Bernie Sanders is a nothing.

a reply to: introvert

What needs should be provided? Food water, shelter? What?

Ok businesses are part of the problem what's the solution?

Public good is socialism. Ok again what is the definition of socialism and what constitutes public good? Firemen, roads public good. Who deciedes what is public good?


You're welcome

a reply to: introvert

A family of 4 making less than $50,000/year pays zero net income taxes and, as they go downward from $50,000, actually enter negative taxation territory and are paid from the taxes I pay. You can call that fair, you can call that socialist, you can call it whatever you want, I call it horsesnip. 10% flat tax across the board, zero exemptions, zero kick backs, zero handouts in exchange for votes... we need it yesterday, but I'll happily settle for it beginning in 2017.

I can't name any countries in the arctic regions I have no intention of ever moving away from, no. In general, UAE, Monaco, Bermuda, and the Bahamas all have no income taxes. I just have no interest in living in the tropics or desert. But by God I can do whatever I need to do to try and make it a reality where I do live, ya? Currently that entails supporting flat tax proponents and deriding increased and scaled tax proponents.

Um, sorry, you have me confused with someone else. I'm getting zero handouts, benefits, or subsidies. I have no problem paying taxes to defend the country, pave the roads, educate the kids, and maintain trade routes... I just want to see all the rest of the crap we're wasting money on abolished. Nowhere in my list of priorities is pretending to be Robbin Hood or gladhanding for someone who has a Messianic Loxley Complex.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I don't know. I do have a problem paying for those things when I can see that the money I spend for them is being wasted.

Education is one of my big beefs currently. Can you honestly say the money we pay is getting any bang for its buck? And it isn't like we aren't paying on par with other industrialized nations, in fact, we're paying more than most who end up getting better results.

I do prefer him getting attention over Trump or Hillary for that matter. But I have wondered the same thing. It seems those who have backed Paul are now on Bernie's side. Even though their stances on Government could not be more different. Bernie stabbed Ron in the back and bailed out. Not worth my vote IMHO.

a reply to: ketsuko

*sigh*
The problem is less complicated than the solutions where education is concerned. First and foremost, the USA needs to be made a right to work nation. Unions can be allowed, but the policies which mandate "to be a public school teacher, you must belong to the teachers' union" must be torn to shreds. If you continually pump out failing students, as a teacher, you should be fired and replaced. Bottom line. I give not a slang word for fornication if you've been a teacher for 20 years... nobody's job should be steel belted simply because they're senior staff. That's solution #1 and I'm fairly certain it would turn around our education system within a few years' time like magic if applied. Either get results or get the pink slip and move over for someone more qualified and motivated than yourself. Step two: Acknowledge that not everyone needs or wants a general education and modify the system to stop wasting students' and teachers' time alongside taxpayers' dollars. By the time most kids are in high school, they at least know whether they want to go to college or work a trade. Expand the trade school system in America and, alongside that, start tailoring education plans to the goals of the students. If you've got a 15 year old who doesn't give a rat's ass about Spanish and WW2 History but knows he wants to be an auto mechanic, does it not make sense to maximize his 3 remaining years of education by getting him into auto mechanic training classes so when he graduates he will already be nearly to his certification process and walk out the trade school doors job-ready in a field that is always hiring? Same goes for college. We need to eliminate this asinine concept that college should always serve as some sort of great expanse of personal growth and exploration and provide a path for people who are zero BS goal setters that just want their engineering, chemistry, pre-med, or business degree so they can grow up and start making money. Those are the smart money investments anyway, because they are the ones who not only hammer through their student loans, they are also the ones who tend to end up in higher tax brackets, leech the least off the system, and "pay back" the investment of their education many times over.

It isn't an "enlightened" approach, but I'll be damned if "enlightenment" hasn't cost the country way more than it can afford and failed to produce any tangible benefit to the middle class of America.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think that's one step. I don't think any union has any business being bigger than the entity it bargains against. Two teachers' unions for all the districts in the US? How is that not monopolistic?

But there are other issues too that need to be addressed.

a reply to: ketsuko

Public unions are a clear conflict of interest, ESPECIALLY since the SCOTUS ruling on Citizen's United.

-Unions fund politicians
-Politicians ensure unions get what they want, including huge minimum wage increases and redistributions
-Unions get stronger
-Politicians and their parties have nice little collective of "kept voters" that pressure members to vote a particular way.

That's the definition of conflict of interest and, allegedly, it is illegal in the US.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Teikiatsu

I am a socialist and I know full well about socialism. What you are portraying is the ultimate extreme. I don;t agree with that whatsoever.

You don't have to agree with the extremes to believe in the basic principles of socialism.

Yep, utopian. Looks great on paper, fails miserably when put into practice.

