United States presidential election 2016 This Bernie Sanders fella

Discussion in 'Politics' started by VikingToker, Jul 22, 2015.

  1. [​IMG]


    how do people feel about him


    and why


    interested in all opinions, american or otherwise
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. #2 parkster, Jul 22, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 22, 2015
    Hes a socialist and I cant believe people are supporting him. He wants like a 90% tax rate on the rich, those are the people who are creating the most jobs whether you like them or not. Tax them like crazy, there goes our economic growth, rise in wages, and any chance of getting over this debt. I mean look at Greece, does socialism look like its a good idea right now? Especially when we're about to be 19 TRILLION in debt?


    He uses the idea of abolishing wealth inequality as a way to brainwash the masses into thinking hes helping you by limiting how far you can get yourself in life. I believe I will prosper on my own so I would never let some old fart hold me back, but I can understand how those out there dont believe they can be successful and want government to make it easy for them.[​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. I've lived in Vermont for 18 years, and Bernie has been my congressman and senator for just as long. There is a reason why he consistently gets re-elected, and consistently has over 70% approval rating among his constituents. His positions are consistent and real. All you have to do is look at his list of donators compared to other candidates to find out who they really work for.


    Bernie is not a socialist. He is a progressive, and a self-proclaimed democratic socialist - which is different then actual socialism. He believes in a more Nordic model of government - which I'm sure you realize is quite successful.




     
    • Like Like x 4
  4. He's like the Ron Paul of the left.


    Crazy like a fox!






     
  5. Aaaaaand this, well, faux news for ya
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Ron Paul is on the left iirc
     
  7. I've always liked Bernie Sanders. He is what a public servant is all about. If he gets the nomination I am definitely voting for him.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. #8 forty winks, Jul 23, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2015
    Our version of Bernie Sanders is Thomas Mulcair, and according to some recent polling, he's got a chance of winning. But Harper is sneaky and corrupt, so we'll have to wait and see.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. He does remind me of Ron Paul a lot in the way that he's consistent, is open about government corruption, and has huge crowds wherever he goes. Pretty solid foreign policy too for the most part. Doesn't seem like just another cog in the system.


    I am not of the progressive persuasion, but I agree a lot with what he says when it comes to money in politics and foreign policy.


    If and when he gets the shaft in favor of some corporate piece of crap neocon like Hillary, hopefully it'll signal to Sanders supporters what a waste of time politics is.


    My brother told me the other day that if Sanders doesn't get the nomination he's giving up on this whole voting thing alltogether. It's wonderful!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Let's break this down shall we. Sorry for the wall of text but I felt that you had the record wrong about Bernie Sanders.


    "Hes a socialist and I cant believe people are supporting him."
    As much as Bernie says he's a socialist it's actually not the most accurate term used to describe his stated goals. Socialism is generally defined as a political system where the state owns all industry and there is no such thing as private ownership which is dramatically different from Bernie's platform. He is much closer to being a social democrat which is someone who believes that there should be largely a free market, but we need a government for certain services like education, criminal justice, healthcare, education, and to regulate industries. Claiming he is a socialist is misleading, he's a progressive democrat.


    "He wants like a 90% tax rate on the rich,"
    Well technically true this is misleading, because Bernie wants around a 90 percent tax rate so that the effective tax rate is much closer to 30 percent than where it hovers at about 18 percent right now. I believe that given the complexity of our tax code and ability to write things off no one would be paying anywhere remotely close to 90 percent or probably above the mid 30's even under his tax proposals although they are not fully laid out yet and this is obviously an oversimplification.

    "those are the people who are creating the most jobs whether you like them or not. Tax them like crazy, there goes our economic growth, rise in wages, and any chance of getting over this debt."

    Well this can generally be true it is not as simple as the top down approach would have you believe especially if you look at a personal level. If you give back 5 percent of someone's income to someone who is just scraping by then you will see almost an immediate spending of that money in goods and services. Whereas, someone who is well off and can basically afford all the things they want isn't going to make nearly as many purchases right alway as the person with a lower income and will often invest or save the money. This is why tax cuts and wealth that ends up in the hands of lower income and middle income people tends to drive the economy more in than in wealthy people's hands because you have more consumption which leads businesses to expand and hire, which leads to more consumption in a giant cycle. It's a simple historical fact that the economy relies on the middle class and right now the middle class is being squeezed out well the richest Americans become increasingly wealthy at an alarmingly quick rate.

    The simple fact is that we have cut taxes over the last 15 years whether it's capital gains tax, income tax, estate tax, or a whole bunch of other smaller taxes and we haven't seen any rises in wages or business to validate continuing these cuts well seeing major increases in production. Many numbers and studies indicate that tax increases/cuts don't have a major effect on employment. It seems that increasingly a large portion of the wealth generated by tax cuts and increased production has ended up in the bank accounts of CEO's/executives and this is one of the major reasons the middle class has taken it on the chin. At this point it seems that we should at least get tax money to fund education, infrastructure, and other important things we need to prosper if the tax cuts only seem to be majorly helping out the wealthiest 1 percent of our population and wages/employment are most likely gonna remain stagnant anyway.

