Here's Why so Many People Like Bernie

a reply to: Xtrozero
I would have NIGHTMARES of dragging a stupid "Maynard" type across their desk for some political crap they were trying to teach my kids(Don't have /want any)

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: deadlyhope

So, restricting Commercial Banks from doing business in a manner they see fit is all well and good.

So much for capitalism and a free market.

Any chance he is for something that is an actual danger like abolishing the Federal Reserve?

I think it's more about seperating commercial banking and investment banking.

Non regulated capitalism and a totally free market never existed.

He's for auditing the Fed.

a reply to: mOjOm

Good luck finding "untouchables" to oversee that little deal.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

What do you mean by that??

a reply to: mOjOm

To crack the most CROOKED industry ever created ,would require a watchdog or things wouldn't change.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

To defend people from other people.

I would not put it past our police force and army to actually march on the citizens, should they be told it's somehow justified.

Our 2nd amendment rights were created in the first place to ensure we could resist tyrannical government.

It is to ensure we can kill to save our way of life, so yes.

We are meant to have in our possession the means to dispose of any threat. Including other humans with automatic rifles.

a reply to: amazing

How about Denmark? That's the main model of Sanders platform.

The people of Denmark just voted a center-right political party that advocates free-market and the reduction of welfare-state policies. That, to me, says quite a bit.

a reply to: TheTory

Really? Free market? Are you sure about that? Because the free market is bullsh*t. Even if you believe, unlike I, that it is a "good" thing to possess, it is just as feasibly attainable as the "Utopia" I am so often ridiculed for desiring to pursue. A totally free market does not exist on this planet, and will never exist on this planet.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Really? Free market? Are you sure about that? Because the free market is bullsh*t. Even if you believe, unlike I, that it is a "good" thing to possess, it is just as feasibly attainable as the "Utopia" I am so often ridiculed for desiring to pursue. A totally free market does not exist on this planet, and will never exist on this planet.

What's with you guys and "No Pure Socialism" or "no totally free market". No pure social justice, no true democracy, no true equality and no "totally" happy society has existed either, but I don't hear you calling them bullsh*t. That's because we're speaking about ideas. Yes, ideas are a little different than reality. Your argument is also bullsh*t.

Maybe if I repeat what I say, you won't evade my entire argument again:

The people of Denmark just voted a center-right political party that advocates free-market and the reduction of welfare-state policies. That, to me, says quite a bit.

Not to mention, Denmark doesn't have a minimum wage. It has really low corporate taxes. If Denmark is the model, I cannot wait to see how it goes over when Bernie tries to implement it and realizes he made a little fib.

a reply to: TheTory

Denmark has equal or higher top marginal income tax rates. Not sure what Bernie is doing with corporate taxes but you tell me if you know yourself.

Also, things always change. The fact that Denmark is doing what they are only enhances the pro Bernie argument. No system can go too far right or too far left, too toward democratic socialism nor too far past capitalism and stay as successful.

Denmark learned that they need to adapt for the times.. Not hold onto the ways it was done a few years ago.

For America to do better, we have to do the same.

Is Bernie the exact and perfect answer and savior? Maybe not..

But he is a sign of change, and if we take your example of Denmark and how they saw a necessity to change, we should follow suit.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

It was set forth for the people to be armed. Very simple.

a reply to: mOjOm

And I ask again, where does the Govt get off thinking it gets to regulate private business?

Aside from people thinking Govt is there to be an equalizer in life, which it isn't, at what point is Govt interference too much?

a reply to: macman

Riddle me this...where does the government get its power, why would any corporations get tax cuts and subsidies and others not, what is the Golden rule?

He who has the gold makes the rules...

Business needs to be cut down, period. If you want a less encumbering government, get rid of the corrupt agendas and such.. Cut their extra income.

Anyone who thinks the problem is only business or government are ignorant. They are in it together, and collectively ensuring their own way of life while ensuring we have a different way of life.

a reply to: deadlyhope

What tax cuts does one company get and not one else get?


And I have been very staunch on my backing of removing tax cuts and installing a flat tax.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: amazing

How about Denmark? That's the main model of Sanders platform.

The people of Denmark just voted a center-right political party that advocates free-market and the reduction of welfare-state policies. That, to me, says quite a bit.

True, but then again, most people in Denmark would tell you there country is a Free market/Capitalist country with good social programs. I think most people miss the fact that in the USA, we have bad social programs, and In my opinion Sanders would make them better. Example would be how our government funds and subsidizes colleges and the grants they give out every year and the student loan debt that some of our citizens are saddled with it would make economic sense to pay for some college outright just as we do K-12. It would probably cost our federal government less money. Obama care...a good, easy single payer option would replace it and save our federal government billions. That kind of thing.

a reply to: macman

Well, perhaps when the Gov. decided to bail them out at a price of 700 billion dollars when they almost crashed the economy. They consider that they are no longer separate from each other.

After all, if they were actually a private business they would have collapsed like any other private business without having the Gov. step in and save them.

That's just one example off the top of my head anyway.

So back to you with a couple questions. Where does private business get off thinking the gov. and tax payers owe them for their mistakes???

At what point is unregulated bad banking practices the responsibility of anyone but those banks who chose to follow them??

a reply to: mOjOm

So, we are to the final point of understanding the issue.

What we have is a corrupt Govt. And handing a corrupt anything more power is not the answer to correct the problem.

Actually, moving in the exact opposite direction from more Govt power is what is needed.


And I think the bailouts to banks was against everything that the country was designed and built upon.

a reply to: macman

We have corruption in gov., in private business, banking, military, in education, in religion, etc. In fact I challenge you to name any institution where corruption cannot be found. Because I've looked and can find none as of yet.

I do agree that the bailouts shouldn't have happened. However I also think had we not removed the regulations that were in place to start with which allowed them to happen would have kept those bailouts and the crisis itself from ever happening. IMO it is far better to stop the problems before they ever happen rather than try and fix them after they do.

a reply to: macman

I am all for the flat tax.

But... Cruz is the main guy with this idea, and he's too much a "Hobby lobby" act type of guy for me.

I'd rather roll dice with the economy, rather than have a nation where any religion is illegally propped up, or any other religion squashed by the government.

Just curious. Does the anti-Sanders crowd support privatizing K-12? Did you go to a private school? Or were you a 'commie leech'?