Trump vs. Bernie

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

If they are treating the people who work for them like shit, they should be thrown off a fucking cliff and run over with a Range Rover. Twice.

It happens all the time, and any attempt to prevent it is called Communism.

 

[Jaguar]

It happens all the time, and any attempt to prevent it is called Communism.

One person could cry out "Communism" and you'd claim a million are doing it. It's how you roll.

 

[Stigmata]

Id actually disagree, being someone who pays out of pocket consistantly. If you compare the price of healthcare, to the cost of a car. Healthcare is a lot cheaper. Its cheaper than student loans at times. All three have a significant impact on your life. I pay on average 50$ for healthcare, as a copay. I have a total of 150$ of outstanding debt. I have recieved numerous treatments, including therapy without being in debt. I had more debt at the vet, for giving my cat chemotherapy. Which was upward of 3k. But preventative care in people, is cheap as fuck out of pocket. Its only when you wait for the ER that it is expensive. Dont wait for the ER, and it isnt expensive for the average healthy adult.

The problem.is having a system for critically ill, that suits healthy people. Why isn it so hard to make multiple systems?

Lol, what? Does your experience now reflect that of millions of other Americans? I take it you haven't had a serious medical condition. Have a heart attack and see how far $150 bucks will take you.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

One person could cry out "Communism" and you'd claim a million are doing it. It's how you roll.

Ok, so because you don't do it, that means nobody does?

- - - Updated - - -

Lol, what? Does your experience now reflect that of millions of other Americans? I take it you haven't had a serious medical condition. Have a heart attack and see how far $150 bucks will take you.

Hell, if you break a bone, you have no choice but to go the emergency room. I'm not going to wait until I can get an appointment scheduled for my broken wrist, that's for sure.

 

[Jaguar]

Ok, so because you don't do it, that means nobody does?

Ok, so because one person does it, that means everybody does? I could shoot down everything you have to bitch about and you still wouldn't be happy. Why? You don't want to be happy. Chew on that one.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

LOL.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Ok, so because one person does it, that means everybody does? I could shoot down everything you have to bitch about and you still wouldn't be happy. Why? You don't want to be happy. Chew on that one.

I hate freedom. Bald eagles are the only birds I loathe. We should have let them go extinct, except that would require not restraining the free market, so it was a huge dilemma.

 

[Jaguar]

Florida Dems in uproar after Sanders’ Cuba comments - POLITICO

 

[Maou]

Lol, what? Does your experience now reflect that of millions of other Americans? I take it you haven't had a serious medical condition. Have a heart attack and see how far $150 bucks will take you.

I am talking about healthy, if you read. I think inurance shoukd be tiered, so healthy people are not paying for shit they do not need. I don't feel it right to foot the bill to the non-sick people. If you want a specific insurance plan, you should have choices into its sevarity of coverage.

 

[rav3n]

To be fully honest with you I haven't registered you as a "Bernie sis".

That's because I'm not one but Sanders and Warren strike me as good antidotes to Trump's corruption, lies, fraud and other criminal activities, never mind the tearing down of democracy into a racist, fascist regime.

 

[Jonny]

It takes two to tango, and I predicted the catastrophe before it even hit when my real estate broker in Chicago told me a bunch of rookie, greedy assholes were taking out 2 and 3 mortgages to try and make a quick buck by flipping houses with shit credit scores. They had no business getting mortgages to begin with. Just because you see a pool water doesn't mean you have to take off your clothes and jump in. Show some self-control. If someone makes it easy to get a credit card, should you blame the card issuer for you racking up debt? No. Am I pleased with the bankers selling all that sub-prime paper? No. But they're not the only ones to blame. Consumers are guilty as well.

How on earth can patriotic American consumers be guilty of anything? That sort of talk could lead to some self-reflection and personal responsibility...be careful.

In all seriousness, whereabouts do you land on the economic revolution spectrum? Clearly you're no fan of Sanders, and I think, rightfully, don't want to blame successful business for all our woes. But do you not agree that income and wealth disparity is an issue that isn't just solved by the plebeians pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps? In principle, the beauty of free market capitalism is that the wealth people accumulate will be commensurate with the marginal value they bring to society. But, the first-past-the-post system we have here, coupled with money-begets-money and other market imperfections lead to certain people accumulating great sums of wealth without having added such value to society in turn. Here is something I wrote last year regarding another person's criticism of Warren's proposed wealth tax:

It isn't intended to punish success, per se. The intention is to limit the amount of power one person can amass as a result of the imperfect, unchecked functioning of the economic process.

