What's wrong with Sanders?

[SharpArrowhead]

I hate to say it but if he were a bit younger, he'd really be a contender. Hate that there's age bias in this country where youth is celebrated above all else.

 

[kiwiman127]

What's wrong with Sanders?


He thinks socialism works.

Anybody that dumb must be kept far away from the Presidency, or any elected office.

A major characteristic of the socialism he supports, is theft and redistribution of stolen goods.

Spoken like someone totally clueless about the real world.
Capitalism worked great when it was focused on producing commodities. Wages steadily climbed and workers were rewarded for their productivity. Because everyone was getting a piece of the pie, America flourish and had a strong and stable economy.
Then things changed in the early 80s. Workers wages stopped reflecting their contribution to the profits or their productivity. The profits went to the select few and productivity went u rewarded. Offshoring jobs started to become the norm. The middle class started it's decline. All of a sudden, capitalism didn't work so well. Our consumer driven economy became quite fragile. Inequality started to effect millions of workers and their inability to consistently contribute to the consumer driven economy because of shrinking expendable money.
The IMF, The World Bank and most economist blame income inequality for our fragile economy.
The current model of capitalism isn't working for a large majority of Americans. This is what Sanders is talking about and this is why he has been getting the largest crowds and not only in Blue States.
Most.economist think we should go back to the form of capitalism that made America strong. Sanders has opened up the discussion and most Americans are fed up with the current status quo.
What. The Sanders haters are defendIng is a system that has failed America.
I say we go back to the system that made America great and that benefitted all of America.

Yeah things were working just great in the 1970s under Carter.
Income inequality has grown under Obama and his socialist policies. It will get far worse the more of that we do.
You just really arent very bright or well informed are you? This is one of the advantages of being in your 50s. I was there. I saw what happened.

Rabbi, I am really hesitant to have any further discussions with you on these boards.
Why? Because you are like other ideologues who lack the ability to be objective. In your very narrow mind, your ideology never does any wrong. You spend all day,seven days a week pointing fingers away from your ideology. You don't have the balls to look inwardly. This trait isn't just the trait of the right but also the left.
In the past you have denied that the banks defrauded customers, that a good infrastructure is highly important in the US being competitive on the world's business stage and that unemployment numbers play a huge role in determining the state of an economy. These examples are just a few of the many issues that I have unquestionably proved you wrong, because you trusted your ideology over reality.
Now to the subject of our little discussion.
First of all, I have frequently stated that Obama hasn't been a good president and just this week, I stated Carter wasn't a good president.
Now that I got that out of the way, let's deal with the reality that income inequality thrived under both Democratic and Republican presidents and congresses. It's a fact. Go ahead and Google "history of flat wages in America", there are more than enough facts at your finger tips that prove my point.
You say I'm not too bright and uninformed, if that's the case, what does that say about you?
The difference between you and I is that I consistently use linked facts, you consistently use unlinked talking points. That is why I consistently look like the smart one and you come off looking foolish.

You know, you play the aggrieved victim when your posts are shown to be ignorant and shallow.
Reagan did not fuck everything up. Things were fucked up before Reagan got into office. That's why he got elected. had you been there you might have remembered it, like I do.
Income inequality has become an issue only under Obama. Sure, you can find some commie rag or other talking about this in 2006, but basically no one cared. Because the UE rate was under 5%. Anyone who wanted to work could.But under Obama's absurd policies UE is stuck at high rates and we have slow growth, the worst in post war history.
These are simply facts. You cannot argue facts so you must accuse me of being partisan. You are wrong.

There was a thread awhile back about what posters had the least personality on USMB and not surprisingly your name came up. One of the the more intelligent conservatives thought not only do you lack a personality but also that you were a paid hack and whoever was paying, wasn't getting their money's worth
Anyway, you are well known as a hypernon-partisan.
Secondly, do you think you could disprove all the published economists that have clearly stated thatduringthe Reagan years the concept of flat wages really took off as facts prove. Go ahead, use the Google search I suggested, "history of flat wages in America". If you have the balls and ambition,you 'd find a multitude of facts showing that Dems and Repubs both oversaw flat wages and increased income inequality, including Reagan. I guarantee I am correct.
Thanks for wasting my time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I know what is wrong is him. He is just a communist. Really, his campaign is full of typical communist agenda and he doesn't even try to hide it. He wants to reduce wealth inequality by equalizing poor and rich people, make America even more racially diverse, give free money to every poor person and create more jobs. So that means that he wants the government to control every aspect of American life. I can't believe people are going to vote for him.

So is Hillary - so what's the diff?

 

[The Rabbi]

What's wrong with Sanders?


