If Things Are So Great, Why Is Bernie Sanders Doing So Well?

  
By:  john-russell  •  2 months ago  •  127 comments

If Things Are So Great, Why Is Bernie Sanders Doing So Well?
The ideological contention is not just about capitalism vs democratic socialism, it is about the failure to achieve a promising future for America's young. 

Bernie Sanders message is rather stark. America is victimized by the rich, who buy political power and use it to maintain their domination of the finances of the society. 

A lot of young people like Sanders, meaning they buy Sanders message. The Nevada voting for the Democratic candidates is taking place today, and I hear one report that the over 45 vote is splitting roughly evenly between Sanders, Biden, Buttigieg, Warren and Klobuchar.  But Sanders is going to win this Nevada election very easily, because he is getting overwhelming support from people under 45 year old. 

The under 45's are the main people looking at the future. They dont see a bright future for themselves in a Donald Trump style economy, mainly because they dont see a bright present. A large majority of college graduates under 45 cannot find a job in their field of training.  They see no path to universal health care in the near future, and that is something young people overwhelmingly want done. They see nothing being done about the cost of college, which is another political item they want addressed immediately. 

And of course, the young see that the person leading the nation is a dishonest ignorant buffoon. Being so fresh or relatively fresh out of school makes them more idealistic in terms of what leaders should be according to American tradition, and Trump ain't it. 

The ideological contention is not just about capitalism vs democratic socialism, it is about the failure to achieve a promising future for America's young. 

Hillary Clinton beat Trump in the under 30 vote by 18 points in 2020, a spread that almost certainly will be wider this year in favor of the Democrat. 

The country should be concerned with what their young are concerned with. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    2 months ago

Leaving Trump aside, there is still a mass of dissatisfied people. And they are the future. 

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

"Why Is Bernie Sanders Doing So Well?"

Because he's playing within his own league. He won't have a designated hitter when he shows up downtown.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  squiggy @1.1    one month ago

Correct. I think it's fair to say that progressives are now a majority of the democratic party. When Bernie gets into a general election we shall see how many Americans want a Socialist economy.

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    one month ago
I think it's fair to say that progressives are now a majority of the democratic party.

I have my doubts about that.   Perhaps they are in the places he appears to be winning but in the rest of the US?

Debatable at best imo.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.2    one month ago

It shall be interesting.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago
And they are the future. 

they are the minority.

bernie supporters are very far from being the majority and will be easy to beat in 2020 and beyond

go bernie :)

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2    2 months ago

and Biden supporters are in the majority in the over 45 year old age bracket, at least in Nevada.......

and maybe.................in the other 46 or 47 states?

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.2.2  gooseisgone  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.1    one month ago
Biden supporters are in the majority

With the stuff that comes out of Biden"s mouth, I can't see people voting for him he really seems delusional. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.2.3  Split Personality  replied to  gooseisgone @1.2.2    one month ago

Well, he's been consistent for 70 years, there's that, he stutters, it's more evident in the debates tha it is during Town Halls.

That doesn't make him delusional.

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.2.4  gooseisgone  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.3    one month ago
That doesn't make him delusional.

He's running for Senate

1,500,000 people killed by gun violence since 2007

Arrested in South Africa with Nelson Mandela

This is just a few.

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.2.5  Split Personality  replied to  gooseisgone @1.2.4    one month ago

So it seems to me that misspeaking or  acting like one has had a stroke is very Presidential these days.

jrSmiley_2_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.2.6  gooseisgone  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.5    one month ago

I didn't even mention the misspeaking, he doesn't have a grasp on reality.  "Arrested with Nelson Mandela" is not a misspeak it's a lie.

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.2.7  Split Personality  replied to  gooseisgone @1.2.6    one month ago

He was detained and separated from the US entourage when traveling with UN Ambassador Andrew Young

for refusing to use the "white's only" door and attempting to use the 'black's only' doors when they arrived.

Mandela was still 600 miles away in his cell.

So he's exaggerating his detainment while other's twist what he said.

“I had the great honor of being arrested with our U.N. ambassador on the streets of Soweto trying to get to see [Mandela] on Robben Island.”

According to Young, they were simply dealing with apartheid as best they could, including being separated by color for no good diplomatic reason but it happened in Johannesburg, not Soweto.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.2.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.7    one month ago

He lied. He was not arrested on the streets of Soweto like he claimed. 

His spokesman says was separated, not detained.

He also  lied about Mandela  thanked him for being arrested.

He lied. He lies all the time. From his law school plagiarism to his lies about gunshot victims at the debate (Under the Trump standard, every misstatement is a lie).  That's what he does.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

A lot of young Bernie supporters are extremely naïve and subject to believing people telling what they want to hear and Bernie knows this. By the time the reality sets in it will be far too late.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

A horse named TRUMP'S REVENGE ran in the sixth race at Sam Houston race track in Texas today.

He went off at odds of 70-1 and finished 11th in a field of 12.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2  Freedom Warrior    2 months ago

If they think they’re dissatisfied now wait till they experience the misery socialism is going to heap upon them.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1  WallyW  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2    2 months ago
Socialism or it's big brother communism. So far, neither one has worked.

The complete paragraph containing Marx's statement of the creed in the Critique of the Gotha Program is as follows:

In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs! [1] [2] [4] [5]
 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  WallyW @2.1    2 months ago

What you find among the young people is that they don’t realize the misery that awaits them under a socialist/ communistic society. They are obviously indoctrinated through academia and other means to believe that they can have everything for free. 

Those that have witnessed the oppression the lack of liberty the utterly dismal failure of socialistic/communistic economic systems firsthand may have taken that understanding for granted. They don’t Venezuela

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.1    2 months ago

Sanders doesnt have a program of everything for free, that I know of. 

Universal health care will be paid by taxes that everyone who pays income taxes will pay. (In other words everyone who is not poor.) The poor already get "free" health care, and they always will. Of course they may get substandard or limited care, but generally the poor dont pay. 

