Sanders transforms into contender, still pitches revolution

[sgtsabai]

I will agree that unions shot themselves in the foot more than once. I carried a boilermaker card for years, worked pipeline (on a permit) worked shipyards (shut one down one cold rainy night with a wildcat strike over unsafe working conditions that were corrected the next night), worked refineries and would not have been able to do so without the union.

My dad worked for the railroad for what seemed like 1,000 yrs, and even in a management position, Depot Agent, maintained his union membership and refused to cross picket lines or enter the refinery to negotiate with plant managers for train service. He also refused to allow his trains to cross the picket line. One of the very few times I respected him. He was born in 1903 and knows well the labor struggles for fair wages and working conditions.

My mother was a teacher that started in a one room school house in Idaho in the early 20's. Union member until she died although she retired in '64 when I joined Uncle Sam's Misguided Children. She needed the rest...lol. Were they corrupt, yes I was friends with too many, including business agents to not know better. Had it not been for unions workers would still be back in the Gilded Age and working like the do here in Thailand and that is what most employers want.

I repeat again, it is not the manufacturer that makes a success, it is coming up with a needed product and the people to make it, transport it and most of all the money they have earned to buy it. It is the worker that makes a successful business, not the already rich guy sitting on his fat ass and barking orders. Workers made the clothes I wear, not some damn capitalist. It appears that some of you need to educate yourselves as to what socialism is and what democratic socialism is. It is anything but the "Red Scare" which shows your ignorance. Oh btw I was a business major in college for a time, until I became disgusted with their teachings which was mainly how to screw over the working man, keep women barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen and how wonderful it was to have black people to take care of our houses, be porters on trains (every hear of the Pullman Strike) etc. I left no uncertainty about what I thought of the business dept, no uncertainty at all. Perhaps some of you should go back and learn a little about the labor struggles in this country. And while you are at it explain to me your rational for why worker productivity has gone up, wages and benefits have stagnated or gone down, moral is low and there is no retirement or employment security while the 1% have raked in all the profits.

Along with this has been the breaking up and decline of unions and misnamed "right to work" (if you are lucky for a lower wage and less benefits and your employer's whim) laws. And yes I'm abrasive, never have been into the "peace, love, dope and good vibes" stuff. Here is a good read by Robert Reich. It encompasses several articles, please read all the way down to the answers to those that don't believe Bernie can/will be elected president. It matters not which buffoon from the clown bus runs, they cannot win a general election. Not everybody in America is batshit crazy. http://robertreich.org/

Edited February 3, 2016 by Scott
Paragraphs added

[SpokaneAl]

It would be a blessing for America, and indeed the world in general, if Sanders won the presidency. Unfortunately, that is
never going to happen in a country full of people who already call Obama a socialist/communist.

I do not remember the stats, but socialism is better understood and accepted by many more Americans now than it was just a few years ago.

Most Americans still believe the cold war propaganda about socialism and have no idea of what it is or how much it is a part of their daily lives already.

If nothing else, Bernie Sanders has convinced a lot of Americans to at least look at socialism and learn what it is really all about.

Maybe people who like what Obama has done hearing him being called a socialist has had some influence as well?

P.S. The cold war has been over for a while now and we don't need that propaganda in the 21st century !

Socialism promotes laziness and discourages hard work. If you are giving things away, you are just taking from those who work. I suspect a large percentage of the Sander supporters on this forum were less than successful in their careers, and tend to fall into the 47% who pay little to no taxes. There is no logical reason for tax payers to want higher taxes so the slugs of society can continue to receive government handouts.

If Sanders were ever elected, he would do more damage to America than Obama has done. As far as Hillary, she will be lucky if she doesn't end up being a recipient of correctional services.

Really? It promotes laziness? Then, why are countries that have large socialistic programs listed among the most productive countries in the world? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_hour_worked I am sure that the success of these countries is not totally due to their chosen economic systems. Still, it strongly suggests that there are things to learn from them and to not solely depend upon an overly simplistic understanding of socialism.

A socialistic govt. does not necessarily "give things away." I believe that what needs to addressed in regards to that issue is not so much the system itself, but how well it is managed. Does not a supposed capitalistic nation like the USA give large sums of money to big businesses and big banks in what are called subsidies and bailouts? Surely, they are not among the so-called 47%. Their received largesse far exceeds that of any "slug."

As I have stated in an above post, it does not have to do with merely supporting or not supporting an abstract concept such as socialism, but it has to do with whether certain industries, businesses, etc. better serve the public good by being socialistic or not and to what degree, if any, they should be regulated.

" I suspect a large percentage of the Sander supporters on this forum were less than successful in their careers, and tend to fall into the 47% who pay little to no taxes. There is no logical reason for tax payers to want higher taxes so the slugs of society can continue to receive government handouts."

You need to pass this on to the NFL ( America's National Football League ) possibly the best example of successful socialism in the U.S.A.

Every year money is shifted from teams who earn huge amounts to teams that make little or lose money. ( that's socialism )

I think the owners, players and staff could be considered successful and big earners,

and yet, the NFL avoids paying taxes.

What I get a kick out of ( pun intended) is that the hard core football fans are usually the ones who hate socialism so much!

Go figure!
images.jpg

The NFL does not avoid taxes. The NFL head office was tax exempt for many years and that has since changed. That said, teams, players, owners etc are liable for taxes - always have.

