie, you should be thinking FDR and the New Deal, not this notion of free handouts and freeloaders. That is the correct political analysis. But again, that would bring your false pretenses down like a house of cards.

Pretty sure most of us just think Bernie is a dumbfuck.

 

[Tibs]

Pretty sure most of us just think Bernie is a dumbfuck.

Yes, given the groupthink tendencies and the far-right leanings of this board, that would make perfectly good sense.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Yes, given the groupthink tendencies and the far-right leanings of this board, that would make perfectly good sense.

And the fact that he is a dumbfuck.

 

[Tibs]

And the fact that he is a dumbfuck.

 

[deljzc]

All I see is the fact liberal America wants to call Trump "crazy" and "unrealistic" for wanting to build a $11 billion wall while Bernie Sanders is running on a platform that increases the size of the federal government from $3.75 trillion to almost $5 trillion.

Think about that for a second. Or maybe think about it for 10 minutes. Whatever it takes to sink in.

We have a presidential candidate that wants to INCREASE the size of the federal government by 30% and has no qualms or apologies about it. And they want to accuse Trump backers as being uneducated and going along for a "ride to nowhere". Really?

 

[Tibs]

All I see is the fact liberal America wants to call Trump "crazy" and "unrealistic" for wanting to build a $11 billion wall...

That is just a drop in the ocean as far as what makes Trump crazy and unrealistic.

 

[DBS1970]

Fixed it for you. It's about time we put an end to Corporate Socialism in America. No more free handouts to the freeloaders.

The best way to end "Corporate Welfare" is shrinking the government and implementing the FairTax. The Crazy-B plan will do two things: suck capital out of the economy sending every aspect of our market into a nose dive, and force people to move their personal wealth overseas. This is not 1952 where the rest of the world is a bombed out waste and the USA is the only game in town with an intact industrial base. There are other games in town and that is where the smart money will go. Crazy-B would sink us with a depression level economic collapse with no hope of recovery because domestic capital will have been soaked up by beaureaucrats and foreign investors will have zero incentive to come in and have all their profits taxed away.

No nation in the history of the world has ever taxed its self into prosperity. A few have taxed themselves out of existence though.

 

[madinsomniac]

All I see is the fact liberal America wants to call Trump "crazy" and "unrealistic" for wanting to build a $11 billion wall while Bernie Sanders is running on a platform that increases the size of the federal government from $3.75 trillion to almost $5 trillion.

Think about that for a second. Or maybe think about it for 10 minutes. Whatever it takes to sink in.

We have a presidential candidate that wants to INCREASE the size of the federal government by 30% and has no qualms or apologies about it. And they want to accuse Trump backers as being uneducated and going along for a "ride to nowhere". Really?

Both sides are idiots so it doesn't surprise me that both make idiotic statements. The only redeeming quality for Bernie and trump are that both are honest about their intentions, and say what they mean... either might start world war 3 or the next civil war, but its still a bit refreshing to not have to listen to a bunch of Hillaries and Jebs politic and lie through the campaigns....

 

[oneforthebus]

It's funny how in liberalspeak "ending this" and "ending that" always seems to end up in billions or trillions more flowing into government. Government which already spends almost 35% of GDP. Who is really stealing from the middle class and poor here? Imagine if we had maybe just 10% of that money back in people's pockets to buy, build, spend, invest and pay people with.

That's the missing puzzle piece liberals just don't get.

 

[deljzc]

Again... according to Bernie, Europe is better when government spends close to 50% GDP.

He wants that. And it's 10% unemployment, low business startups, stagnant Euro, flat stock markets and high interest rates. It's European Socialism. And people are getting suckered into thinking it will work in a country like ours that's 4 times as big.

European socialism here will just bring 4 times the same problems.

 

[SteelChip]

Again... according to Bernie, Europe is better when government spends close to 50% GDP.

 

[RollRed]

I understand the attitudes towards socialistic type of government. I do. I 100% agree that people are much better off when they work and pay for the goods and services that allow us to live a comfortable, healthy life. The issue I have with folks on the right is that while I understand it drives them crazy knowing that much of the money they work for is taken by the government and given to people with less....believe it or not it bugs the **** out of me too... they also seem to be against every idea that would allow people to get off the dole. No to minimum wage increases... no to unions.... no to government grants that help kids that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college... no to any policies that would mandate that corporations that make the majority of their money in the U.S. keep at least some of their workforce here... and on and on and on. My question is simply this... If you are a person that agrees with everything I just listed, what is the solution to getting our country back to a place where most people can be self sufficient and not rely on government programs to survive. The free market is great, but it's function is to generate profits for shareholders and I get that... that's what businesses are supposed to do. Businesses are supposed to keep profits up and costs down, and everything I mentioned would require them to do the exact opposite. Spend money that they desperately want to keep. Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one. I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

 

[oneforthebus]

I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

The ONLY answer is economic growth, and the truth that socialists don't want to face is that income inequality is irrelevant. When the rich get richer, the poor get richer too. Trickle down economics works. I know that's an unpopular opinion, but it's the truth. Some would rather have "equality" than for everyone to be more prosperous.

