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

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

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.

socialism has absolutely nothing to do with the current wealth gap in america - nothing. wait for socialism to really take hold? do you think this is like, happening right now?

no one is advocating america go socialist, not even bernie. i totally believe in limited government.

i'm not answering your question about the 'countries bernie said we should emulate' because that's not what he said, and america becoming venezuela or north korea is not even remotely what he was talking about. 

[Dashinka 24,960]

2 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

socialism has absolutely nothing to do with the current wealth gap in america - nothing. wait for socialism to really take hold? do you think this is like, happening right now?

no one is advocating america go socialist, not even bernie. i totally believe in limited government.

i'm not answering your question about the 'countries bernie said we should emulate' because that's not what he said, and america becoming venezuela or north korea is not even remotely what he was talking about. 

I didn't say socialism was the cause of the current wealth gap, I just said it would make it worse in the long run. 

 

How do you reconcile your thoughts on limited government with also being pro socialism?  I realize everyone loves a good Robin Hood narrative, but that doesn't mean it is smart economically.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I didn't say socialism was the cause of the current wealth gap, I just said it would make it worse in the long run. 

 

How do you reconcile your thoughts on limited government with also being pro socialism?  I realize everyone loves a good Robin Hood narrative, but that doesn't mean it is smart economically.

honestly, i can't really have a conversation with you concerning how i reconcile my belief in the strict importance of limited government and being 'pro socialism' because i'm not 'pro socialism'. there's really no point in me running my mouth if you're only hearing 'socialist'..

is this smart, economically?

[Dashinka 24,960]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

honestly, i can't really have a conversation with you concerning how i reconcile my belief in the strict importance of limited government and being 'pro socialism' because i'm not 'pro socialism'. there's really no point in me running my mouth if you're only hearing 'socialist'..

is this smart, economically?

When I hear the government will fix this wealth gap and redistribute the wealth and the economy will still grow, what else do you call it?  I know Democratic Socialism, lipstick on a pig!

[smilesammich 10,727]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-arel/5-ways-democratic-sociali_b_8876476.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/271652-what-does-sanders-mean-by-democratic-socialism

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

When I hear the government will fix this wealth gap and redistribute the wealth and the economy will still grow, what else do you call it?  I know Democratic Socialism, lipstick on a pig!

some more links for you above, i hope you can figure out where you're getting this wrong.

 

i'll stop repeating myself now..

Quote

3. It Is Not A Replacement For Capitalism

True socialism would replace the capitalist economy we live in now and replace it fully with a socialist one. While this is the dream of Marxists and socialists everywhere, this is not the plan under democratic socialism. Democratic socialism would instead put more restrictions on corporations and owners. This would include limitations on how much more money a CEO can make compared to their employees, and granting employees more rights and higher minimum wage.

4. It Is Not The Same As Regular Socialism

Democratic socialists have historically rejected the belief that the economy should be centrally planned (a centrally-planned economy is a socialist keystone belief). Instead, democratic socialism believes that some parts of society may be better if they are democratically planned: mass transit, medical care, minimum wage, etc. Democratic socialism still believes the capitalist market is best for consumer goods and services.

5. It Is Not Outside The Democratic Party

When Sanders announced he was running for President, he switched his party from Independent to Democrat, and many wondered why a socialist would run as a Democrat. Yet, what many didn’t understand was that Democratic Socialism is not a party in itself and is an ideology that actually exists inside the Democratic Party.

Democratic socialists only hope to strengthen the party by improving upon issues the nation faces today such as healthcare, college tuition, and a strengthened social safety net.

Originally published at www.liberalamerica.org on December 22, 2015.

 

[CaliCat 3,957]

10 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

When I hear the government will fix this wealth gap and redistribute the wealth and the economy will still grow, what else do you call it?  I know Democratic Socialism, lipstick on a pig!

 

But isn't that what the so-called president is doing, giving a tax break to the top 1%, removing 23,000,000 Americans from their healthcare coverage, and giving corporations a huge tax break? Isn't that a redistribution of wealth?

Edited June 21, 2017 by CaliCat

[jg121783 3,921]

11 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

honestly, i can't really have a conversation with you concerning how i reconcile my belief in the strict importance of limited government and being 'pro socialism' because i'm not 'pro socialism'. there's really no point in me running my mouth if you're only hearing 'socialist'..

is this smart, economically?

As it stands right now the federal government owns about as much land as that image shows for the 1%. I wonder how that map would look if we factored in how much wealth the federal, state and local governments possess.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, jg121783 said:

As it stands right now the federal government owns about as much land as that image shows for the 1%. I wonder how that map would look if we factored in how much wealth the federal, state and local governments possess.

you think that map is about federal landownership?

[CaliCat 3,957]

9 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

some more links for you above, i hope you can figure out where you're getting this wrong.

 

i'll stop repeating myself now..

 

 

Here is the kicker. Any rich individual understands how money flows, how it's made, and how it's distributed. The rich are the first to admit that their share is a large one - remember Warren Buffett telling the whole country his secretary paid more taxes than he did? 

 

The only people that are afraid of making our country more socially just are those who'd have the most to gain. It seems they enjoy their servitude, so long as they keep calling it by another name. 

[jg121783 3,921]

1 minute ago, CaliCat said:

 

But isn't that what the so-called president is doing, giving a tax break to the top 1%, removing 23,000,000 Americans from their healthcare coverage, and giving corporations a huge tax break? Isn't that a redistribution of wealth?

I don't buy the argument that 23 million people would lose their insurance. Just like I didn't buy the argument that Obamacare gave millions of people insurance that didn't have it which has been thoroughly debunked.

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

you think that map is about federal landownership?

Did I say it was? 

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, jg121783 said:

I don't buy the argument that 23 million people would lose their insurance. Just like I didn't buy the argument that Obamacare gave millions of people insurance that didn't have it which has been thoroughly debunked.

 

Yeah, just like the Moon landing was faked and has been debunked. 

 

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, jg121783 said:

I don't buy the argument that 23 million people would lose their insurance. Just like I didn't buy the argument that Obamacare gave millions of people insurance that didn't have it which has been thoroughly debunked.

it has has it. smh..

Just now, CaliCat said:

 

Yeah, just like the Moon landing was faked and has been debunked. 

 

 

the moon is a construct, doncha know.

[jg121783 3,921]

Just now, CaliCat said:

 

Yeah, just like the Moon landing was faked and has been debunked. 

 

 

How did we jump from health insurance to the moon landing? Talk about a red herring.

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, smilesammich said:

 

the moon is a construct, doncha know.

 

All made up by the Left (capital L, no less!). After all, there would be no NASA and no space program without JFK!

Just now, jg121783 said:

How did we jump from health insurance to the moon landing? Talk about a red herring.

 

We jumped the shark with your unsupported claim. I was just following your cue.