[up2u2]

So is this where Bernie's estimated (by the CBO) tax increases over the next ten years in the amount of $19.6 Trillion going?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heres-a-list-of-bernie-sanders-19.6-trillion-in-tax-hikes/article/2580846

The Washington Examiner is a hard right-wing paper. What they may have done is send a slew of unrealistic policy proposals to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) and asked for an estimate for how much it would cost. The Examiner knows how to play dirty - they've had a lot of practice of throwing mud. Plus, where have you ever heard a "10 year projection" of taxes? Probably never before.

Another factor, if Sanders becomes president, is there will most likely be a Republican-dominated congress. Republican reps and senators are very adept at blocking proposals and wasting time. They will oppose nearly everything a Democratic prez proposes. They do it in their sleep. They've done it for the full 8 years Obama has been in the top spot - though some good things were able to get passed regardless of Republican intransigence.

Regardless of which Dem candidate wins the nomination, the Rep Attack Machine will be going full tilt - throwing mud, like the $19.6 trillion tax bill myth and anything else they hope will possibly stick to their opponents.

I'm sure if anyone were to ask Mr. Sanders how he proposes to pay for some programs, he'll be glad to oblige with a sensible answer. In contrast, if someone asks the Washington Examiner staff writers, they'll get shrill and inaccurate answers.

Check this page at NPR. Some good photos of Sander's fans

Did you even read the linked Washington Examiner article?

If you got past the first four paragraphs you might have seen these...

1. As part of his single-payer healthcare plan, Sanders would institute a 6.2 percent tax on employers to finance healthcare premiums for his new federally-run system, which he said would raise $630 billion per year.

2. Sanders says he would raise $310 billion per year by ending the tax breaks for employer sponsored health insurance, which his campaign said would become "obsolete" if his single-payer plan were implemented.

3. Sanders has proposed imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, claiming it would raise about $300 billion a year and would more than pay for his plan to offer free tuition at public colleges and universities.

4. In addition to the business premium tax, Sanders would propose a 2.2 percent tax on individual income to raise another $210 billion per year to finance his healthcare plan.

5. To pay for his plan to expand Social Security, Sanders has proposed removing the cap on payroll taxes on income exceeding $250,000 per year.

There are an additional seven tax changes hs is proposing...and the CBO frequently estimates costs over a ten year period.

Attacking the source is so passe'.

This is absolute rubbish. ALL economists have come out and torn these costings to shreds. Among about 100 factors it fails to take into account the trillions of dollars of savings. A Universal one payer system health care fund pushes prices down, and I mean down big time. No more holding the American public to ransom. Currently America has the most expensive 'by 10 county miles' health care system in the entire developed World with the worst patient outcomes. Preliminary figures show a reduction of $5000 for a family health care costs. Another great benefit is not having to work some shitty job that pays below the poverty line wages because you desperately need health care. It takes the power away from the employer and makes a fairer playing field.

Seriously Chuckd no one is really buying this Right Wing / Corporate profiteers health education / trickle down BS or the 'Socialist boogie man' drivel anymore mate. Bernie is getting the message out there and gradually educating the electorate. Your days are numbered my friend. I know you are 'feeling the Bern' and clutching at straws but the writings on the wall mate.

[chuckd]

Here is a little food for thought to those that might be burdened with paying for Bernie's give away programs.

[SpokaneAl]

So is this where Bernie's estimated (by the CBO) tax increases over the next ten years in the amount of $19.6 Trillion going?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heres-a-list-of-bernie-sanders-19.6-trillion-in-tax-hikes/article/2580846

The Washington Examiner is a hard right-wing paper. What they may have done is send a slew of unrealistic policy proposals to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) and asked for an estimate for how much it would cost. The Examiner knows how to play dirty - they've had a lot of practice of throwing mud. Plus, where have you ever heard a "10 year projection" of taxes? Probably never before.

Another factor, if Sanders becomes president, is there will most likely be a Republican-dominated congress. Republican reps and senators are very adept at blocking proposals and wasting time. They will oppose nearly everything a Democratic prez proposes. They do it in their sleep. They've done it for the full 8 years Obama has been in the top spot - though some good things were able to get passed regardless of Republican intransigence.

Regardless of which Dem candidate wins the nomination, the Rep Attack Machine will be going full tilt - throwing mud, like the $19.6 trillion tax bill myth and anything else they hope will possibly stick to their opponents.

I'm sure if anyone were to ask Mr. Sanders how he proposes to pay for some programs, he'll be glad to oblige with a sensible answer. In contrast, if someone asks the Washington Examiner staff writers, they'll get shrill and inaccurate answers.

Check this page at NPR. Some good photos of Sander's fans

Did you even read the linked Washington Examiner article?

If you got past the first four paragraphs you might have seen these...

1. As part of his single-payer healthcare plan, Sanders would institute a 6.2 percent tax on employers to finance healthcare premiums for his new federally-run system, which he said would raise $630 billion per year.

2. Sanders says he would raise $310 billion per year by ending the tax breaks for employer sponsored health insurance, which his campaign said would become "obsolete" if his single-payer plan were implemented.

3. Sanders has proposed imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, claiming it would raise about $300 billion a year and would more than pay for his plan to offer free tuition at public colleges and universities.

4. In addition to the business premium tax, Sanders would propose a 2.2 percent tax on individual income to raise another $210 billion per year to finance his healthcare plan.

5. To pay for his plan to expand Social Security, Sanders has proposed removing the cap on payroll taxes on income exceeding $250,000 per year.

There are an additional seven tax changes hs is proposing...and the CBO frequently estimates costs over a ten year period.

Attacking the source is so passe'.

