Bernie Sanders Thread

Take pride in being a drama queen?

You understand that the youngest voters subjected to McCarthy type intimidations are now in their early nineties.

And do you understand the concept of lasting effects? Many of the voters now had parents or grandparents who likely shared some to many of the fears from that era.
Take pride in not understanding basic human nature?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Would you mind expounding on the the phrases "subjective cause" and "stable system" and the context in which are using them.

Every system has flaws. Even socialism. The key is to minimize the flaws for the largest number of people. For people tied into their community, whether through their religious faith, their occupation, hobbies, etc., charity and volunteerism beats anything the government does by a country mile.

Subjective cause referring to charity which is highly subjective and wavering given the year/cause/person etc

Stable system referring to a guaranteed minimum rather than you get this I get that and this person gets nothing.

Not saying or even advocating for total socialism. I understand that every system has its flaws and minimizing those is the best we can do. However, your ideas are a perfectionist dream, of course some of that can be implemented but unless you are going to force volunteering on the vast majority then its just an idealist vision that will fail.
 
Bernie Sanders' Presidential campaign will serve as a reminder that a candidate who's totally honest has no chance at winning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
He could start by paying back the taxpayers for his salary the last 6 plus years..

It must hurt typing things like this, when in your heart you're driving a union made car with an "I <3 Bernie" bumper sticker on it
 
It must hurt typing things like this, when in your heart you're driving a union made car with an "I <3 Bernie" bumper sticker on it

Smart person isnt driving a US made car. While I'd love to support my fellow American its hard to pass up quality for..whatever they call this US sh!t.
 
His point today was that the top 1/10th of one percent has as much wealth as the bottom 90 % and that is not healthy for the economy.

First, who agrees with that premise? There is a difference between "not healthy" and unfair, immoral, or whatever normative phrase you want to put on it. I, personally, agree with him. I can't point you to a particular authority on it, but it seems to me that part of the reason the economy has remained so seized up, if you will, is that the oil (money) is too concentrated in parts of the engine that don't really need it. Well, not as much as other parts do in order to function more healthily.

So who agrees with his premise? We'll discuss what to do about it momentarily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
His point today was that the top 1/10th of one percent has as much wealth as the bottom 90 % and that is not healthy for the economy.

First, who agrees with that premise? There is a difference between "not healthy" and unfair, immoral, or whatever normative phrase you want to put on it. I, personally, agree with him. I can't point you to a particular authority on it, but it seems to me that part of the reason the economy has remained so seized up, if you will, is that the oil (money) is too concentrated in parts of the engine that don't really need it. Well, not as much as other parts do in order to function more healthily.

So who agrees with his premise? We'll discuss what to do about it momentarily.

Nu uh! It's those dang lazy people on food stamps taking all our money!

On a serious note, he is right. There is no solution, and we are all going to ride this ship to the bottom. Might as well point our fingers at each other and not address the issue. Taxes on business? Lower them. Some will still choose to keep jobs overseas and pay as little as possible. Cut food stamps? 100 million people will riot. Our money will eventually be worth nothing, and we will have nothing to worry about!
 
Last edited:
His point today was that the top 1/10th of one percent has as much wealth as the bottom 90 % and that is not healthy for the economy.

First, who agrees with that premise? There is a difference between "not healthy" and unfair, immoral, or whatever normative phrase you want to put on it. I, personally, agree with him. I can't point you to a particular authority on it, but it seems to me that part of the reason the economy has remained so seized up, if you will, is that the oil (money) is too concentrated in parts of the engine that don't really need it. Well, not as much as other parts do in order to function more healthily.

So who agrees with his premise? We'll discuss what to do about it momentarily.

Absolutely. Inequality for All goes very in depth on this topic.
 
Nu uh! It's those dang lazy people on food stamps taking all our money!

On a serious note, he is right. There is no solution, and we are all going to ride this ship to the bottom. Might as well point our fingers at each other and not address the issue. Taxes on business? Lower them. Some will still choose to keep jobs overseas and pay as little as possible. Cut food stamps? 100 million people will riot. Our money will eventually be worth nothing, and we will have nothing to worry about!

As I saw it tweeted earlier, Bernie is the best President we'll never have.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top