Everyone else will pay. So what is free? 

Oh yeah, the rich will pay more. 

Many people think it is high past time. 

But that is not communism. 

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.3  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago
So what is free? 

Easy...

Sanders and Warren run around the country telling their blind that everything should either be free or forgiven. Most that believe that are young people that have been indoctrinated in public schools and universities almost their whole lives. They think they are the ones that won't have to pay anything, that it will be someone else, especially those evil rich millionaires and billionaires, whom Sanders and Warren are both members of that group.

I wonder why both of them dropped the cry of millionaires and billionaires will pay more, and only now preach billionaires are the ones that will pay. They don't want their blind followers to know they are part of what they are being told to hate.

Everyone paying more is not what either of them are preaching. They are preaching that everything will be given to them.

 Then there are the immigrants who are citizens that see an opportunity to get their family members in without being vetted, and if they have family that are illegal, then they will be able to become legal at the tip of a hat, again with no vetting....all in the name of more and more democratic voters.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago
Universal health care will be paid by taxes that everyone who pays income taxes will pay.

It's cute that you think that will work.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @2.1.3    2 months ago
Everyone paying more is not what either of them are preaching. They are preaching that everything will be given to them.

where do you see that?

Sanders wants a 15 dollar minimum wage.

what is "free" about paying someone to do work?  

They want "free college" at state schools.  What is that but a modernization of the "free" k to 12 we already have in this society?

Both Sanders and Warren want to tax extreme wealth and use those funds to benefit society on the whole. 

It should have been done a long time ago. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.4    2 months ago

Every other advanced country on earth has some form of universal health care. I think it has already been proven to "work". 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.7  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

So you think you’re going to get something for free because somebody else is going to pay for and you’re not considering that something for free.   oh yeah yeah they teach that in your school of illogic I suppose.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.4    2 months ago

As I recall Sanders has a plan to tax incomes OVER 5 million dollars a year , and Warren has a plan to tax personal wealth OVER 50 million dollars.  In both instances the additional taxes would be small. (2 percent for every dollar OVER 50 million)

Are these really taxes that will effect anyone on Newstalkers? If they are, you have lived a blessed life. Congratulations. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.9  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    2 months ago

You probably don’t realize how idiotic that comment is. This  country has the best healthcare system in the world and you want to destroy it? This country has the best economic prosperity in the world and you want to destroy it? [deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.10  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.7    2 months ago

When everyone but the poor is paying taxes toward these things, what is free? 

Are you seriously complaining because the extremely wealthy will pay more? 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.11  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago

You should know by now that’s a complete freaking lie and if you don’t then now you should most definitely know.

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.12  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

I invite you to go to any Bernie rally and ask the attendees why they back him. The vast majority of them will say that he will give free health care, free college and forgive any college loans they have. They don't know to say they understand they will be paying more because they are not being told that.

Anyone that owns property pay taxes that support local schools. If you rent a home for 2 or 3 thousand a month, you don't pay property tax, therefore you don't pay to support the schools your kids go to, so everyone else is paying for YOUR kids education, even though you can afford several thousand a month in rent. Even if your city uses some sales tax to support schools, you will still be paying far less to educate your kids than everyone else.

As far as taxing the wealthy, do you think THEIR taxes should be increased dramatically, because THEY are what they are telling everyone to hate. No one is asking them that and I'm sure they won't volunteer their true feelings.

 

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.13  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago
Are you seriously complaining because the extremely wealthy will pay more? 

Bernie already admitted the middle class will be paying substantially more.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.14  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.9    2 months ago
You probably don’t realize how idiotic that comment is. This  country has the best healthcare system in the world and you want to destroy it? This country has the best economic prosperity in the world and you want to destroy it? Should  we go on with a list of things that you would like to destroy here? 

Other countries have medical success rates as good or better than the US. 

Taxing extreme wealth would not end economic prosperity. That is a myth. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.15  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @2.1.13    2 months ago

They also wont be paying premiums or deductibles. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.16  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @2.1.12    2 months ago
If you rent a home for 2 or 3 thousand a month, you don't pay property tax, therefore you don't pay to support the schools your kids go to, so everyone else is paying for YOUR kids education, even though you can afford several thousand a month in rent.

Utter nonsense. The price of rent includes a portion that the owner will use to pay property tax. Everyone who pays housing costs pays an element of property tax. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.17  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.14    2 months ago

What’s a myth is that you’re only going to tax the wealthy that’s complete fucking bullshit

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago
Universal health care will be paid by taxes that everyone who pays income taxes will pay. (In other words everyone who is not poor.) The poor already get "free" health care, and they always will. Of course they may get substandard or limited care, but generally the poor dont pay.

About 40% of Americans don't pay income tax. Do you honestly expect the other 60% to pay for healthcare for all? That isn't realistic without having astronomical rates which will rape the taxpaying public.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.19  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    2 months ago

You show me a residential lease that requires a portion of rent to go to taxes.

That is almost like claiming that someone who went to the emergency room and was unable or unwilling to pay for it is helping pay medical costs because they bought a bottle of aspirin.

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.20  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    2 months ago
The price of rent includes a portion that the owner will use to pay property tax

So you admit that either the renter or the owner does not pay property tax. If the renter pays 1500 over the course of the year of a property tax bill of 1500 annually, then the owner does not pay property tax.

I can guarantee you that an owner does not pitch in anything towards property tax of a rental..

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.17    2 months ago
What’s a myth is that you’re only going to tax the wealthy that’s complete fucking bullshit

Wel, of course it is.

When people get used to the free stuff, then they'll demand more.

And where will THAT money come from? 

The threshold will just keep getting lower.

Of COURSE taxes will go up---on ALL of us taxpayers.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.22  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago

It isn't just the extremely wealthy if you make as little as 750,000 a year you are a 1% if you make as little as 400,00 you are in the top 5% hardly extremely wealthy. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.23  MUVA  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.21    2 months ago

If you want European style socialism the poor will pay taxes.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.24  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @2.1.23    2 months ago
If you want European style socialism the poor will pay taxes.  