This is absolute rubbish. ALL economists have come out and torn these costings to shreds. Among about 100 factors it fails to take into account the trillions of dollars of savings. A Universal one payer system health care fund pushes prices down, and I mean down big time. No more holding the American public to ransom. Currently America has the most expensive 'by 10 county miles' health care system in the entire developed World with the worst patient outcomes. Preliminary figures show a reduction of $5000 for a family health care costs. Another great benefit is not having to work some shitty job that pays below the poverty line wages because you desperately need health care. It takes the power away from the employer and makes a fairer playing field.

Seriously Chuckd no one is really buying this Right Wing / Corporate profiteers health education / trickle down BS or the 'Socialist boogie man' drivel anymore mate. Bernie is getting the message out there and gradually educating the electorate. Your days are numbered my friend. I know you are 'feeling the Bern' and clutching at straws but the writings on the wall mate.

What is rubbish is all these wonderful savings estimates that will never come to pass. Each and every time cost savings are projected due to increased taxes, people and, yes, corporations change their habits, modify their spending etc and the result is billions of unfunded additional costs.

All economists - yeah right.

[Jingthing]

Sorry about the no paragraphs. What you don't know is for whatever reason I cannot make paragraph on this site. When I do, they post as one long paragraph. Perhaps you could enlighten me with a solution? Thank you.

...

Please post on the technical support forum here. You post here a lot and I usually don't read your posts because of the HORRIBLE way they're formated. I'm certain I'm not the only one.

Have some CONSIDERATION for readers.

Get help and learn how to use PARAGRAPHS. I find your excuse very weak.

[SpokaneAl]

Sorry about the no paragraphs. What you don't know is for whatever reason I cannot make paragraph on this site. When I do, they post as one long paragraph. Perhaps you could enlighten me with a solution? Thank you.

...

Please post on the technical support forum here. You post here a lot and I usually don't read your posts because of the HORRIBLE way they're formated. I'm certain I'm not the only one.

Have some CONSIDERATION for readers.

Get help and learn how to use PARAGRAPHS. I find your excuse very weak.

When I want to make a new paragraph, I simply

Hit the return key

A couple of times.

And I am not the sharpest pencil in the box.

[chuckd]

So is this where Bernie's estimated (by the CBO) tax increases over the next ten years in the amount of $19.6 Trillion going?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heres-a-list-of-bernie-sanders-19.6-trillion-in-tax-hikes/article/2580846

The Washington Examiner is a hard right-wing paper. What they may have done is send a slew of unrealistic policy proposals to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) and asked for an estimate for how much it would cost. The Examiner knows how to play dirty - they've had a lot of practice of throwing mud. Plus, where have you ever heard a "10 year projection" of taxes? Probably never before.

Another factor, if Sanders becomes president, is there will most likely be a Republican-dominated congress. Republican reps and senators are very adept at blocking proposals and wasting time. They will oppose nearly everything a Democratic prez proposes. They do it in their sleep. They've done it for the full 8 years Obama has been in the top spot - though some good things were able to get passed regardless of Republican intransigence.

Regardless of which Dem candidate wins the nomination, the Rep Attack Machine will be going full tilt - throwing mud, like the $19.6 trillion tax bill myth and anything else they hope will possibly stick to their opponents.

I'm sure if anyone were to ask Mr. Sanders how he proposes to pay for some programs, he'll be glad to oblige with a sensible answer. In contrast, if someone asks the Washington Examiner staff writers, they'll get shrill and inaccurate answers.

Check this page at NPR. Some good photos of Sander's fans

Did you even read the linked Washington Examiner article?

If you got past the first four paragraphs you might have seen these...

1. As part of his single-payer healthcare plan, Sanders would institute a 6.2 percent tax on employers to finance healthcare premiums for his new federally-run system, which he said would raise $630 billion per year.

2. Sanders says he would raise $310 billion per year by ending the tax breaks for employer sponsored health insurance, which his campaign said would become "obsolete" if his single-payer plan were implemented.

3. Sanders has proposed imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, claiming it would raise about $300 billion a year and would more than pay for his plan to offer free tuition at public colleges and universities.

4. In addition to the business premium tax, Sanders would propose a 2.2 percent tax on individual income to raise another $210 billion per year to finance his healthcare plan.

5. To pay for his plan to expand Social Security, Sanders has proposed removing the cap on payroll taxes on income exceeding $250,000 per year.

There are an additional seven tax changes hs is proposing...and the CBO frequently estimates costs over a ten year period.

Attacking the source is so passe'.

This is absolute rubbish. ALL economists have come out and torn these costings to shreds. Among about 100 factors it fails to take into account the trillions of dollars of savings. A Universal one payer system health care fund pushes prices down, and I mean down big time. No more holding the American public to ransom. Currently America has the most expensive 'by 10 county miles' health care system in the entire developed World with the worst patient outcomes. Preliminary figures show a reduction of $5000 for a family health care costs. Another great benefit is not having to work some shitty job that pays below the poverty line wages because you desperately need health care. It takes the power away from the employer and makes a fairer playing field.

Seriously Chuckd no one is really buying this Right Wing / Corporate profiteers health education / trickle down BS or the 'Socialist boogie man' drivel anymore mate. Bernie is getting the message out there and gradually educating the electorate. Your days are numbered my friend. I know you are 'feeling the Bern' and clutching at straws but the writings on the wall mate.

From the linked article:

"Taken together, Sanders is proposing $19.6 trillion in new taxes over a decade, according to an analysis by the Washington Examiner, of which $14 trillion would come from his healthcare plan alone. To put that in perspective, the Congressional Budget Office projects that federal revenues over the next 10 years will be a total of $41.6 trillion, meaning that Sanders would raise taxes by 47 percent over current levels."