That's the short answer.

 

[IndySteel]

Socialist equality means everyone is poor.

 

[Rod Farva]

I understand the attitudes towards socialistic type of government. I do. I 100% agree that people are much better off when they work and pay for the goods and services that allow us to live a comfortable, healthy life. The issue I have with folks on the right is that while I understand it drives them crazy knowing that much of the money they work for is taken by the government and given to people with less....believe it or not it bugs the **** out of me too... they also seem to be against every idea that would allow people to get off the dole. No to minimum wage increases...That would kill and HAS killed jobs....mw jobs are not and never were jobs on which one should be trying to raise a family. The old saying that "a lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine" applies here. Small business's provide the majority of mw jobs and they operate on razor thin profits. More government involvement in the private sector is definitely a loser. no to unions....How do unions create jobs? no to government grants that help kids that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college... There already is a program in place.....enlist for a few years.no to any policies that would mandate that corporations that make the majority of their money in the U.S. keep at least some of their workforce here... and on and on and on. My question is simply this... If you are a person that agrees with everything I just listed, what is the solution to getting our country back to a place where most people can be self sufficient and not rely on government programs to survive. Cut taxes, eliminate the epa and the rest of the useless, non revenue generating, costly regulation imposing government oppressors.The free market is great, but ? it's function is to generate profits for shareholders and I get that... that's what businesses are supposed to do. Businesses are supposed to keep profits up and costs down, and everything I mentioned would require them to do the exact opposite. Right. Spend money that they desperately want to keep. Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one. I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

The population explosion you speak of is an issue isn't it? Wonder to what the most growth of it is due?

 

[Superman]

I understand the attitudes towards socialistic type of government. I do. I 100% agree that people are much better off when they work and pay for the goods and services that allow us to live a comfortable, healthy life. The issue I have with folks on the right is that while I understand it drives them crazy knowing that much of the money they work for is taken by the government and given to people with less....believe it or not it bugs the **** out of me too... they also seem to be against every idea that would allow people to get off the dole. No to minimum wage increases... no to unions.... no to government grants that help kids that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college... no to any policies that would mandate that corporations that make the majority of their money in the U.S. keep at least some of their workforce here... and on and on and on. My question is simply this... If you are a person that agrees with everything I just listed, what is the solution to getting our country back to a place where most people can be self sufficient and not rely on government programs to survive. The free market is great, but it's function is to generate profits for shareholders and I get that... that's what businesses are supposed to do. Businesses are supposed to keep profits up and costs down, and everything I mentioned would require them to do the exact opposite. Spend money that they desperately want to keep. Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one. I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

how is increasing the money the government takes in and then distributes going to allow economic and individual growth?
there is a time limit for drawing unemployment benefits. why isnt there one for drawing welfare benefits?

and you just said ...

Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one.

so by taking MORE money from LESS people working and doling that out to MORE people not working ... what's that economic principle?

 

[deljzc]

I understand the attitudes towards socialistic type of government. I do. I 100% agree that people are much better off when they work and pay for the goods and services that allow us to live a comfortable, healthy life. The issue I have with folks on the right is that while I understand it drives them crazy knowing that much of the money they work for is taken by the government and given to people with less....believe it or not it bugs the **** out of me too... they also seem to be against every idea that would allow people to get off the dole. No to minimum wage increases... no to unions.... no to government grants that help kids that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college... no to any policies that would mandate that corporations that make the majority of their money in the U.S. keep at least some of their workforce here... and on and on and on. My question is simply this... If you are a person that agrees with everything I just listed, what is the solution to getting our country back to a place where most people can be self sufficient and not rely on government programs to survive. The free market is great, but it's function is to generate profits for shareholders and I get that... that's what businesses are supposed to do. Businesses are supposed to keep profits up and costs down, and everything I mentioned would require them to do the exact opposite. Spend money that they desperately want to keep. Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one. I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

Actually, there are a lot of people on the right that don't give a **** about minimum wage. If states want to raise it, go right ahead.

The problem with a FEDERAL minimum wage increase is that it effects areas that have a median income of $25,000 that same as places with $50,000. The liberals in their ivory towers in Seattle, San Francisco and New York think $10.00/hour is peanuts but in rural south, that's the only thing keeping companies relevant and profitable. And those small business owners aren't making millions of dollars. This isn't just about Walmart and McDonalds.

As a moderate right-wing conservative, I am fine with a varying minimum wage based on the MEDIAN income of your MSA or county or however else you want to draw the lines. If that means Seattle and San Francisco and New York get $15/hour and Bumfuck, AL stays around $8/hour so be it.