He thinks socialism works.

Anybody that dumb must be kept far away from the Presidency, or any elected office.

A major characteristic of the socialism he supports, is theft and redistribution of stolen goods.

Spoken like someone totally clueless about the real world.
Capitalism worked great when it was focused on producing commodities. Wages steadily climbed and workers were rewarded for their productivity. Because everyone was getting a piece of the pie, America flourish and had a strong and stable economy.
Then things changed in the early 80s. Workers wages stopped reflecting their contribution to the profits or their productivity. The profits went to the select few and productivity went u rewarded. Offshoring jobs started to become the norm. The middle class started it's decline. All of a sudden, capitalism didn't work so well. Our consumer driven economy became quite fragile. Inequality started to effect millions of workers and their inability to consistently contribute to the consumer driven economy because of shrinking expendable money.
The IMF, The World Bank and most economist blame income inequality for our fragile economy.
The current model of capitalism isn't working for a large majority of Americans. This is what Sanders is talking about and this is why he has been getting the largest crowds and not only in Blue States.
Most.economist think we should go back to the form of capitalism that made America strong. Sanders has opened up the discussion and most Americans are fed up with the current status quo.
What. The Sanders haters are defendIng is a system that has failed America.
I say we go back to the system that made America great and that benefitted all of America.

Yeah things were working just great in the 1970s under Carter.
Income inequality has grown under Obama and his socialist policies. It will get far worse the more of that we do.
You just really arent very bright or well informed are you? This is one of the advantages of being in your 50s. I was there. I saw what happened.

Rabbi, I am really hesitant to have any further discussions with you on these boards.
Why? Because you are like other ideologues who lack the ability to be objective. In your very narrow mind, your ideology never does any wrong. You spend all day,seven days a week pointing fingers away from your ideology. You don't have the balls to look inwardly. This trait isn't just the trait of the right but also the left.
In the past you have denied that the banks defrauded customers, that a good infrastructure is highly important in the US being competitive on the world's business stage and that unemployment numbers play a huge role in determining the state of an economy. These examples are just a few of the many issues that I have unquestionably proved you wrong, because you trusted your ideology over reality.
Now to the subject of our little discussion.
First of all, I have frequently stated that Obama hasn't been a good president and just this week, I stated Carter wasn't a good president.
Now that I got that out of the way, let's deal with the reality that income inequality thrived under both Democratic and Republican presidents and congresses. It's a fact. Go ahead and Google "history of flat wages in America", there are more than enough facts at your finger tips that prove my point.
You say I'm not too bright and uninformed, if that's the case, what does that say about you?
The difference between you and I is that I consistently use linked facts, you consistently use unlinked talking points. That is why I consistently look like the smart one and you come off looking foolish.

You know, you play the aggrieved victim when your posts are shown to be ignorant and shallow.
Reagan did not fuck everything up. Things were fucked up before Reagan got into office. That's why he got elected. had you been there you might have remembered it, like I do.
Income inequality has become an issue only under Obama. Sure, you can find some commie rag or other talking about this in 2006, but basically no one cared. Because the UE rate was under 5%. Anyone who wanted to work could.But under Obama's absurd policies UE is stuck at high rates and we have slow growth, the worst in post war history.
These are simply facts. You cannot argue facts so you must accuse me of being partisan. You are wrong.

There was a thread awhile back about what posters had the least personality on USMB and not surprisingly your name came up. One of the the more intelligent conservatives thought not only do you lack a personality but also that you were a paid hack and whoever was paying, wasn't getting their money's worth
Anyway, you are well known as a hypernon-partisan.
Secondly, do you think you could disprove all the published economists that have clearly stated thatduringthe Reagan years the concept of flat wages really took off as facts prove. Go ahead, use the Google search I suggested, "history of flat wages in America". If you have the balls and ambition,you 'd find a multitude of facts showing that Dems and Repubs both oversaw flat wages and increased income inequality, including Reagan. I guarantee I am correct.
Thanks for wasting my time.

You fail to answer the objections and engage in character assasination. That isnt argument, dear boy.
The fact is that GDP growth under Reagan far exceeded his predecessor, Carter, and is way and above what its been under Obama.
First you want to talk about income inequality and when that doesnt pan out you switch to flat wages. You are a dope.

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

I hate to say it but if he were a bit younger, he'd really be a contender. Hate that there's age bias in this country where youth is celebrated above all else.

Well he'd better be younger at least because people would consider him as mentally sane. And such official person as the President of the US must be good-looking, that's the point why Sanders has no chance.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It kills me, literally kills me that people equate Democratic socialism, which I wouldn't even equate to socialism in general with communism. Everything, the entire thread is irrelevant purely because you felt that was the right word. Let me throw some more dumb word equivalencies in there.