Social democracy, not socialism.

And, with that correction, you are correct.   Citizens in social democracies pay very high taxes in return for services such as 'free' higher education, inexpensive (or 'free') healthcare, etc.

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.25  Tacos!  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.9    2 months ago
This  country has the best healthcare system in the world

I think I need to be convinced of that. According to the World Health Organization , the US healthcare system is the 37th best in the world. That's not too good, and it's not even close to "best." 

Several factors determine the level of healthcare quality in each country. These include the care process (preventative care measures, safe care, coordinated care, and engagement and patient preferences), access (affordability and timeliness), administrative efficiency, equity, and healthcare outcomes (population health, mortality amenable to healthcare, and disease-specific health outcomes).

At Health System Tracker , they compare the US healthcare system to other countries across a variety of metrics. In many of these measures, the US does not compare favorably and the trend is getting worse.

I love my country and all, but in many respects, our healthcare system sucks.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.26  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @2.1.12    2 months ago
If you rent a home for 2 or 3 thousand a month, you don't pay property tax, therefore you don't pay to support the schools your kids go to, so everyone else is paying for YOUR kids education, even though you can afford several thousand a month in rent.

That's ridiculous.

Every property owner includes the cost of property taxes in the amount they charge for rent.

Sheesh. 

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.27  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago
Are you seriously complaining because the extremely wealthy will pay more? 

There aren't enough of the "rich" to pay for it all

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.29  Split Personality  replied to  bugsy @2.1.12    2 months ago
If you rent a home for 2 or 3 thousand a month, you don't pay property tax, therefore you don't pay to support the schools your kids go to, so everyone else is paying for YOUR kids education, even though you can afford several thousand a month in rent. Even if your city uses some sales tax to support schools, you will still be paying far less to educate your kids than everyone else.

Complete and udder bullshyte. What a disappointing statement.

The owner of the property being rented pays the property and school taxes that allow the children at that address to attend school witin the district,

in every effing community in the whole effing country!

Period

How basic is that effing arguement?????????

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.30  Split Personality  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.29    2 months ago

I have owned multiple rental properties.  If they were occupied or not, I paid the same property and school taxes whether they were occupied or not.

It's not brain surgery, the rent includes the taxes, sometimes the escrow and a "wear & tear" fund.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.1.31  igknorantzrulz  replied to  bugsy @2.1.13    2 months ago

Bernie already admitted the middle class will be paying substantially more.

Like an expiring Trump "Middle Class my Ass" tax cut ...?

WHo the Hell do you think you're fooling besides the mirrored image,

you imagined would be thinner, or perhaps taller for the tail told and pulled by the wait of anticipated anticipation some refuse to carry for the wait of anticipated overages, that round down to right angels to such a degree knot tied to  a reality  not all that so cute, by a sailor who could only tie his tongue into a twisted cherry stem dancing like a Shirley Temple

of Doom could see

for all to worship our infallible one syllable wondering how to spell GPS so as to actually be lost in an acronym by a forecasted stormy Jack Daniels liquid concentration  that clouds porn out of clouds porn, but rated Y  MCA records released a new Polaroid photo album to picture the future that past Trumpsters in dragsters good by, but totally unhappy is the short gay story, that make heterosexuals go buy  markeded merchandise tossed into Snakes eyes to roll the eye balls found to be very well unround ed whence spun for deception, as the ignorance ingestion unsettles belly fulls of full bellies slapped till pretty in Pink... don't you

think about thoughtless of 

with more appreciation of the lesser after depreciation...

 
 
 
squiggy
2.1.32  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    2 months ago

Let Burnie tell the whole truth - that $2.50 gas will be $6 next week.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
2.1.33  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  bugsy @2.1.12    2 months ago
If you rent a home for 2 or 3 thousand a month, you don't pay property tax

property tax is included in the rent.... get a clue.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
2.1.34  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago
Sanders wants a 15 dollar minimum wage.

256

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.35  bugsy  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.29    2 months ago

So you understand that both the owner and the renter do not pay property tax for a rental, only one does. If the one that does not pay taxes for that property has kids in school in that community, then those kids go to school free. Glad you understand that. I;m actually surprised. Maybe you can explain that little "effing argument" to  your little lib friends on here.

They could learn something s/

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.36  Ronin2  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @2.1.34    2 months ago

You are leaving out all of the jobs that will be lost as companies downsize, and move to automation, to replace overpriced labor.

Just ask Seattle how well their $15/hour wage is working.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/new-study-casts-doubt-on-whether-a-15-minimum-wage-really-helps-workers/

When Seattle officials voted three years ago to incrementally boost the city's minimum wage up to $15 an hour, they'd hoped to improve the lives of low-income workers. Yet according to a major new study that could force economists to reassess past research on the issue, the hike has had the opposite effect.

The city is gradually increasing the hourly minimum to $15 over several years. Already, though, some employers have not been able to afford the increased minimums. They've cut their payrolls, putting off new hiring, reducing hours or letting their workers go, the study found.

The costs to low-wage workers in Seattle outweighed the benefits by a ratio of three to one, according to the study, conducted by a group of economists at the University of Washington who were commissioned by the city. The study, published as a working paper Monday by the National Bureau of Economic Research, has not yet been peer reviewed.

https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/7/13/20690266/seattle-minimum-wage-15-dollars

The story for employees is much more varied. The minimum wage for some large employers jumped from $11 to $13 from 2015 to 2016. The economists observed the impact of the hike in 2017 and found it had dramatic effects on the low-wage workforce and employment.

Not all of them were good. They found that the policy “reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by 6-7 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by 3 percent ... consequently, total payroll for such jobs decreased.” That means the total amount that employers paid to workers was less with the new minimum wage in place than projected payroll if the policy hadn’t gone into effect.

