- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 34,159
- Reaction score
- 37,638
- Location
- With Yo Mama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
We are witnessing the first campaign since 1933 that directly challenges the essential features of our economy. We are now living through a 40-year neo-liberal dystopia. Finally it is under assault. Any objective observer would note that Hillary operates within that neo-liberal order while Bernie is its attacker.
Neo-liberalism refers to the set of theories and practices that swept through our political system (and many others) in the late 1970s. It argues that prosperity for all will occur only if we 1) cut taxes (especially on the higher income brackets); 2) cut government regulations on the private sector; and 3) cut/privatize government social programs. This combination of policies, it is argued, maximizes economic efficiency and increases economic incentives which together continually improve and expand our economy.
The economic differences between Hillary and Bernie sorted and explained. No secrets here, but rather an honest comparison well done. No pat answers, no obvious conclusions.
For me Sanders remains the only way to go. A vote for Hillary is a vote for the establishment, a vote for status quo. I understand that some people want to continue living much as they do today. I understand people don't want much change at all. I get that. I don't agree, but I understand that some people are reluctant to toss the broken system out. Hillary would change little. We all know that. Hillary will never get my vote.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
The full article here.
Don't give up hope just yet, friend.Sanders would be better than Hillary. Yet it won't happen. She will be the next Prez.
Sanders has yet to convince me he could actually get anything he's promised through congress, sooooo......
Sanders has yet to convince me he could actually get anything he's promised through congress.
Don't give up hope just yet, friend.
I totally get that, on both a political and personal level.Some days it is hard not to give up....I haven't yet.
And Congress is a giant mess that we usually don't tend to address as much as the POTUS.And thats the crux of the matter, people look to the executive far too much to solve problems (partially because it's easier to project problems onto one person than a body of people) when its actually Congress that has the power to fix many of the issues America faces, but outright refuses to do so because it is paralyzed by corruption.
Sanders has yet to convince me he could actually get anything he's promised through congress, sooooo......
One, Bernie Sanders would not be able to get a tenth of one percent of his vision enacted...and that is being generous. I love the guy and what he wants done...but his programs are all heart and no head.
How is that going to change?
Two, the economy is in bad shape and will get worse no matter who is elected president...or which party controls the congress.
Three, the most important issue facing the electorate this election is who will make the nominations that are coming for the Supreme Court. If the Republicans win this election (and retain control of the senate) we are doomed.
They said the same thing about FDR.
Sanders indeed cannot do it alone. If you listen to his speeches Bernie is big on "We" compared to Hillary who is big on "I". That is telling. Sanders is saying and has said that he cannot do it alone. No one can but that is indeed part of the problem. Most Americans have sat on their flabby asses and let someone else do and someone else has, the 1% and their toadie minions. They have damn near total control. They are not going initiate a return of some of the massive wealth and power they now control.
Although people seem to forget it democratic change comes from the bottom and flows upward. It must be initiated and sustained by the people. That is what Sanders' campaign is about. People are involved. If Bernie wins it will be because most of the voting public have become involved. It will be incumbent on the People to stay involved if the transition is to be successful.
The movement, the "revolution" is bigger than Bernie. I believe few people want status quo.
Yes and continuing with the same failed feckin corporate controlled government we have is going to turn things around how?
You are saying that you won't approve of Sanders' supreme court appointments? He has said time and time again that his appointments must agree to overturn Citizens United. Hillary time and again has avoid answering the question. Are you opposed to Citizens United?
Compared to what and which other candidates?
And thats the crux of the matter, people look to the executive far too much to solve problems (partially because it's easier to project problems onto one person than a body of people) when its actually Congress that has the power to fix many of the issues America faces, but outright refuses to do so because it is paralyzed by corruption.
...and you should know how congress works because....???
And thats the crux of the matter, people look to the executive far too much to solve problems (partially because it's easier to project problems onto one person than a body of people) when its actually Congress that has the power to fix many of the issues America faces, but outright refuses to do so because it is paralyzed by corruption.
My take on things:
Bernie Sanders will NEVER be president of the United States...and he will not be the Democratic Party nominee.
Hillary Clinton will win the nomination...and then the election.
The people she nominates will meet fierce resistance from the Senate, even if the Democrats gain control of it.
And thats the crux of the matter, people look to the executive far too much to solve problems (partially because it's easier to project problems onto one person than a body of people) when its actually Congress that has the power to fix many of the issues America faces, but outright refuses to do so because it is paralyzed by corruption.
I think sanders would be good for the country even if he was "toothless" in regards to congress.
Four years of hearing the actual "other" side would be great.
We need to have a real conversation about our made up economic system.
I agree with you. Let the welfare statists and socialists make their case against the free marketeers. Lets have a true ideological battle between the two sides and see who comes out on top. Hillary just represents the continuation of Bush/Obama/establishment half measures, like Obamacare, for instance. Those who think the state should run the health care system, let them make their case against those who think the market should handle it
Sanders has yet to convince me he could actually get anything he's promised through congress, sooooo......
I agree with you. Let the welfare statists and socialists make their case against the free marketeers. Lets have a true ideological battle between the two sides and see who comes out on top. Hillary just represents the continuation of Bush/Obama/establishment half measures, like Obamacare, for instance. Those who think the state should run the health care system, let them make their case against those who think the market should handle it
I doubt you would like the outcome.
If we had the REAL conversation.
Because its quite clear the game has changed to such a degree that fundamental precepts will have to be looked at.
We're going to have to choose between vast personal fortunes and a reasonable quality of life for the greatest number.
We can't have both.
There aren't enough resources on the world to provide a western, first world lifestyle to the entire planet. We are too wasteful.
Anything that deals with this reality means no place for vast, intergenerational wealth. There will still be rich people, there will still be profits. But they'll both have to be "smaller".
And dopamine is a hell of a drug.
None of that is even remotely true--except perhaps your last comment which I can only defer to your own personal expertise on the matter.
The divvy up of capitalism is about scarcity. Everybody can't have everything they want.
The more competition for scarce resources the worse everything is going to become.
Especially when we're dead set on the owners continuing to harvest profits at the rate to which they have grown accustomed.
It doesn't really matter to me whether you believe it or not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?