Check with the CBO, not me.

[chuckd]

All of this rubbish talk about corporations being the financial spark that drives the political engine might be interested to know labor unions really provide that spark.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Organization Contributors

Totals on this page reflect donations from employees of the organization, its PAC and in some cases its own treasury. These totals include all campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties, political action committees (including super PACs), federal 527 organizations, and Carey committees. The totals do not include contributions to 501© organizations, whose political spending has increased markedly in recent cycles. Unlike other political organizations, they are not required to disclose the corporate and individual donors that make their spending possible. Only contributions to Democrats and Republicans or liberal and conservative outside groups are included in calculating the percentages the donor has given to either party.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To give you a head's up, six of the top ten are labor unions and they give 100% to Democrats and liberal causes.

Open the link if you dare.

Edit in:

Goldman Sachs ranks 15th with donations of $54,453,925 split 52-48 in favor of Democrats.

Service Employees International Union ranks 1st with donations of $224,273,550 split 99-1 in favor of Democrats.

This data is for all election cycles.

Edited February 3, 2016 by chuckd

[up2u2]

All of this rubbish talk about corporations being the financial spark that drives the political engine might be interested to know labor unions really provide that spark.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Organization Contributors

Totals on this page reflect donations from employees of the organization, its PAC and in some cases its own treasury. These totals include all campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties, political action committees (including super PACs), federal 527 organizations, and Carey committees. The totals do not include contributions to 501© organizations, whose political spending has increased markedly in recent cycles. Unlike other political organizations, they are not required to disclose the corporate and individual donors that make their spending possible. Only contributions to Democrats and Republicans or liberal and conservative outside groups are included in calculating the percentages the donor has given to either party.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To give you a head's up, six of the top ten are labor unions and they give 100% to Democrats and liberal causes.

Open the link if you dare.

Edit in:

Goldman Sachs ranks 15th with donations of $54,453,925 split 52-48 in favor of Democrats.

Service Employees International Union ranks 1st with donations of $224,273,550 split 99-1 in favor of Democrats.

This data is for all election cycles.

Unions represent the American worker so of course they will donate to the Democrats. Hardly likely to donate money to the Republicans who detest the thought that workers can unite and speak out and have some leverage in the game.

It highlights that Democrats are selling out the American people and aligning themselves with Wall Street. This is a real concern for the electorate. Republicans play one side of the fence, Democrats are trying to play both sides of the fence, Bernie has a bulldozer and is looking to drive right through the fence and demolish it.

'Feel the Bern' Comrades.

[Boon Mee]

What a choice for the Democrats, eh?

The Felon or the Communist?

[Steely Dan]

Some people have made a thing about Bernie being a Jew but only about 10 percent of Americans say they wouldn't vote for someone just based on being a Jew.

But he has too MUCH BIGGER political problems.

A very large percentage of Americans will never vote for an atheist.

Also, a very large percentage of Americans will never vote for socialist.

Bernie recently "came out" as not associating himself with religiosity which is short of saying he's an atheist, but it's close enough.

People, forget this guy.

It's hopeless!

Those two things are simply insurmountable going into the general election, if he's nominated.

And let's face it a position of opposing selling arms to Israel before the Yom Kippur war hardly makes him a certainty for the Jewish vote, should such facts be common knowledge.

[Jingthing]

Some people have made a thing about Bernie being a Jew but only about 10 percent of Americans say they wouldn't vote for someone just based on being a Jew.

But he has too MUCH BIGGER political problems.

A very large percentage of Americans will never vote for an atheist.

Also, a very large percentage of Americans will never vote for socialist.

Bernie recently "came out" as not associating himself with religiosity which is short of saying he's an atheist, but it's close enough.

People, forget this guy.

It's hopeless!

Those two things are simply insurmountable going into the general election, if he's nominated.

And let's face it a position of opposing selling arms to Israel before the Yom Kippur war hardly makes him a certainty for the Jewish vote, should such facts be common knowledge.

Israel policy is one issue out of many for most American Jews. American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and democratic and the republican party has failed in changing that, even though yes, they are usually generally stronger on Israel support. A candidate that was explicitly "anti-Zionist" would be different, but that's not likely to happen with either major party. The only one even close to that in this election cycle is republican Rand Paul and he's not a contender. Obama, who most Israelis hate, won big two times with the Jewish American vote, and if it was legal for him to run a third time, he would win their vote again.

I don't know all the details about Sanders policy positions but I do like his advocacy for a real universal health care system in the U.S. Obamacare is disliked from all sides, the right, middle, and left. It helped some people and hurt some people, but it doesn't provide even close to real full access and the way it is structured (welfare for big pharma, big hospital, and big insurance) means real COST containment is impossible.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

All of this rubbish talk about corporations being the financial spark that drives the political engine might be interested to know labor unions really provide that spark.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Organization Contributors

Totals on this page reflect donations from employees of the organization, its PAC and in some cases its own treasury. These totals include all campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties, political action committees (including super PACs), federal 527 organizations, and Carey committees. The totals do not include contributions to 501© organizations, whose political spending has increased markedly in recent cycles. Unlike other political organizations, they are not required to disclose the corporate and individual donors that make their spending possible. Only contributions to Democrats and Republicans or liberal and conservative outside groups are included in calculating the percentages the donor has given to either party.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To give you a head's up, six of the top ten are labor unions and they give 100% to Democrats and liberal causes.