The data, researcher Mark C. Long explained, suggested a “tipping point” between $11 and $13 “when it becomes less tenable to keep work in the city.” (Critics were quick to point out that this likely wasn’t solely due to the minimum wage policy — Seattle’s labor market continued to heat up during that period, reducing the number of low-wage jobs compared to high-wage jobs overall.)

But a year later, the team published another paper that complicated their findings. They looked at the same time period and same wage increase, but this time broke down the actual take-home pay of workers. They found that workers who were already employed at the low end of the wage scale in Seattle “enjoyed significantly more rapid hourly wage growth,” following wage increases in 2015 and 2016.

Those who were already working more hours before the wage increase saw “essentially all of the earnings increases,” while the workers who had fewer hours saw their hours go down, but wages go up enough so that their overall earnings didn’t really change. They theorized that a slowdown in new hiring for low-wage jobs could explain their earlier findings that overall payroll had gone down.

Ultimately, workers already employed either saw their take-home pay go up or stay roughly the same while working fewer hours.

With Bernie and the Democrats it will be a race to the bottom. Last ones there have to pay for everything.

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.37  bugsy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1.31    2 months ago

Once again the entire post made zero sense,

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.38  bugsy  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.30    2 months ago
If they were occupied or not, I paid the same property and school taxes whether they were occupied or not.

And when someone rents your property, you no longer pay taxes on that property. The renter does.

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.39  bugsy  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @2.1.33    2 months ago

I believe I clarified my comment below.

 
 
 
charger 383
2.1.40  charger 383  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.29    2 months ago

the tax bill for rental property I own comes to me and I write the checks to the town and county and deduct that from my Federal tax.  

 
 
 
squiggy
2.1.41  squiggy  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.40    2 months ago
and deduct that from my Federal tax.  

He fast forgot that part.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.1.42  Jasper2529  replied to  bugsy @2.1.3    2 months ago
Sanders and Warren run around the country telling their blind that everything should either be free or forgiven. Most that believe that are young people that have been indoctrinated in public schools and universities almost their whole lives.

87043649_10219837436119350_3565449517178

87167581_10219837948692164_9771989220552

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.43  TᵢG  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.42    2 months ago

I suspect (strongly) that Sanders supporters fancy a big government that nets them goodies.    They are not thinking about what is required to achieve such a dream, only focusing on the fantasy that this will happen.

Unfortunately, with the momentum Sanders has, he is now even more emboldened that he can actually accomplish what he claims.   And worse, his current level of support gives credibility to his position.    

Seems he actually could get the D nomination.   That would be a very sad commentary on the sophistication of D voters.    He would lose to Trump for obvious reasons (e.g. the economy) but getting that far with such an extreme position speaks very poorly for the future.

 
 
 
squiggy
2.1.44  squiggy  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.43    2 months ago

Cortez beat Crowley in a microcosm of that. The voters won the shiny thing yet are in the seniority toilet.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.45  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.43    2 months ago

I think the problem is that there are too many moderate candidates and they are splitting the vote, and Sanders is the winner of this. I look at how the vote breaks up, and there are about 3 candidates that should drop out, because they are taking away votes from other candidates that could beat Sanders. It's a total mess. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.46  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.45    2 months ago

Warren’s votes are no doubt going to Sanders.

Looks like a brokered convention followed by disarray and claims of rigged process and lots of disgruntled voters staying home and giving Trump yet another advantage.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.1.47  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.45    2 months ago
I think the problem is that there are too many moderate candidates and they are splitting the vote,

I don't see any candidate as a "moderate". To varying degrees, each of the current Democrat candidates promote Socialist ideologies targeted at the general population through more government control of our lives.

I look at how the vote breaks up, and there are about 3 candidates that should drop out, because they are taking away votes from other candidates that could beat Sanders.

IMO, Buttegieg, Klobuchar, Gabbard, and Steyer definitely should drop out. Warren, Biden, and Bloomberg should consider doing the same. Warren carries a lot of baggage re: her lies, Biden is painful to watch when he pathetically tries to re-ignite his years with his "good friend, Obama", and Bloomberg has insulted many demographics (women, LGBTQ, Blacks/Hispanics, teachers). 

None of them will beat Sanders unless the DNC finds a way to cheat him out of the nomination for a second time and tosses the ball to another Socialist.

It's a total mess. 

Indeed, it is.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.48  Split Personality  replied to  charger 383 @2.1.40    2 months ago

I know that well.

And you also get to pay income taxes on any profit after whatever depreciation you could claim.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.49  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.47    2 months ago

Indeed it is and we can sit back and enjoy it all while feeding it. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.50  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.43    2 months ago

It is probably similar to this. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.52  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.47    2 months ago
I don't see any candidate as a "moderate". To varying degrees, each of the current Democrat candidates promote Socialist ideologies targeted at the general population through more government control of our lives.

Did you think that FDR was a socialist?

None of them will beat Sanders unless the DNC finds a way to cheat him out of the nomination for a second time and tosses the ball to another Socialist.

I don't see how the DNC can cheat Bernie. I don't think that the other candidates are socialist. And yes some of them need to drop out. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.1.53  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.52    2 months ago
Did you think that FDR was a socialist?

This seed pertains to the 2020 election cycle, so discussing FDR would be highly off-topic.

I don't see how the DNC can cheat Bernie.

It's well-documented that the DNC cheated Bernie out of the 2016 nomination.

I don't think that the other candidates are socialist.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion.

And yes some of them need to drop out. 

On this, we can agree.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.52    2 months ago
Did you think that FDR was a socialist?

FDR was, in my opinion, a social democrat.   He was a large 'benevolent' government statist who saw government as the solution.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.55  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.54    2 months ago

Agreed and we are in a MUCH different place than when FDR made those decisions.    Much different, much better.

The real debate today imo is had WW-2 not happened and not primed our countries economic pump in more than one way, how much slower would we have recovered from the bad economic times that brought on much of his social engineering?

Much much longer imo but how much is debatable.

Bernie is no FDR and certainly doesn’t need to be by comparison.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.56  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.55    2 months ago
 Much different, much better.

