Bernie Sanders: Act in 'Unprecedented' Ways to Thwart Republicans

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

It is fun isn't it?

 

 

It is. :-)

[Dashinka 24,591]

Just now, IAMX said:

You said it a few mins ago.. identity politics. This personality fetish the left have.. it's clear since Trump was running they just don't like his personality, everything else that results comes from this irrationality. The left were obsessed in 2008 with the apparent accomplishments they made by voting in a person due to their skin color.. no surprise they're fascinated with the skin color of another President. People with issues.  

Definitely!

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

New labels do not really mean anything is different.  Reading a puff piece from a bunch of socialists to defend a failed economic system regardless if we inject some sort of democracy into it doesn't change that.  Heck, they get to vote in Venezuela and North Korea, so are they democratic socialists?  If you want to have some sort of local, state or national referendum for every political or economic decision fine, just don't count me in.  Most intelligent people know that communism and socialism are not the same thing, but for some reason purely socialistic economic systems trend toward authoritarian single party systems as the government and the leadership class gain more and more power and the people become more dependent on them.

next time just say, 'i'm not reading that'

and to answer your question (though you could have found the answer in the link) - no venezuela and north korea aren't democratic socialist systems.

 

[Dashinka 24,591]

6 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

next time just say, 'i'm not reading that'

and to answer your question (though you could have found the answer in the link) - no venezuela and north korea aren't democratic socialist systems.

 

I did actually read it and it was quite a hoot.  I didn't say Venezuela and the DPRK were democratic socialists, I think I said they allowed their people to vote to decide things as long as the outcome is what their leaders wanted.  "Democratic socialism" is just the proverbial lipstick on a pig.

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

I didn't say Venezuela and the DPRK were democratic socialists

Don't need to, you'll have an argument made up for you in the event you don't provide one that comes with something easy to straw man. The beauty of debating imaginary people.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I did actually read it and it was quite a hoot.  I didn't say Venezuela and the DPRK were democratic socialists, I think I said they allowed their people to vote to decide things as long as the outcome is what their leaders wanted.  "Democratic socialism" is just the proverbial lipstick on a pig.

you asked..

[Dashinka 24,591]

48 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

you asked..

Bernie was all for the socialist paradises of Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba etc.  what has changed?

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Bernie was all for the socialist paradises of Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba etc.  what has changed?

right now? your question..

[Dashinka 24,591]

7 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

right now? your question..

The link said that those that espouse DS are the first to call out authoritarian regimes, but in 2011 Bernie said we need to take after the paradises of the Caribbean and South America.  Last I heard Chavez and Castro were fairly authoritarian.  Are you saying Bernie is not a true democratic socialist?

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

The link said that those that espouse DS are the first to call out authoritarian regimes, but in 2011 Bernie said we need to take after the paradises of the Caribbean and South America.  Last I heard Chavez and Castro were fairly authoritarian.  Are you saying Bernie is not a true democratic socialist?

nope, reads like you're saying bernie is not a democratic socialist.

[Dashinka 24,591]

Just now, smilesammich said:

nope, reads like you're saying bernie is not a democratic socialist.

It is either that or a hypocrite.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

It is either that or a hypocrite.

my guess is you're taking whatever quote you've noted from 2011 out of context to fit your bernie bashing agenda. but that's just a guess.

[Dashinka 24,591]

2 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

my guess is you're taking whatever quote you've noted from 2011 out of context to fit your bernie bashing agenda. but that's just a guess.

These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger. Who's the banana republic now?

 

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/close-the-gaps-disparities-that-threaten-america

 

 

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

3 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger. Who's the banana republic now?

 

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/close-the-gaps-disparities-that-threaten-america

 

 

 

like i said, totally out of context. you can't dispute any of the numbers in that article, but you go with the summation sentence at the very end..the incomes are more equal. are you disputing that?

 

Washington, it seems to us, is focusing on one gap -- between spending and revenue -- to the exclusion of others. That's unwise, because these other gaps also pose threats to America and its social structure. They, too, ought to be closed.

Take the jobs gap, which doesn't need much explanation. There are far fewer jobs than people seeking work, which is why unemployment is close to 10 percent or higher, if you count those who would like a job but have given up looking. According to economist Laura D'Andrea Tyson, writing last week in The New York Times, the U.S. economy would have to add about 12.3 million jobs to return to employment levels that existed before the 2008-2009 recession blindsided America. A quarter of a million people enter the labor force each month. At the current pace of recovery -- which is to say slower than slow -- closing this gap could take 10 years or more. Talk about a lost decade.

Closing the jobs gap might be easier if there were a solid commitment to closing the investment gap. Unlike other rich nations and, we hasten to add, developing countries such as India and China, the United States doesn't spend nearly enough on education and work force training; research and development; and vital infrastructure such as bridges, roads and air traffic control. This is what's known as "non-security discretionary spending," which is a misnomer. Investing in these areas would actually help strengthen America and secure the future. Yet spending in these categories accounts for less than 10 percent of all federal expenditure, and the share has been falling and is likely to fall further in the grip of the Scissorhands caucus that has taken control of Congress.