Open the link if you dare.

Edit in:

Goldman Sachs ranks 15th with donations of $54,453,925 split 52-48 in favor of Democrats.

Service Employees International Union ranks 1st with donations of $224,273,550 split 99-1 in favor of Democrats.

This data is for all election cycles.

Unions represent the American worker so of course they will donate to the Democrats. Hardly likely to donate money to the Republicans who detest the thought that workers can unite and speak out and have some leverage in the game.

It highlights that Democrats are selling out the American people and aligning themselves with Wall Street. This is a real concern for the electorate. Republicans play one side of the fence, Democrats are trying to play both sides of the fence, Bernie has a bulldozer and is looking to drive right through the fence and demolish it.

'Feel the Bern' Comrades.

Have you been living in an outback cave for the past 30 years?

Labor unions represent the desires and wishes of the labor union leaders.

Why do you think so many states now have Right to work laws in place?

Try to catch up with the US if you insist on posting about it.

[helpisgood]

And who did the unions work for? Where did the money come from? Did the unions invent the TV or the computer? No, they got their jobs from CAPITALISTS. Unions rode the coattails of the people who invented, created, aggregated capital and built factories - capitalists.

Where does Thailand get its manufacturing jobs? Capitalists. Who made the clothes you are wearing? Capitalists.

Why are stores full of the things you need so that you can buy them? Capitalists.

Bernie wants to suck them dry in the name of socialism. He'd wind up where Russia is with everyone depending on the government instead of on his own initiative. Not only don't those people have money, but if they did the stores are empty.

Really? Just like Russia (assuming you really mean the USSR)? All "socialist" nations are exactly like the USSR model? How have the socialist nations in northern Europe done? Yes, I know that they have problems like everyone else, but my guess is that they don't have the same problems like the USA has with, e.g., poorer working folks not being able to send their family members to the doctor when desperately needed. That's why Sanders says "democratic socialism."

It seems to me that some of you are still analyzing this issue as if it was 1950, and we were still entrenched in Cold War rhetoric. In the more recent years, big business and big banks have used their power, yielded by politicians they have bought and paid for, to get even richer at the expense of the vast majority of Americans.

Yes, there is a lot of good in capitalism, and Sanders has stated clearly in one of the debates that he not against small and medium-sized capitalist businesses. The problem is that large and esp. very large capitalist businesses, esp. banks. have taken advantage of the system and have rigged it in their favor, more and more.

In essence, it is not a black and white issue of pure capitalism and pure socialism. An overly simplistic perception of the issues does not help anyone get anything sensible done. The real problem is how Americans manage the political and economic system in the hybrid capitalistic/socialistic that now exists.

[helpisgood]

Sanders has labelled himself that way, socialist, so that's the deal breaker aside from the other stuff.

Of course all candidates support some socialist style programs, even the republicans.

That's not the point.

The U.S. is still not Europe. Like it or not.

America hopefully will never be like the failed states of Europe. See the muppets running the show in the EU. That's why I hope the American people make Donald trump the next president.

America as a capitalist country with all of it horrible "corporations" brought you the computer you are using and the internet it's interfacing with. It brought you most of the other software on it in addition to the operating system.

All of this within your lifetime. Before that and perhaps within your lifetime was the TV and so many other things. Now everyone has all of this but protests that they are "poorer".

We have so much more technology and convenience than our grandparents had. How can anyone say we are poorer? How did they really live? Did I mention medical breakthroughs brought to us by big corporations including Big Pharma? We live a lot longer now too. How can we say this isn't some benefit from "big business"?

A big corporation named IBM which pioneered and owns much of the infrastructure that provides bandwidth for the internet (who would have stretched out all of that cable?) published a dictionary of more than 18,000 NEW AMERICAN ENGLISH WORDS brought to us by technology. Most of them are new within the last 50 years and more than half of them are much newer than that.

BTW and for the haters, there isn't a European socialist on the entire planet who can pronounce even one of the English words in this book correctly.

Just think of all of the things you have that your grandparents didn't have and tell me where they came from, and then how you are poorer.

Cheers.

71RYBQCEWHL._SX374_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Which candidate has stated that they will nationalize the high tech industry? Also, the criticism of large corporations, including Big Pharma, is directed to their abuses not their very existence. It does not follow that all, and even many, of their critics believe nothing good has been done by big corps. I hope no one has such a simplistic belief that big business in the USA is either all good or all bad. The issues that many people nowadays want to address is how to correct the system. Even Pres. Teddy Roosevelt went after big business long ago (see trust busting).

So, we already know that we many good things came from private enterprise as we type these posts on our p.c.'s.

By the way, in regards to "socialists" who cannot pronounce certain words, who hacked SONY pictures?

[up2u2]

All of this rubbish talk about corporations being the financial spark that drives the political engine might be interested to know labor unions really provide that spark.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Organization Contributors

Totals on this page reflect donations from employees of the organization, its PAC and in some cases its own treasury. These totals include all campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties, political action committees (including super PACs), federal 527 organizations, and Carey committees. The totals do not include contributions to 501© organizations, whose political spending has increased markedly in recent cycles. Unlike other political organizations, they are not required to disclose the corporate and individual donors that make their spending possible. Only contributions to Democrats and Republicans or liberal and conservative outside groups are included in calculating the percentages the donor has given to either party.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To give you a head's up, six of the top ten are labor unions and they give 100% to Democrats and liberal causes.

Open the link if you dare.

Edit in:

Goldman Sachs ranks 15th with donations of $54,453,925 split 52-48 in favor of Democrats.