    "I mean look at Greece, does socialism look like its a good idea right now? Especially when we're about to be 19 TRILLION in debt?"
    Well two can play at this game. Why don't we look at some other countries such as Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands which are very similar to what Sanders proposes in terms of a political landscape. Theses are three examples of successful social democracies to your one bad one, but I'm sure you'll ignore the idea that social democracy could be good because it doesn't fit in with your preconceived notions about anything with the word social in it. The only way to pay back a debt is with an economic boom in the long run and that can only be done if we invest in our crumbling infrastructure, and give kids better access to higher educations and technical schools so we can become a more intelligent nation that has the skills necessary to compete in a global market. You have to look at the fact that the political landscape is extremely different in Greece from America so you are comparing apples and oranges. The amount of corruption in Greece makes America look like we have our shit together.

    "He uses the idea of abolishing wealth inequality as a way to brainwash the masses into thinking hes helping you by limiting how far you can get yourself in life. I believe I will prosper on my own so I would never let some old fart hold me back, but I can understand how those out there dont believe they can be successful and want government to make it easy for them."

    How is giving people a free/reasonably priced college education, access to healthcare till they're at least 25, and fighting to fix our crumbling infrastructure going to hold us back? Do you realize how many people there are out there who want to get an opportunity to go to college but simply can't afford it and go the safe route of working right way? Do you realize how many poor kids are disenfranchised by the system and give up all hope knowing that the farthest they can really go is a high school education? If you make public universities free then you send the message to even kids who are poor that they can make it if they can work hard enough, which is not the current message we are sending to many kids.

    Wealth inequality is not only an issue for the poor as many conservative groups would like you to think. People don't just complain about wealth inequality because they are poor. Many people including myself believe that wealth inequality is unsustainable and leads to a more stagnant economy because the wealthiest Americans sit on their money more than people in lower classes. Wealth inequality is a real issue for all classes including the wealthiest Americans themselves. Social mobility is on a sharp decline in America and is actually worse by most estimates than even 20 years ago. As much as you can say oh I'll make my own future, it's unreasonable to expect that you can do it all alone. Work is a huge component of being successful and generally you need to put in work to be successful, although that's not always the case. However hard you work, at some point you need someone to give you that opportunity or stumble upon something by chance.


    We tend to think that most businessman must be geniuses to get where they are but that's not always the case. If you look at the Forbes 500 list about 60 percent inherited almost all of their wealth and business assets from a family member. Also, about 75 percent or 3/4 had inherited a significant portion of their wealth from a relative. As much as we like to think in America that we are all just as equally likely to succeed it's a false narrative. A very large percent of jobs are acquired though connections which usually means family friends and acquaintances recommend you. This is why it's extremely hard for people who are poor compared to someone who say's dad is an investment banker at Goldman Sachs to get a high paying job. If you are poor living in a shitty neighborhood then most of your connections would be people working low wage jobs. Whereas someone who is the son of an investment banker probably has many connections who have much higher wage jobs.

    This isn't to say that all jobs are determined this way or that people can't rise up from the lower class. I'm just saying that there are real disadvantages that poor people deal with that wealthy people simply don't have to. I personally believe that our government should work to correct that and level the playing field for people who's only crime was being born into a poor family. I also believe that things like education and healthcare are too important and privy to abuse to allow private industries to run them especially when there is so little competition.

    Bernie is one of the few politicians proposing solutions like EIT, raising the minimum wage, giving kids access to free higher education, and providing healthcare for people who are at least under the age of 25. All of these things would help close the wealth gap and make children lives better who live in poverty. Now it is a debate worth having about the effects of these plans economically, but I think it's silly to say that Bernie's plans are holding back Americans, as it seems to be helping many move forward.

    Overall, I believe there are many flaws with Bernies plans and that they could have negative consequences, but I think you have a skewed perception of what Bernie Sanders stands for. Sorry for the wall of text. I am horrible at being concise when I'm baked.
     
    • Like Like x 7
  11. Bernie is different then Ron Paul in one way... he's always been an Independent. Granted he is running as a Democrat, mainly because he's not in it to split the vote, but he has always been a true third party candidate.




     
  12. I voted for Ron Paul in the last election. I liked his non-interventionist foreign policy as well has his view on the war on drugs.



    I don't know enough about Bernie to make a decision either way about him.

    I will make a more in depth post when I know more.
     
  13. And this....Well.... Government leach PMSnbc viewer.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. BRZ boy?

    Have you rose from your fracking grave?
     
  15. I support everything Bernie stands for, but I'm just going to pick one to say something about, and it's one that America really needs to get its head out of its ass about.

    Healthcare. We. Do. Not. Have. The. Best. Healthcare. System. By. A. Fucking. Long. Shot.

    I'm gonna post a hospital bill posted on reddit a few days ago, it was for a <em class='bbc'><strong class='bbc'>RATTLESNAKE BITE</strong></em> something that can happen to literally anyone.