Finally, and most worryingly, there's the widening wealth gap. The inequality of incomes in this country has been well documented and much commented on, to wit: The richest 1 percent of Americans now account for almost a quarter of the nation's income, creating an imbalance even worse than the days of the Rockefellers and the Vanderbilts.

Less remarked, however, is the fact that America's wealth gap is also a race gap. As the Pew Research Center reported last week, the median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households. Think about that. In 2009, the typical black household had $5,677 in wealth -- defined as assets minus debts; the typical Hispanic household had $6,325; the typical white household, by contrast, had $113,149.

The disparity is twice as large as it was in the two decades prior to the Great Recession and the largest since the government began publishing such data a quarter century ago. The downturn has been particularly hard on blacks, who are twice as likely to be unemployed as whites.

Moreover, according to the Pew analysis, the wealth gap widened between 2005 and 2009 because minorities disproportionately reside in states hit hardest by plummeting house values -- Michigan, California, Arizona, Florida and Nevada, where median house prices fell as much as 50 percent .

White households saw house values decline as well, of course, but they tended to be cushioned by other assets that many black and Hispanic households don't have, including savings accounts, pensions and stocks.

"What's pushing the wealth of whites is the rebound in the stock market and corporate savings, while younger Hispanics and African Americans who bought homes in the last decade -- because that was the American dream -- are seeing big declines," Timothy Smeeding of the University of Wisconsin told The Associated Press.

[Dashinka 24,591]

8 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

like i said, totally out of context. you can't dispute any of the numbers in that article, but you go with the summation sentence at the very end..the incomes are more equal. are you disputing that?

 

Washington, it seems to us, is focusing on one gap -- between spending and revenue -- to the exclusion of others. That's unwise, because these other gaps also pose threats to America and its social structure. They, too, ought to be closed.

Take the jobs gap, which doesn't need much explanation. There are far fewer jobs than people seeking work, which is why unemployment is close to 10 percent or higher, if you count those who would like a job but have given up looking. According to economist Laura D'Andrea Tyson, writing last week in The New York Times, the U.S. economy would have to add about 12.3 million jobs to return to employment levels that existed before the 2008-2009 recession blindsided America. A quarter of a million people enter the labor force each month. At the current pace of recovery -- which is to say slower than slow -- closing this gap could take 10 years or more. Talk about a lost decade.

Closing the jobs gap might be easier if there were a solid commitment to closing the investment gap. Unlike other rich nations and, we hasten to add, developing countries such as India and China, the United States doesn't spend nearly enough on education and work force training; research and development; and vital infrastructure such as bridges, roads and air traffic control. This is what's known as "non-security discretionary spending," which is a misnomer. Investing in these areas would actually help strengthen America and secure the future. Yet spending in these categories accounts for less than 10 percent of all federal expenditure, and the share has been falling and is likely to fall further in the grip of the Scissorhands caucus that has taken control of Congress.

Finally, and most worryingly, there's the widening wealth gap. The inequality of incomes in this country has been well documented and much commented on, to wit: The richest 1 percent of Americans now account for almost a quarter of the nation's income, creating an imbalance even worse than the days of the Rockefellers and the Vanderbilts.

Less remarked, however, is the fact that America's wealth gap is also a race gap. As the Pew Research Center reported last week, the median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households. Think about that. In 2009, the typical black household had $5,677 in wealth -- defined as assets minus debts; the typical Hispanic household had $6,325; the typical white household, by contrast, had $113,149.

The disparity is twice as large as it was in the two decades prior to the Great Recession and the largest since the government began publishing such data a quarter century ago. The downturn has been particularly hard on blacks, who are twice as likely to be unemployed as whites.

Moreover, according to the Pew analysis, the wealth gap widened between 2005 and 2009 because minorities disproportionately reside in states hit hardest by plummeting house values -- Michigan, California, Arizona, Florida and Nevada, where median house prices fell as much as 50 percent .

White households saw house values decline as well, of course, but they tended to be cushioned by other assets that many black and Hispanic households don't have, including savings accounts, pensions and stocks.

"What's pushing the wealth of whites is the rebound in the stock market and corporate savings, while younger Hispanics and African Americans who bought homes in the last decade -- because that was the American dream -- are seeing big declines," Timothy Smeeding of the University of Wisconsin told The Associated Press.

Yes equally low except of course for the leadership class, but we need those leaders to tell us what to do.  If you think the wealth gap is bad now, just wait for socialism to really take hold.  As to the summation sentence, my original question stands, what happened to these models Bernie said we should emulate?  

 

Do I think the US will turn into a socialist country?  No, as we have a pesky constitution that limits government.  As long as we keep that in place, we will most likely just dabble in some of the failures.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Bill & Katya