Service Employees International Union ranks 1st with donations of $224,273,550 split 99-1 in favor of Democrats.

This data is for all election cycles.

Unions represent the American worker so of course they will donate to the Democrats. Hardly likely to donate money to the Republicans who detest the thought that workers can unite and speak out and have some leverage in the game.

It highlights that Democrats are selling out the American people and aligning themselves with Wall Street. This is a real concern for the electorate. Republicans play one side of the fence, Democrats are trying to play both sides of the fence, Bernie has a bulldozer and is looking to drive right through the fence and demolish it.

'Feel the Bern' Comrades.

Have you been living in an outback cave for the past 30 years?

Labor unions represent the desires and wishes of the labor union leaders.

Why do you think so many states now have Right to work laws in place?

Try to catch up with the US if you insist on posting about it.

'right to work laws' are you serious? 'Right to be an indentured slave' is more accurate. Republicans have been VERY successful in ensuring Unions are removed from wage negotiations ensuring that workers are unrepresented and open to exploitation by Corporate America. What America needs is to catch up it is falling behind the rest of the developed World rapidly.

Another example of Right Wing gobbledygook that no one is buying anymore.

It is a real credit to The Bern how he is challenging this neocon gibberish. The more people who learn how neocons like you are feeding them tripe and they reject it and get on board.

'Right to Work Laws' what a sham. Absolutely laughable.

[sgtsabai]

Frankly I'm surprised that any of our right wingers would even know about, much less read OpenSecrets.org. Very little of what they publish, is any is favorable to the right wing. You forgot one little detail, it doesn't include 501's and other dark money. Unions are largely outspend, you actually think they could spend as much as the Koch (John Birch Society) traitor brothers and all the tentacles?

[boomerangutang]

What a choice for the Democrats, eh?

The Felon or the Communist?

Well thanks for making it known which side you're on. It sounds like you're getting your mind-set from a Fox version of Mad Magazine.

It's interesting to watch the Reps for the past 6 months try to out-do each other by showing how right-wing arch conservative they are. As soon as they get a nominee, that man will do an about-face and try to appeal as much as possible to the general public, the poor. and disadvantaged. That Republican candidate will only do the minimum (his handlers' suggest) to appeal to those at the lower rungs of the economic ladder - in order to try and garner votes.

It's much more of a juggling act for Republican candidates than for Dems. Dems can maintain their opinions and policy statements throughout the campaign, whereas Republicans have to show their arch-conservative qualifications in the primaries, and then switch and show their caring-for-all-Americans side in the general election. Guess which manifestation is a lie? Yup, it's the general election rhetoric that's hollow.

[SpokaneAl]

What a choice for the Democrats, eh?

The Felon or the Communist?

Well thanks for making it known which side you're on. It sounds like you're getting your mind-set from a Fox version of Mad Magazine.

It's interesting to watch the Reps for the past 6 months try to out-do each other by showing how right-wing arch conservative they are. As soon as they get a nominee, that man will do an about-face and try to appeal as much as possible to the general public, the poor. and disadvantaged. That Republican candidate will only do the minimum (his handlers' suggest) to appeal to those at the lower rungs of the economic ladder - in order to try and garner votes.

It's much more of a juggling act for Republican candidates than for Dems. Dems can maintain their opinions and policy statements throughout the campaign, whereas Republicans have to show their arch-conservative qualifications in the primaries, and then switch and show their caring-for-all-Americans side in the general election. Guess which manifestation is a lie? Yup, it's the general election rhetoric that's hollow.

Both sides must play to their base to make its through the primaries - the republicans to the right and the democrats to the left. Then after a nominee is decided upon by each party those nominees tack to the center. Basic presidential politics 101.

[sgtsabai]

I think you'll find that Bernie is playing to America right now. Don't expect much change from him because this is him and always has been. He won't loose to any of the now clown/buffoon car. Although one shouldn't just make fun, they are very, very dangerous people that have no concept of the Constitution and/or Bill of rights.

[willyumiii]

A post has been removed, if you wish your post to remain up please use the correct names to describe the various parties, thank you

Great call.

How would we know who they are referring to without using the proper names?

Good job!

Thank you!

[willyumiii]

What a choice for the Democrats, eh?

The Felon or the Communist?

A democratic socialist is very far from being a communist.

The cold war has been over for a long time now and it's propaganda is now obsolete.

Welcome to the 21st century!

P.S. I don't cary for her either, but a felon is not a felon until they have been convicted..and she has not been.

But, nice try.

[chuckd]

All of this rubbish talk about corporations being the financial spark that drives the political engine might be interested to know labor unions really provide that spark.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Organization Contributors

Totals on this page reflect donations from employees of the organization, its PAC and in some cases its own treasury. These totals include all campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties, political action committees (including super PACs), federal 527 organizations, and Carey committees. The totals do not include contributions to 501© organizations, whose political spending has increased markedly in recent cycles. Unlike other political organizations, they are not required to disclose the corporate and individual donors that make their spending possible. Only contributions to Democrats and Republicans or liberal and conservative outside groups are included in calculating the percentages the donor has given to either party.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To give you a head's up, six of the top ten are labor unions and they give 100% to Democrats and liberal causes.

Open the link if you dare.

Edit in:

Goldman Sachs ranks 15th with donations of $54,453,925 split 52-48 in favor of Democrats.

Service Employees International Union ranks 1st with donations of $224,273,550 split 99-1 in favor of Democrats.

This data is for all election cycles.