    [​IMG]

    Anything strike you about this picture?
     
  16. #16 parkster, Jul 23, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2015
    Despite the success of a few countries, Europe isnt considered as an ideal model for an economy, as much as the U.S. is struggling it still beats Europe in every category but GDP, which isnt even a good measure to indicate a successful economy.Based on what has gone on the past 7 years, more spending=more debt.
    A Washington Times article states; “Researchers examined 21 Organizations for Economic Cooperation and Development countries between 1970 and 2007 and found that countries with successful fiscal reforms.” Tax, regulatory, monetary, and governmental programs, on average, closed 85 percent of budget gaps with spending cuts. Countries that relied on at least 50 percent tax increases, saw failed fiscal reforms."


    Governments have no resources, so the less they spend the more left in the private sector to fund production. You say that the economy is hurt by lower taxes because the poor are more likely to spend while rich will invest, but what creates business? Investments. Entrepreneurs quite simply cannot give their innovations life without investment. The guy who found Uber may be willing to work at high rates of taxation, but without capital there is no Uber, thats why there is no innovation in socialist countries. Giving back to the poor as I see it means many businesses will never come to life, and those same poor people are stuck on government subsidies instead of having a job that couldve been there for them to prosper.


    You want sympathy for those who are born poor, but we already have plenty of financial aid, food stamps, and Medicaid without resorting to "Democratic socialism". Any college kid can get financial aid and go to community college, and then to a university. The problem with our education today isnt so much that people cant get one, its how they are able to pay it back. Many colleges are passing kids along rather than preparing them for jobs. Instead of weakening education by making it cheaper, it needs to actually translate into success after graduation rather than just attaining a degree.


    His idea would cost $70 billion per year, more than twice what the federal government spends on Pell grants. Its really funadmentally impossible, because the "price" of free public college is more than the money taxpayers would spend on it. And much of that money would provide a free education to students whose families can already afford it. In addition to reducing options for institution choice, he wants to get rid of adjunct professors, which keeps bad professors from being let go.


    Government run institutions like this create a system that is stagnant, bureaucratic and unresponsive to the changing needs of students and the economy over time. Just like health care, where medical professionals are dropping like flies, people have less options, longer waits, and worse treatment overall. What needs to happen is getting rid of over regulation we see from the government, reduce the number of regulatory barriers preventing new and innovative educational institutions from gaining success.


    The free market sparks competition among producers, who make better products for consumers, socialist policies simply drag every aspect of life down except for those who cant adapt. Life isnt fair for anyone, there will always be problems for the rich and the poor. People who inherit their business from their families hard work shouldnt have to give it up to those who aren't as fortunate. Whos the government to punish those who are trying to carry on a legacy of perseverance, ambition, and determination? Why bring everyone else down in order to establish a welfare state? People who want to be successful, will be if they work hard enough, no matter how poor.


    " However hard you work, at some point you need someone to give you that opportunity or stumble upon something by chance."
    I have the same philosophy, but just apply it to the private sector. When the rich invest when they drive the economy just by simply investing. When A bank is paying you for your savings so that it can lend them out to someone with near-term consumptive needs, who needs money for a car, house or college loan, or who needs short-term capital to start a business. When you save your wealth it is being redistributed, by definition. And that's very stimulative.


    High rates of taxation reduce the amount of capital available to producers in addition to serving as a barrier to production. Even though individuals will work and produce despite high taxes, government spending has by definition shrunk the amount of capital necessary to fund what powers any economy forward. Which is why capitalism destroys socialism or democratic socialism. Greece is full of lazy, overpaid, over pensioned, government workers rather than competitive, innovative private sectors.


    Old Bernies radical ideals will make us just like Greece, full of lazy, ovverpaid, over pensioned, government workers rather than competitive, innovative private sectors, that energize the free market and establish growth to the people rather than government.Instead of raising taxes on producers and small businesses, why don't we stop subsidizing the wealthy? Stop the corporate welfare, income test our entitlements. Taxes arent the answer. There hasnt been a time in history where raising taxes on one group alleviated them for another. Its not "transferring wealth from the haves to the have nots" its transferring wealth from the people to the government, who will keep spending until we go bankrupt. Instead of allowing people to reach their potential it just limits the opportunities of many in exchange for lackluster, poorly run, government freebies. Which equates into your typical socialist country with little economic growth.


    Even if taxes are increased you think thats going to cover everyone's education,15 dollar minimum wage, welfare,or healthcare? At 19 trillion, some point you have to realize its time to cut back, all this spending just has not worked.






     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Yep, dirty fucking socialist, lmfao.


     
  18. Socialism is so evil we have to redefine it to show how evil it is.


    Just like how capitalism is so awesome we have to redefine it to show how awesome it is.


    [​IMG]

     
  19. #FeeltheBern


    That's how I feel about him. So do many others, like the 10,000 people who saw him speak in Madison or the 11,000 in Phoenix. He is the hope.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Omg no way !! Is that legit?
     

Share This Page