Earlier this year, Jeff Bezos sold Amazon stock worth roughly $2.8 billion. That's $2.8 billion in liquid assets that are usable for any purpose. (Jeff Bezos still has about $100B in Amazon stock).

Assuming a person can, over the long run, safely earn 2% above inflation through a diversified investment portfolio, the cash from that sale alone provides Bezos with an annual budget of $50+ million in perpetuity for his own personal use and the use of his descendants, without him (or them) doing anything else productive ever. Amazon could collapse into nothingness, it wouldn't matter.

Those who advocate for restrictions on accumulated wealth (through a direct wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren, or through estate taxes which have been a more traditional route) believe that there shouldn't be this level of power concentrated in the hands of an individual that is so divorced from their continued efforts or value added to society.

In some frame of reference, this position could be seen as absurd. If we believe that every amount of money a person accumulates is a result of the value they add and the effort they undertook, then it can seem downright evil to take it away. If I spend 50 years toiling away on my own property to build a house for me and my descendants, why on earth should anyone be allowed to come take part of it??!?!

The problem though, is that the relationship between work >> value added >> wealth accumulated isn't always the same. You (probably), like me and most others, work and get paid for your effort on the basis of time (yearly, hourly, by the job, etc.). This relationship forms the basis for most people's intuition about the process.

Not so for the richest among us. You don't become rich through labor alone. You become rich through capital accumulation, which relies on leveraging, by implicit or explicit agreement, the labor of others. Here, the wealth you accumulate becomes a function of a more complex equation, and often the sorts of behaviors that maximize this accumulation are not as much about hard work / effort, and are not always related to value added.

In theory, a perfectly competitive environment in which we have perfect information and minimal market friction would only allocate the marginal increase in value to the business owner. In other words, Jeff Bezos would be worth only as much as the increase in the collective production of society as a result of Amazon existing.

We could theoretically determine that value by asking the question: If Amazon had never existed, what would the net impact on the economy be? Do we think there would be another online retailer (or a larger collection of retailers) performing a similar function? It is entirely possible we could be better off without Amazon.

This isn't to minimize the life Jeff Bezos devoted to founding and growing Amazon. Very few could rise to that point without hard work, dedication, and brilliance. But, I will say this: there are people who worked just as hard, were just as dedicated and brilliant, and whose efforts added more value to society who aren't billionaires or millionaires. Those who rise to that level of wealth generally do so as a result of market imperfections more so than as a result of their effort.

If one believes that accumulation of such wealth is more the product of imperfections in the free markets, then it follows naturally that they would advocate for societal mechanisms (like a wealth tax or estate tax) that reign in the consequences of those imperfections.

 

[Jaguar]

In all seriousness, whereabouts do you land on the economic revolution spectrum? Clearly you're no fan of Sanders, and I think, rightfully, don't want to blame successful business for all our woes. But do you not agree that income and wealth disparity is an issue that isn't just solved by the plebeians pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps? In principle, the beauty of free market capitalism is that the wealth people accumulate will be commensurate with the marginal value they bring to society. But, the first-past-the-post system we have here, coupled with money-begets-money and other market imperfections lead to certain people accumulating great sums of wealth without having added such value to society in turn. Here is something I wrote last year regarding another person's criticism of Warren's proposed wealth tax:

I couldn't care less about who has more money than me or what they do with it. And if I ever do, I would hope to god I hit myself over the head with a baseball bat. Seriously. I root on every budding entrepreneur I've ever met and I hope to christ they make a million or two if not a billion. To pluck me out of the ether for a game of what-have-people-done-for-society-lately will be a waste of time for both of us.

In principle, the beauty of free market capitalism is that the wealth people accumulate will be commensurate with the marginal value they bring to society.

I don't judge the relative worth of individuals to society. Thankfully.

 

[ceecee]

Lol, what? Does your experience now reflect that of millions of other Americans? I take it you haven't had a serious medical condition. Have a heart attack and see how far $150 bucks will take you.