That is true.   

Bernie is no FDR and certainly doesn’t need to be by comparison.

Sanders is an entirely different flavor of social democrat.   Sanders is going for better whereas Roosevelt was trying to recover from disaster.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.57  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.56    2 months ago

“Better” is the debate isn’t it?

I can’t imagine how his vision is better when he can’t even reasonably explain how he is going to pay for it all.

Sanders is a disaster waiting to happen if he gets his way.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.58  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.57    2 months ago

My point was that Roosevelt was trying to dig the USA out of a hole (a net negative position) whereas Sanders is trying to improve from what is already a net positive position.

I was not making a value judgment on Sanders' proposals.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.59  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.58    one month ago
My point was that Roosevelt was trying to dig the USA out of a hole (a net negative position) whereas Sanders is trying to improve from what is already a net positive position.

And my point was that FDR had great cause and Sanders ...... meh .... not so much.   I do respect the guy though for being at lease somewhat honest with everyone that isn't a "rich" person.   Bernies definition not mine.   He admits his plans are going to cost everyone.   Where he drops the ball IMO is trying to infer that everyone that isn't "rich" will pay net less or not that much more.   I highly doubt that with what he is proposing.   His plans will cost everyone more.    Much more IMO.

I was not making a value judgment on Sanders' proposals.

Never said you were.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.60  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.59    one month ago
His plans will cost everyone more.   

Of course they would.   He knows that too because that is what takes place in other social democracies.   The people pay very high taxes in return for 'free' education and healthcare.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.1.61  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    one month ago

And what we have has been an abject FAILURE.  Before the ACA even Canadians were coming to the US for healthcare needs.  Then the government got involved an look at what we have.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.1.62  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.8    one month ago

Now, lets apply something that isn't used - Common Sense.

These millionaires get taxed.  Most are business owners.  Where do you think the money will come from to pay that tax?  The customers - US.  They will raise prices to cover that tax.  Those that don't raise prices simply move out of the country and use every loophole available (kind of like they do now).    

And do you honestly think Sanders and Pocahontas will include THEMSELVES in those to be taxed?  Hell no.  Just like with the ACA.  They will exempt themselves.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.63  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.61    one month ago
Before the ACA even Canadians were coming to the US for healthcare needs.

and Americans were going to Mexico for cancer treatment and Iran for rhinoplasty....

Then the government got involved an look at what we have.  

Well not much has changed in my lifetime.  Medicare/Medicaid were established in 1965,  CHAMPUS in 1966, TriCare in 1988.

I was a long time Champus & Tricare user, now Medicare.

no complaints.

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.1.64  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.60    one month ago

America is the land of opportunity for those who want to work hard to move up. (Disabled excluded as there are state and federal safety nets for them)

Instead Bernie wants to take from those who have worked hard to move up or inherited family wealth by a relative who worked their way up. 

If that is accomplished what is the incentive to work hard to move up?

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.65  TᵢG  replied to  dennis smith @2.1.64    one month ago
If that is accomplished what is the incentive to work hard to move up?

Exactly!

Our problems are not so easily solved by merely redistributing wealth;  that is just naive as hell.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.66  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.65    one month ago

Part of the problem can't be solved.   The human nature element.  

No amount of government aid or interference will fix all of that on either economic side of this.   That is why i error on the side of free choice as much as possible.   Socialism inherently takes much of that away.   Not saying government doesn't have a roll to play, it certainly does but we need to minimize it as much as possible imo if we want to remain as free as possible.

Adding to the Federal bloat is not the answer.   Actively managing and overseeing free enterprise is IMO.

There is a lot of wisdom in the old Margaret Thatcher quote and i paraphrase:

Socialism is great, until you run out of other peoples money.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.67  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.66    one month ago
Part of the problem can't be solved.   The human nature element.  

Correct.   An effective system is one that work with —not against— human nature.

Socialism inherently takes much of that away.  

You are implicitly defining socialism as big government ' something '.   That is not socialism;  that is statism.

Adding to the Federal bloat is not the answer.   Actively managing and overseeing free enterprise is IMO.

Yes

Socialism is great, until you run out of other peoples money.

Below is what she actually said in her 1976 Thames interview :

I would much prefer to bring them down as soon as possible. I think they've made the biggest financial mess that any government's ever made in this country for a very long time, and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money.

She is talking about parliamentary governments in the U.K.    A 'socialist government' in this context is that which is formed when statist elements assume control of parliament.   In particular, the U.K. Labour party .

She is saying that they (again, the Labour party ) bump up the social democracy (public programs funded by higher taxes) and the conservative governments (e.g. when the Conservative party is in control) have to fix it when they get power.   She is talking about statism (and in particular, U.K. social democracy) .    Elsewhere in the interview she refers to systems such as those of the former USSR and calls them socialism too.   To Thatcher, 'socialism' essentially means ' big government taking too much control '.   She was not talking about an economic system (the economic system that goes by the name of socialism has never existed).

 
 
 
Ronin2
3  Ronin2    2 months ago

Because the Russian bots are backing him.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/02/us-officials-said-russia-is-also-trying-to-help-sanders.html

U.S. officials have informed Senator Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to aid his presidential campaign in an effort to interfere in the 2020 Democratic primary, the Washington Post reported on Friday. It’s not yet clear how Russia is backing Sanders this time around, but in its efforts to help elect President Trump in 2016, the Kremlin used social media to support the Sanders campaign and fuel discord and division among the U.S. electorate to weaken support for Hillary Clinton.

Same as they did in 2016. Of course the left completely ignores it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @3    2 months ago

Thats funny. Maybe you can get a job as Trumps warm up act at his rallies. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
3.1.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    2 months ago

Looks like you’re proving his point

 
 
 
bugsy
3.1.2  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    2 months ago

Maybe you can get a job as Trumps warm up act at his rallies. 

 

So NOW you don't believe the intel community?

 
 
 
TᵢG
4  TᵢG    2 months ago
The country should be concerned with what their young are concerned with. 