Unions represent the American worker so of course they will donate to the Democrats. Hardly likely to donate money to the Republicans who detest the thought that workers can unite and speak out and have some leverage in the game.

It highlights that Democrats are selling out the American people and aligning themselves with Wall Street. This is a real concern for the electorate. Republicans play one side of the fence, Democrats are trying to play both sides of the fence, Bernie has a bulldozer and is looking to drive right through the fence and demolish it.

'Feel the Bern' Comrades.

Have you been living in an outback cave for the past 30 years?

Labor unions represent the desires and wishes of the labor union leaders.

Why do you think so many states now have Right to work laws in place?

Try to catch up with the US if you insist on posting about it.

'right to work laws' are you serious? 'Right to be an indentured slave' is more accurate. Republicans have been VERY successful in ensuring Unions are removed from wage negotiations ensuring that workers are unrepresented and open to exploitation by Corporate America. What America needs is to catch up it is falling behind the rest of the developed World rapidly.

Another example of Right Wing gobbledygook that no one is buying anymore.

It is a real credit to The Bern how he is challenging this neocon gibberish. The more people who learn how neocons like you are feeding them tripe and they reject it and get on board.

'Right to Work Laws' what a sham. Absolutely laughable.

You might want to put the shovel down and quit digging. We are talking about the US, not the EU or Australia. I know nothing about their labor union participation and to be quite frank, don't really care.

Check out this link if you want to educate yourself about the labor union participation in the past 50 years. It's been dropping like a rock and has nothing to do with the Republican party.

It has everything to do with union management.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

50 Years Of Shrinking Union Membership, In One Map

Updated February 23, 201511:53 AM ET Published February 23, 201511:04 AM ET

Fifty years ago, nearly a third of U.S. workers belonged to a union. Today, it's one in 10. But the decline has not been the same for every state. Here is a map showing how union membership has changed across the country.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/23/385843576/50-years-of-shrinking-union-membership-in-one-map

[lannarebirth]

Some people have made a thing about Bernie being a Jew but only about 10 percent of Americans say they wouldn't vote for someone just based on being a Jew.

But he has too MUCH BIGGER political problems.

A very large percentage of Americans will never vote for an atheist.

Also, a very large percentage of Americans will never vote for socialist.

Bernie recently "came out" as not associating himself with religiosity which is short of saying he's an atheist, but it's close enough.

People, forget this guy.

It's hopeless!

Those two things are simply insurmountable going into the general election, if he's nominated.

And let's face it a position of opposing selling arms to Israel before the Yom Kippur war hardly makes him a certainty for the Jewish vote, should such facts be common knowledge.

Israel policy is one issue out of many for most American Jews. American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and democratic and the republican party has failed in changing that, even though yes, they are usually generally stronger on Israel support. A candidate that was explicitly "anti-Zionist" would be different, but that's not likely to happen with either major party. The only one even close to that in this election cycle is republican Rand Paul and he's not a contender. Obama, who most Israelis hate, won big two times with the Jewish American vote, and if it was legal for him to run a third time, he would win their vote again.

I don't know all the details about Sanders policy positions but I do like his advocacy for a real universal health care system in the U.S. Obamacare is disliked from all sides, the right, middle, and left. It helped some people and hurt some people, but it doesn't provide even close to real full access and the way it is structured (welfare for big pharma, big hospital, and big insurance) means real COST containment is impossible.

Regardless of your healthcare insurance policy. Whether it be Medicaid, Medicare or the so called "Cadillac" policies, everyone now understands that the best way to get any kind of healthcare service is to show up in the Emergency Room. Regardless whether your ailment is emergent or not. You will get attention there, which is weeks or months away otherwise. This drives up healthcare costs tremendously but I can't knock the people who do it. They're just making the best of a broken system.

[up2u2]

'right to work laws' are you serious? 'Right to be an indentured slave' is more accurate. Republicans have been VERY successful in ensuring Unions are removed from wage negotiations ensuring that workers are unrepresented and open to exploitation by Corporate America. What America needs is to catch up it is falling behind the rest of the developed World rapidly.

Another example of Right Wing gobbledygook that no one is buying anymore.

It is a real credit to The Bern how he is challenging this neocon gibberish. The more people who learn how neocons like you are feeding them tripe and they reject it and get on board.

'Right to Work Laws' what a sham. Absolutely laughable.

You might want to put the shovel down and quit digging. We are talking about the US, not the EU or Australia. I know nothing about their labor union participation and to be quite frank, don't really care.

Check out this link if you want to educate yourself about the labor union participation in the past 50 years. It's been dropping like a rock and has nothing to do with the Republican party.

It has everything to do with union management.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

50 Years Of Shrinking Union Membership, In One Map

Updated February 23, 201511:53 AM ET Published February 23, 201511:04 AM ET

Fifty years ago, nearly a third of U.S. workers belonged to a union. Today, it's one in 10. But the decline has not been the same for every state. Here is a map showing how union membership has changed across the country.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/23/385843576/50-years-of-shrinking-union-membership-in-one-map

Correct and another area that Bernie intends to rectify and not before time. It is another thing that is wrong with America. Worker representation. Over time slowly but surely government regulation has eroded Union participation and it is one of the reasons for the disparity in wages v productivity where the profit share has significantly shifted to the employer / investor. This is exactly the reason why Income Inequality is such a major issue in this election. Will a Republican address this. Absolutely not. In fact a Republican President will work to further erode Union participation. Will Hillary? No she will allow it to continue. Will Bernie address this issue Absolutely he will. His first strategy will be to raise the minimum wage and slowly over time roll back government regulations that have eroded worker participation. There are a number of over seas models that work really well that he can adopt.