I'm betting, greatly, that her income level allows charity in one form or another, to come into play. That can be free or much reduced services or total elimination of balance from a doctor or a hospital.

But posts like hers also show just how ignorant most are about health care and how that is leveraged by every element looking to wring as much profit out of a patient as possible. Gotta pay those lobbyists and campaign contributions.

 

[Jaguar]

Bernie Staffer Mocked Warren’s Looks, Pete’s Sexuality on Private Twitter Account
AHEAD IN THE TROLLS

Bernie Sanders Staffer Mocked Elizabeth Warren’s Looks, Pete Buttigieg’s Sexuality on Private Twitter Account


During the most recent presidential primary debate in Las Vegas, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) suggested that critiques of some of his most antagonistic online supporters are largely unfounded and unfair, proposing that some of the worst offenders might actually be Russian trolls on a mission to sow disunity in the field.

But the private Twitter account of a newly promoted campaign staffer indicates that despite his condemnation of online harassment, at least some of the Vermont senator’s most toxic support is coming from inside the house.

What happened to leading by example? Or could it be he already is . . .

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Bernie Sanders Is the Only Leading Presidential Candidate Publicly Opposing the Patriot Act

Wow, he actually wants to repeal it instead of some bullshit about "changing a few provisions." The monster. Trying to stop people like Donald Trump from being able to spy on people.

Whatever this bill’s shortcomings, it’s almost certain to face opposition not only from the Trump administration, but from the Democratic Party leadership. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) played a significant role in November in pushing Democrats to endorse a reauthorization of the Patriot Act—with no reforms—by slipping it into the funding bill. And impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who boosted his public profile by emphatically declaring that President Trump is “dangerous to this country,” was among the “yes” votes for full reauthorization of that president’s spy powers.

 

[highlander]

That's because I'm not one but Sanders and Warren strike me as good antidotes to Trump's corruption, lies, fraud and other criminal activities, never mind the tearing down of democracy into a racist, fascist regime.

Why the need for such extreme opposite policies.. Bernie is a zealot and Warren is a hostile shrew. They are the two most unelectable candidates. How about someone in the middle?

 

[rav3n]

Why the need for such extreme opposite policies.. Bernie is a zealot and Warren is a hostile shrew. They are the two most unelectable candidates. How about someone in the middle?

Firstly, the U.S. has to be rebalanced to bring it back into line with a reasonable level of inequality. Next, would you mind listing the policies of the two candidates that you disagree with, rather than your personality preferences?

 

[ceecee]

Bernie Sanders Is the Only Leading Presidential Candidate Publicly Opposing the Patriot Act

Wow, he actually wants to repeal it instead of some bullshit about "changing a few provisions." The monster. Trying to stop people like Donald Trump from being able to spy on people.

One more reason to love Bernie. And Barbara Lee.

 

[Jonny]

I couldn't care less about who has more money than me or what they do with it. And if I ever do, I would hope to god I hit myself over the head with a baseball bat. Seriously. I root on every budding entrepreneur I've ever met and I hope to christ they make a million or two if not a billion. To pluck me out of the ether for a game of what-have-people-done-for-society-lately will be a waste of time for both of us.



I don't judge the relative worth of individuals to society. Thankfully.

Sorry, I’m not sure if we’re talking about the same things. It isn’t about caring who has more or less money, per se. Nor is it about assessing relative worth. It’s about assessing our current system and laws to ensure that the outcomes aren’t out of line with intentions. Money doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and it doesn’t exist without the consent of the population. It’s a proxy for power, and concentrations of power can have profound consequences. People have the right to reflect on the current system and change it accordingly.

Anyway, I was just curious about your thoughts/preferences. But I understand that this is just a forum on the internet and have no expectation that you’d want to spend time talking with me about it. I just hoped you did. Thanks anyway.

 

[Jaguar]

Sorry, I’m not sure if we’re talking about the same things. It isn’t about caring who has more or less money, per se. Nor is it about assessing relative worth. It’s about assessing our current system and laws to ensure that the outcomes aren’t out of line with intentions. Money doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and it doesn’t exist without the consent of the population. It’s a proxy for power, and concentrations of power can have profound consequences. People have the right to reflect on the current system and change it accordingly.

I have money, but that's not power. Knowledge is power, and knowing what to do with it. But thanks for the Warren talking points.