I have long since concluded that the politically / economically naïve hold the view that all it takes is political will and the Federal government will magically be able to hand out goodies to all and maintain a thriving economy.  If one disregards (or is not sufficiently knowledgeable of) practical reality, Sanders' promises would sound great.

But, yes, it is a cause for alarm to see so many people running after big government statism aka social democracy (which now apparently goes under the label 'socialism').

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5  Dean Moriarty    2 months ago

Because there’s far more idiots than Einstein’s in the Democratic Party. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
6  XDm9mm    2 months ago
If Things Are So Great, Why Is Bernie Sanders Doing So Well?

Really easy answer.

When you offer free shit to your base, of course having others pay for the free shit you're going to give away, they'll swarm to you like flies on shit.  

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
6.1.1  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  WallyW @6.1    2 months ago

Indeed it is. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
7  Buzz of the Orient    2 months ago

I've been thinking about the negative problems Bernie will face if he becomes the Democratic candidate:

1.  Antisemitism.  Everyone knows he's Jewish, and it's obvious that patent antisemites won't vote for him, and since ballots are secret, latent antisemites have no fear of giving vent to their hidden feelings with their vote.

2.  His attitude towards Israel.  The liberal Jews may support his pro-Palestinian policies, but Orthodox Jews will not.

3.  His age.  He will be in his 80s in the first term.  I'm in my 80s now and although I'm not suffering from dementia, I'm not sure I would be able to handle the pressure that a POTUS would experience, so I'd be concerned about him.

4.  His health - he recently suffered from a heart attack, and at his age he might not be able to bear the stress of the job.

5.  Socialism.  I'm sure not everyone in America is as enamoured with his extreme socialistic politics, and I have already noted on this site that a fear and hatred of Communism exists in America.

 
 
 
WallyW
7.1  WallyW  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7    2 months ago

He is not electable on a national basis, not even close.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
7.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  WallyW @7.1    2 months ago

If the Democrats choose him to be their candidate, IMO they will have already assumed that Trump will be re-elected. I think that only Bloomberg has any possibility whatsoever of beating Trump, and I wouldn't bet on him either. What the Republicans need to do is focus their efforts on Congress candidates.

 
 
 
MUVA
8  MUVA    2 months ago

I know why we have a lot of losers in this country and free stuff looks appealing to losers. 

 
 
 
DRHunk
8.1  DRHunk  replied to  MUVA @8    one month ago

With un-employment around 3%, who the hell are these "losers".  It appears pretty much most of the country is willing to work if the work is available.  I am pretty fucking disgusted by your comment.

 
 
 
Sparty On
9  Sparty On    2 months ago

XD pretty much hit the nail squarely on the head.    

You have a lot of shiftless, lazy fuks who will vote for anyone who promises them the most free shit.

Its not rocket engineering John.

 
 
 
It Is ME
11  It Is ME    one month ago

"it is about the failure to achieve a promising future for America's young ."

Lot's of "America's Young" made it "Before Bernie ". jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

These days...."Quickies" are the in-thing with "America's YOUNG ! jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif

"Hard Work" just doesn't cut it anymore (It's theirs, and they WANT IT NOW) ! jrSmiley_54_smiley_image.gif

By the Way....Bernie has been in DC for a bazillion years. Why Now..... is he "Promising" to supposedly to be able to ….. "Fix Things" ?

Was he way tooo busy with himself back when ?

 
 
 
Sparty On
11.1  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @11    one month ago

Testify brother.

I'm glad i'm not far from punching out.

Trying to hire good people is depressing these days

 
 
 
It Is ME
11.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  Sparty On @11.1    one month ago
Trying to hire good people is depressing these days

I'd rather do it myself these days. At least I won't bitch to myself for having to actually "Work".

 
 
 
Sparty On
11.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @11.1.1    one month ago

Meh, Bernie wins, punch out with me and get some free stuff.  

I'm going back to college and take the easy route this time.   Perhaps Poli-Sci .... now thats some party time course work there ....

 
 
 
It Is ME
11.1.3  It Is ME  replied to  Sparty On @11.1.2    one month ago

I figured I'd go to "Princeton" and Major in " Getting Dressed"

 
 
 
Sparty On
11.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @11.1.3    one month ago

I hear "Sky Screaming" is another nice major these days along with "Safe Space" management and procedures in sucker punching.

 
 
 
DRHunk
12  DRHunk    one month ago

Median salary of the boots on the ground employee generating income for their corporate masters $31,000.  Journeyman employees $48,974. Median Executives sitting behind a desk $197K. Median CEO income $7.4M

There are far more boots on the ground and journeyman employees than executives and CEOs.  It is those people struggling to feed, educate, house, and generally provide for their families.  It is those people that are the true working class and it is those people that you disparage with your insults. 

It will ultimately be those that have no choice but to vote for free education and healthcare because it is something they truly need, yet cannot afford because they are barely struggling to live as it is.

Education and healthcare should be a fundamental human right in this day and age.  A lot of EU countries do it quite well, others screw it up, but that is the same with anything.  We need to figure out how to do it well.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
12.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  DRHunk @12    one month ago

No thanks I know what that means for me. I’m tea party and the tea stands for taxed enough already. 

384

 
 
 
DRHunk
12.1.1  DRHunk  replied to  Dean Moriarty @12.1    one month ago

Makes for a great bumper sticker but your returns would tell a different story. If you take into account the taxes I paid to Fed, Medicare tax, and my Medical insurance premium I paid $19,504 last year.  Do you think that if we had Universal Healthcare I would have to continue to pay for Medicare or personal Insurance (at least at the current level I already do?)  The answer would be no..  Overall I might even get a break and only pay $15K for the year for the whole shebang instead of almost $20K

Just a thought. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
12.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  DRHunk @12.1.1    one month ago
Just a thought.

Have you thought about all the other stuff Bernie wants to give away?