So yes the 'big bad evil Union' boogie man is just another Right Wing Zombie lie that refuses to die

'Feel the Bern' comrade

[SpokaneAl]

Some people have made a thing about Bernie being a Jew but only about 10 percent of Americans say they wouldn't vote for someone just based on being a Jew.

But he has too MUCH BIGGER political problems.

A very large percentage of Americans will never vote for an atheist.

Also, a very large percentage of Americans will never vote for socialist.

Bernie recently "came out" as not associating himself with religiosity which is short of saying he's an atheist, but it's close enough.

People, forget this guy.

It's hopeless!

Those two things are simply insurmountable going into the general election, if he's nominated.

And let's face it a position of opposing selling arms to Israel before the Yom Kippur war hardly makes him a certainty for the Jewish vote, should such facts be common knowledge.

Israel policy is one issue out of many for most American Jews. American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and democratic and the republican party has failed in changing that, even though yes, they are usually generally stronger on Israel support. A candidate that was explicitly "anti-Zionist" would be different, but that's not likely to happen with either major party. The only one even close to that in this election cycle is republican Rand Paul and he's not a contender. Obama, who most Israelis hate, won big two times with the Jewish American vote, and if it was legal for him to run a third time, he would win their vote again.

I don't know all the details about Sanders policy positions but I do like his advocacy for a real universal health care system in the U.S. Obamacare is disliked from all sides, the right, middle, and left. It helped some people and hurt some people, but it doesn't provide even close to real full access and the way it is structured (welfare for big pharma, big hospital, and big insurance) means real COST containment is impossible.

Regardless of your healthcare insurance policy. Whether it be Medicaid, Medicare or the so called "Cadillac" policies, everyone now understands that the best way to get any kind of healthcare service is to show up in the Emergency Room. Regardless whether your ailment is emergent or not. You will get attention there, which is weeks or months away otherwise. This drives up healthcare costs tremendously but I can't knock the people who do it. They're just making the best of a broken system.

Generalizations don't help the discussion, especially when they are not true. When we are back in the states, we have our own doctor, can get an appointment within a few days, and are treated very well. And frankly, we are nothing special.

[SpokaneAl]

'right to work laws' are you serious? 'Right to be an indentured slave' is more accurate. Republicans have been VERY successful in ensuring Unions are removed from wage negotiations ensuring that workers are unrepresented and open to exploitation by Corporate America. What America needs is to catch up it is falling behind the rest of the developed World rapidly.

Another example of Right Wing gobbledygook that no one is buying anymore.

It is a real credit to The Bern how he is challenging this neocon gibberish. The more people who learn how neocons like you are feeding them tripe and they reject it and get on board.

'Right to Work Laws' what a sham. Absolutely laughable.

You might want to put the shovel down and quit digging. We are talking about the US, not the EU or Australia. I know nothing about their labor union participation and to be quite frank, don't really care.

Check out this link if you want to educate yourself about the labor union participation in the past 50 years. It's been dropping like a rock and has nothing to do with the Republican party.

It has everything to do with union management.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------50 Years Of Shrinking Union Membership, In One Map

Updated February 23, 201511:53 AM ET Published February 23, 201511:04 AM ET

Fifty years ago, nearly a third of U.S. workers belonged to a union. Today, it's one in 10. But the decline has not been the same for every state. Here is a map showing how union membership has changed across the country.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/23/385843576/50-years-of-shrinking-union-membership-in-one-map

Correct and another area that Bernie intends to rectify and not before time. It is another thing that is wrong with America. Worker representation. Over time slowly but surely government regulation has eroded Union participation and it is one of the reasons for the disparity in wages v productivity where the profit share has significantly shifted to the employer / investor. This is exactly the reason why Income Inequality is such a major issue in this election. Will a Republican address this. Absolutely not. In fact a Republican President will work to further erode Union participation. Will Hillary? No she will allow it to continue. Will Bernie address this issue Absolutely he will. His first strategy will be to raise the minimum wage and slowly over time roll back government regulations that have eroded worker participation. There are a number of over seas models that work really well that he can adopt.

So yes the 'big bad evil Union' boogie man is just another Right Wing Zombie lie that refuses to die

'Feel the Bern' comrade

Democrat answers for increased union participation is to continue to uphold forced membership laws - more of the same. That is the only way to increase participation - give people a choice, especially when they have no choice on where their dues are spent, and they will vote with their feet.

Another area that is just plain wrong is government unions. Unions give massive amounts to a candidate and then when that candidate is elected, they sit down and bargain behind closed doors. Who represents the public at that point? No one.

Unions have provided valuable, irreplaceable, necessary changes for workers throughout their history. That does not mean, however, that government force to require people to pay dues and become members is the solution today.

It is absolutely not and another reason to avoid Clinton, Sanders and the rest who continue to advocate more, bigger and more expensive government as a solution towards their perceived view of our world.

Edited February 3, 2016 by SpokaneAl

[KMartinHandyman]

Here is a little food for thought to those that might be burdened with paying for Bernie's give away programs.

The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money?

[CMNightRider]

Bernie Sanders never owned a business, never invented anything, never had a 9-5 job, never proposed a single bill that passed (25 years in office) and lived off welfare before he was elected to office. Bernie is much like his hero Karl Marx who succeeded at nothing. This guy wants to be President. You have got to be kidding me. You just can't make things like this up.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is equal sharing of misery." Winston Churchill