Democracy= dictatorship
Capitalism = libertarianism
Republic = monarchy

I'm sure you have heard the differences between communism, socialism, and Democratic socialism on many threads, and you just sort of blow over it and go, "well nuh uh its communism cuz merica". I'm sure you have heard people say that we already ARE a Democratic socialist state with many programs, but still.... Murica.

I am sure you have pointed out time and time again, look at Cuba! Look at the Soviet Union! Look at Greece! And while people may inform you with a simple "well, except for Greece, those other countries are communist and other socialist countries in south america were poor to begin with, however, look at Norway, sweden, Denmark and other Democratic socialist nations that expanded their social programs beyond ours and have better economies and lower poverty rates and better education". And these arguments, once more go ignored because again and I must reiterate "Merica".

Or perhaps the funniest argument to me is they are distributing their sweet oil profits around an thats why they can afford to do that, but once those wells are dry, those countries are in for it! As though America is not the wealthiest nation in the world, as though Denmark is rich beyond Americas hopes and dreams.

Our production in natural gas and oil has never been higher, our corporations profits have never been higher. We won the cold war by OUTSPENDING the Soviet Union. We have more billionaires per capita than ANY NATION ON EARTH. And the really great argument is that if you tax those poor, poor billionaires, they'll jump ship and leave America.

Guess what US tax code works differently than other countries in one big way, you pay income tax if you are a CITIZEN no matter where you live! They can't get away!

Oh, but those are our job creators, right? They need that money to provide us with all the jobs they just spew out. Guess what? They have more money than ever and aren't making new jobs! *collective righty gasp of anger*.

And those " communist ideas" that Bernie is advocating, free healthcare for one, would make our spending per capita on health care half! Because it's more efficient than our for profit health insurance. Oh, but I could I know that? Because we are spending double what those Democratic socialist countries spend per capita! Must be all that sweet, sweet Denmark oil, I mean why go to Saudi Arabia when Denmark is pumping out so much oil.

And free college tuition, he dares! He dares to think a more educated population will help the economy by filling high paying technical jobs that our economy is moving too? That perhaps poor families living off of welfare could go to college and improve their place in life? No sir, not in my America!

And how could we even afford all this? Even with taxing our precious job creators that's still alot of money! What, he thinks auditing the DOD, the most wasteful government agency that spends hundreds of billions at a time on projects will help anything? Or getting out of that six trillion dollar hole in the middle East. Or ending that war on drugs so we stop imprisoning more people per capita than Soviet fucking Russia did?

Those prisoners found with weed on them need to be in jail! They're dangerous, at least, they might be when they get out. Money well spent, more kids in jail, less kids in school. I know, it costs more to jail someone for a year than provide an education for a year, but dammit! This is America!

And while we're at it, keep big money in politics! It's so hard to figure out who's policies I like, just let billionaires buy out the candidate THEY like and have them play ads day and night till we vote for them. This is America, where everything's for sale, and your damn right that includes our government!

This is all very tragic. It's America bashing. You libs have turned this into a participation recreational activity..
You look to the Scandinavian nations as though they were absolute in utopia.
These are SMALL countries with largely homogeneous populations. The people in each have high conscience of duty. Meaning, to be unproductive and not working is shameful.
There is no entitlement mentality.
BTW, to say Denmark or any of these other nations you tout have "better" economies than the US is laughable.
In anyh event. these socialist countries have tax rates that are confiscatory.
Their so called free medical care is nothing of the sort. In fact when all the taxation is factored in, it may be more expensive than that of the US. Or darned close. The problem facing these countries is unemployment is rising. Denmark and France have a particularly high unemployment rate among younger people.
France's is 23.6%
Denmark's is 13.3% of those 16-24 and over 12% of those 25-29. All of which are on the public dole.
Denmark’s rapidly growing youth unemployment must come down — Nordic Labour Journal
http://nowbase.org/~/media/Projekt ...tioner/Andre/Youth Unemployment.ashx......see PAGE 17 in the link....
In fact the Euro Zone's overall unemployment rate 11.5% is nearly double the US U-3 rate of around 6%.
That's a lot of people no longer producing, which means they are living off the generous social safety nets which are being funded by fewer and fewer people.
Again, socialism stops working when a country runs out of people and things to tax.
BTW....Americans living and working overseas are NOT taxed by the US government until they repatriate.
I have two acquaintances who are professional athletes working in Europe who are NOT taxed by the US government on earnings made in foreign countries.