That's a REASONABLE way to tackle this issue, but the liberals don't want that. They want it be yet another thing the federal government judges over the WHOLE country unilaterally - which just doesn't work.

And I am pro-union the way unions USED TO BE.... which means I have no problem in the checks and balances of the right of labor to group together against A CORPORATION.

But unions should have no place in negotiating against TAX DOLLARS. If you get paid for by tax dollars, you can't unionize. You are in a SERVICE job and if you are unhappy with wages or benefits, the method of improvement is through the political process only, not to threaten or group together and withhold SERVICE jobs from the Public that is paying you. The whole idea of public service jobs is you are vital to the community and agree to wages tax revenue can afford. Unionizing has no place in that relationship because there is no potential "harm" like from a private corporation.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

But unions should have no place in negotiating against TAX DOLLARS. If you get paid for by tax dollars, you can't unionize. You are in a SERVICE job and if you are unhappy with wages or benefits, the method of improvement is through the political process only, not to threaten or group together and withhold SERVICE jobs from the Public that is paying you. The whole idea of public service jobs is you are vital to the community and agree to wages tax revenue can afford. Unionizing has no place in that relationship because there is no potential "harm" like from a private corporation.

Government employees have only been allowed to unionize since JFK signed an executive order allowing it in 1963. Of course then President Trump or President Cruz can undo that. That's the problem with using EO's or the bureaucracy instead of having laws passed by Congress.
The unions abandoned trying to organize the private sector decades ago in favor of the low-hanging fruit of government workers.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I understand the attitudes towards socialistic type of government. I do. I 100% agree that people are much better off when they work and pay for the goods and services that allow us to live a comfortable, healthy life. The issue I have with folks on the right is that while I understand it drives them crazy knowing that much of the money they work for is taken by the government and given to people with less....believe it or not it bugs the **** out of me too... they also seem to be against every idea that would allow people to get off the dole. No to minimum wage increases... no to unions.... no to government grants that help kids that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college... no to any policies that would mandate that corporations that make the majority of their money in the U.S. keep at least some of their workforce here... and on and on and on. My question is simply this... If you are a person that agrees with everything I just listed, what is the solution to getting our country back to a place where most people can be self sufficient and not rely on government programs to survive. The free market is great, but it's function is to generate profits for shareholders and I get that... that's what businesses are supposed to do. Businesses are supposed to keep profits up and costs down, and everything I mentioned would require them to do the exact opposite. Spend money that they desperately want to keep. Add to this that technology has eliminated the need for so many jobs over the decades while at the same time the population has been growing exponentially.... meaning that every year there are more and more people needing a livable income with less and less places to find one. I don't know what the answer is. I doubt anybody really does.

Too many false premises in the first few sentences to even get through that.

 

[deljzc]

The thing that makes me excited about Trump's message is we are finally starting to talk about things that I CARE ABOUT as a moderate republican again.

Immigration and border control and the growing re-definition of "citizenship"
Foreign policy and it's effect on keeping jobs in America
How to tackle the growing problem of Islam, Sharia and Radicalization
Corporate mergers and tax evasion
Reasonable Wall Street and Banking reform
Tax Policy
Medical costs and maintaining reasonable employee/employer costs
Public Unions and unrealistic demands, pensions, benefits
Small business start-ups and maintenance

You know what people are TIRED AS HELL of talking about?

Gun control
Abortion
Religion
Constitutional Interpretation

The things on the first list EFFECT us every day. They impact middle class america. They impact how our economy is running.

The stuff on the second list don't effect anyone except the extremes and I'm tired of politicians spending so much time on those subjects that the middle cares so little about and actually never changes one iota from election to election.

Guns will always be legal. Abortion will always be legal. Get over it. The pendulum will swing a bit on both issues by region, by state, by president but neither is really going to "change" that much. Can we drop it already? No one is going to "take" either because it's political suicide to be extreme on either issue.

And God isn't a democrat or a republican. Neither was Jesus. And he doesn't give a **** who wins or loses. Get over that too.

 

[deljzc]

That is just a drop in the ocean as far as what makes Trump crazy and unrealistic.

I'm still waiting on some details on this....

 

[Ron Burgundy]

All I see is the fact liberal America wants to call Trump "crazy" and "unrealistic" for wanting to build a $11 billion wall

That is just a drop in the ocean as far as what makes Trump crazy and unrealistic.

Tibs, how long have you been in favor of the government only enforcing the laws that they feel like enforcing and ignoring the ones they feel like ignoring?

 

[IndySteel]

Tibs, how long have you been in favor of the government only enforcing the laws that they feel like enforcing and ignoring the ones they feel like ignoring?

I'm betting it was right around the time that he first started to get offended by common sense and harsh rhetoric.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I'm betting it was right around the time that he first started to get offended by common sense and harsh rhetoric.

I'm betting it was around January 2009 when the Communist Muslim FBP moved into the White House.