Your "universal health care" (aka medicare for all) will likely need a supplemental policy to pay for the things "medicare" doesn't pay for and don't forget all the illegals that will flock here for that freebie health care, and then add what you'll be paying for college for everyone, the price increases you'll be paying for basic essentials when his doubling of the minimum wage kicks in, the exponential increases in fuel to put in your vehicle to get from point a to point b, and don't forget to add in the additional costs of the federal bureaucracy to handle all that federal paperwork, and, well hopefully you get the idea.

Free ain't free....  there's always someone picking up the tab.   You'll wind up drooling over that measly $19,504 you spent and will wish for the good old days when that was your tab.

 
 
 
DRHunk
12.1.3  DRHunk  replied to  XDm9mm @12.1.2    one month ago

Sounds pretty doom and gloom, and a little hyperbolic.   Once again it works in a lot of EU countries we need to see how they do it and work out a plan that works for us. "Medicare" for all is just a term, it is basically everything is covered there is no reason to get additional insurance unless you want to take part in the small private care that would develop to fill niche markets or satisfy those that are all "Screw the Government" types.  Look at Denmark as an example.

Secondly, the insurance companies handle all the red tape and paperwork now....at a profit... those same companies can be contracted out as a lot of services are so they can continue doing what it is they do best, push the paperwork.

Illegals already receive free healthcare...anyone who walks into a hospital is required to receive treatment to stabilize them or their wounds. Illegals however DO NOT qualify for ANY Social welfare programs, even today.  Their American Citizen children however do.

 Education...eh, tuition is so inflated already. State colleges used to be free and receive federal funding, we can go back to that model and let the over priced private colleges remain.

Minimum wage...If a business cannot afford to pay its employees who are working full time, wages that are not above the federal poverty limit, then they have a bad business model and need to rethink what they are doing. Anyone working full time should not have to suffer...the world needs ditch diggers and burger flippers all the same as doctors and lawyers, and no it is not high school students doing those jobs, those businesses are open during school hours and yes they are stepping stone jobs for high schoolers....hence they are not working full time.  

 
 
 
MUVA
12.1.4  MUVA  replied to  DRHunk @12.1.3    one month ago

One question have you ever run a business?

 
 
 
DRHunk
12.1.5  DRHunk  replied to  MUVA @12.1.4    one month ago

Yes, I have started and sold two businesses and am working on a third and fourth business plan now.  All my businesses have a minimum wage of $12 an hour and profit sharing.  I am in business for the fun of it and for a small profit, I am not in it to soak my customers for every dime I can nor am I in it to try and get virtual slave labor. There is plenty of money to go around when a business is ran correctly and when the owner is not trying to take all they can and leave everyone else holding the bag. At one point in history businesses used to put their customers, product and employees first.  Today businesses always put profit first and don't even care about product quality, customer service or employee happiness.  There is no need to make millions as the owner if the people I rely on to generate those millions are only making 20K.  It is not a win win scenario. Sometimes small businesses cannot afford employees because the owners have a misguided expectation of their earnings, or what they think they are owed. They want the biggest piece of the pie, have to make $100K or more a year and use that business as their sole source of income before it is even profitable enough to do so. Those are the business where owners who don't want to pay a fair wage because it dips into what they think they are owed.  Just because you had a good idea and put it all together does not automatically earn you the biggest piece in the beginning, it will get there but only over time as the business grows and there will be some pain up front. There are many factors that play into all of these things but the gist is, if you have the right business model you can pay a fair wage to your employees and still be profitable...might not be to the profit you think you deserve, but there is still profit. That is why you grow the business until it is where you are happy and can make a nice living while ensuring everyone else who is helping you make those profits has a nice living also.  Then you sell it and start a new business with a fresh outlook and renewed vigor, unless it is your cosmic calling then you stay in it forever.

Anyway, I will step off my soapbox.

 
 
 
DRHunk
12.1.6  DRHunk  replied to  MUVA @12.1.4    one month ago

To expand a bit and let you know where my mentality is on the term bad business models is this.  Franchises, where most of the low wage jobs are become money pits for the owners, they are told stories of glorious profits reigning down on them from the consumers above but in reality when you buy a franchise you are just buying yourself a job.  Most franchises earn less than $40K a year in profit to the owner of that franchise. Less if they are not actively running it themselves (the absentee franchisee).  Corporations take 15-20% off the top of Gross revenue, that equates to $150K in most franchise situations...hole shit I say the corporation is take all the cheddar and leaving me with crumbs.  Terrible business model, you will never be able to pay your employees more than minimum wage because you can barely afford to pay yourself.  It gets better once you own 3-4 locations but then you are just getting by and have invested some $5M.  Terrible business model to get into.

I say most as there are some very profitable franchises, (Chik Fil-a) but the corporation is still taking the 15-20% off the top.

 
 
 
Sparty On
12.1.7  Sparty On  replied to  DRHunk @12.1.6    one month ago

I don't know.   I know a lot of very well off franchise holders.   In fact, i can't think of one that i would consider middle class or lower.   All live upper middle or higher from what i've seen.

 
 
 
MUVA
12.1.8  MUVA  replied to  DRHunk @12.1.5    one month ago

I'm running a business that is 88 years old we pay what people are worth and I decide what that is.People in the real world don't start businesses to supply jobs they do it to make money.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @12.1.8    one month ago

Spot on.   Left on its own, a business is a machine designed to increase profits (and increasing market share).   All other factors are choices made by the owners.   For example, owners might choose to sponsor community initiatives to 'give back'.   They might voluntarily incur additional costs to be environmentally responsible.   ...

 
 
 
Tacos!
12.1.10  Tacos!  replied to  MUVA @12.1.8    one month ago
a business that is 88 years old

With the taxes on inheritance and wealth that Sanders and Warren propose, I have to wonder whether it will continue to be possible for small businesses to exist for that long in the future.