You mean except in the nations where socialism does work?

Since there are none, sure.

Be sure to tell that to these nations.
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Sweden
Norway
New Zealand
Belgium

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: gladtobehere

History shows that incumbent vice-presidents always win the electorate.

History does not show that.

Nixon lost to JFK in 1960.
Humphrey lost to Nixon in 1968.
Gore lost to Bush in 2000.

All were incumbent VP's.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: buster2010

You mean except in the nations where socialism does work?

Along with all their poverty and massive debt and micro-managing authoritarianism.

How about Sweden with one of the highest standard of living in the world? Not to mention when the banks tried their pyramid scheme there they took over the banking system not give them hundreds of billions like we did here in the states.

a reply to: buster2010

There are no true socialist nations, buster. China, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba are damned close, but they all fell into authoritarian-capitalist ruled dictatorships.

Socialism is nothing more than the transformation of a free market economy to a centralized authority, where a few beauracrats, politicians and CEOs rule over everyone else. Why people prefer dictatorships to freedom is beyond my comprehension.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: gladtobehere

Dont get me wrong, if you support big government, socialist liberals, hes your man.

Speaking on behalf of everyone else, no thank you.

Why do you believe that us socialists believe in big government? Actually, we also believe in efficient, restricted government. The difference is where we apply the money that is needed to run government and provide services.

Is it better to spend billions, or trillions, on a massive security organization that does not make us more secure or wars that have taken millions of lives, or would it be better to lower taxes and spend some of that money on a universal healthcare system?

It's about priorities.

You are correct. In fact most 'socialists' are very 'conservative' fiscally and would rather 'avoid' problems rather then 'cure' them. The cost (to the taxpayer) up front to maintain and enhance systems is much less then the costs of fixing broken systems and we can see examples of this principle throughout US society in physical and social arenas.

Introvert above show us a very plain example - avoiding making enemies is much less expensive over time then 'defending agaist', I would say mostly imaginary attacks.

However, the wealthly that own most of the stock in large corporations, get much more revenue from 'fixing' problems after they're happened rather then working towards and providing sound preventative measures.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: buster2010

There are no true socialist nations, buster. China, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba are damned close, but they all fell into authoritarian-capitalist ruled dictatorships.

Perhaps it would help if you were to study up on the different forms of socialism. Yes those nations are closer to being communist than socialist just as capitalist systems like the one here in the states is marching headlong into a fascist regime.

a reply to: buster2010

LOL

Sweden is deep in debt.

Don't believe all the LaLa Malarkey.

They have their share of poverty and crime failure too.

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Socialism is nothing more than the transformation of a free market economy to a centralized authority, where a few beauracrats, politicians and CEOs rule over everyone else. Why people prefer dictatorships to freedom is beyond my comprehension.

This is untrue and anyone who had looked in to the subject at all would know that.

The varieties and structures of socialism are vast.

You are mistaking socialism for the authoritarian and central economic control of the 'so-called' communist countries of yesteryear. Even China has decentralized many aspects of 'control' and economics in recent decades. And modern democratic socialism is extremely dencentralized in all aspects.

Your ignorance is astounding.

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Socialism is nothing more than the transformation of a free market economy to a centralized authority, where a few beauracrats, politicians and CEOs rule over everyone else. Why people prefer dictatorships to freedom is beyond my comprehension.

This is untrue and anyone who had looked in to the subject at all would know that.

The varieties and structures of socialism are vast.

You are mistaking socialism for the authoritarian and central economic control of the 'so-called' communist countries of yesteryear. Even China has decentralized many aspects of 'control' and economics in recent decades. And modern democratic socialism is extremely dencentralized in all aspects.

Your ignorance is astounding and not entirely your own fault as many are not exposed to economic truth just capitalist dogma.

a reply to: gladtobehere

Bernie Sanders is Teh Chosen One 2.0.

Sanders is The Bilderberg's Choice

a reply to: gladtobehere

Bernie Sanders will be our next President, so get used to it. The "free market" capitalism / libertarianism you all claim to support is the greatest MYTH ever perpetrated on humanity - there is no such thing as a free market, there are only different people who make the rules. As a Democratic Socialist - which is very different from a Socialist (see www.dsausa.org...), Bernie believes that people should have a larger role in deciding how the market functions, so that the economy is there to serve the people and not vice-versa. I remember 1980 when Reagan won by a landslide, a far right Conservative winning NY, NJ, MA and every other blue state except Minnesota - it was a blowout. And now the country is ready for a blowout in the other direction.
So hold onto your tinfoil hats, it's going to be a bumpy ride for y'all.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

Even China has decentralized many aspects of 'control' and economics in recent decades.

You can show some real details of those China policies right?