 
 
 
DRHunk
12.1.11  DRHunk  replied to  Sparty On @12.1.7    one month ago

hence the "there are some that are still profitable"  and I know those owners you know also own more than one franchise. I know many successful franchisors also, all own upwards of 4-6 franchises to be "well off" and pay as little as possible to their employees and under staff all their restaurants.  They are just not my cup of tea, not enough return, very volatile.  Creating your own business and cultivating your own ideas is where the real money is.

 
 
 
Sparty On
12.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  DRHunk @12.1.11    one month ago

Meh ..... in our business its that people who start new businesses fail to grasp how much hard work it really is.   People start new businesses and think they are going to get by working a 40 hour work week or less.

Very few new businesses will survive with that mindset.

I bet its much the same with franchise businesses

 
 
 
Sparty On
12.2  Sparty On  replied to  DRHunk @12    one month ago

Yeah buddy, i'm all in for the free shit.  

Although i am a bit skeptical since i'm still waiting on my Obama phone and that was promised years ago.

Bernie isn't lying like Obama lied..... is he?

 
 
 
Sparty On
14  Sparty On    one month ago

Too many people think they are going to get a free lunch and there is no such thing.   Someone has to pay for it.  And It's also ironic that so many think "fair share" means higher taxes on those just above their own pay scale.   The concept of being okay with getting something, simply because someone else is going to pay for it, is the epitome of wrong-minded and a non starter IMO.

In my perfect world ALL employers would pay ALL the economic burden of their own employees.   Not the government and certainly not only "rich" people.   That means employers would be responsible for all employee health and welfare including health care and pensions.

The party (customer) using the employers services being provided ultimately bears the burden in this plan.   Right where it belongs in my opinion.   But many people are not going to like that very much because it means a lot of costs of services would go up.   Some significantly.

A more truly fair minded system does not exists IMO.

 
 
 
TᵢG
14.1  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @14    one month ago
In my perfect world ALL employers would pay ALL the economic burden of their own employees.  

The closest thing to that might be workplace democracy wherein the employees (workers) are all owners of the business and participate (democratically, albeit mostly indirect) in business decisions.   Here the employees have a highly vested interest in the business.   The better the business does, the better they do.   This model is starting to get its legs, but it will grow (if it continues) at a generational pace because this requires societal evolution (which is very slow).

 
 
 
Sparty On
14.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @14.1    one month ago
The closest thing to that might be workplace democracy wherein the employees (workers) are all owners of the business and participate (democratically, albeit mostly indirect) in business decisions.

I disagree.   Main reason in our case being most of my people are very good at what they do but their understand of what it takes to successfully run a business that utilizes people who are very good at what they do, is very sophomoric.   And i don't mean that in a bad way.   For the most part they simply don't have the experience or business savvy to do so.   They are experts in the doing, not the managing.    Not everyone can master those two very different things.   Yeah most of them think they can, some can, some even leave and start their own similar business because they think they can and there's a reason the majority of them are back looking for their job back in a year or two.   There is a lot more to it than meets the eye and most fail because of it.

   Here the employees have a highly vested interest in the business.   The better the business does, the better they do.   This model is starting to get its legs, but it will grow (if it continues) at a generational pace because this requires societal evolution (which is very slow).

Employee owned businesses are nothing new.   I for one would love doing that if it was a viable option for us but for multiple reasons, one of them mentioned above, it just wouldn't work.   Now if a mandate came down that everyone in our business was on an even playing field and ALL had to encumber ALL of their employees health and welfare costs, we would be cooking with gas.   But as i said earlier, it probably will never happen because the effect would cause consumer costs for many products to go up.   Other cost like healthcare premiums and such would go down and/or go away completely but again there is no free lunch.   That money will get spent elsewhere.

The biggest reason that will never happen is because it will tend to punish lower pay scale people the most since they are the one catching the most breaks via our current  system.   That would stop to a great degree if most consumer products go up in price.    They will be the hardest hit with those every day higher prices

 
 
 
TᵢG
14.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @14.1.1    one month ago
Main reason in our case being most of my people are very good at what they do but their understand of what it takes to successfully run a business that utilizes people who are very good at what they do, is very sophomoric.  

That is an entirely different point.   You talked about the business covering healthcare, etc. for employees.   I pointed out to you that workplace democracy businesses are inherently oriented in that fashion.    I am not suggesting that USA businesses can or even should convert and certainly not suggesting that employees can simply invert into co-owner / managers.   That is not realistic; this would be evolutionary at a generational pace. 

I will say, however, that this is possible over time as evidenced by coops like Mondragon.   But to do this, the people cannot think like most workers in the USA.

Employee owned businesses are nothing new. 

Why are you bringing this up?   Again, the viability today of this form of organization in the USA was never my point.  

 
 
 
Comrade Cameron
15  Comrade Cameron    one month ago

Bernie is doing well because this is the truth that is taught to America in schools starting at Elementary school to the University. We own education and we control the truth on social media. I realize the economy is temporarily good and that is all it is temporary. 

The mistakes by the greedy and corrupt will once again tank our economy as they always do. Even if Bernie doesn't rise now, we will raise his ideology in the next ten years. We are ten years away from an electorate that knows the truth.

 
 
 
Sparty On
15.1  Sparty On  replied to  Comrade Cameron @15    one month ago
Bernie is doing well because this is the truth that is taught to America in schools starting at Elementary school to the University.

Lol ..... truth?

Don't hold your breath for your indoctrination to take hold.   You might be turning blue in the face.

Dasvidaniya comrade .....

 
 
 
TᵢG
15.2  TᵢG  replied to  Comrade Cameron @15    one month ago

What is the truth of which you speak?

If you do not define that word, your entire comment has no meaning.

Even if Bernie doesn't rise now, we will raise his ideology in the next ten years. 

Sanders' ideology is statism.   He believes in a big 'benevolent' government.    He believes that the disparity in wealth in the USA is wrong and sees government as the agent to mitigate this through taxation and regulation.   He is a social democrat.

Is that what you think is his ideology or do you have something else in mind?

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Donald J. Trump Fan #1
Sparty On
pat wilson
The Magic Eight Ball
CB
bbl-1


78 visitors