Feel the Bern

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Feel the Bern

Bernie has still got a chance, but holding only 371 to Hill's 1001 must be an inspiration.

...and Trump wins again.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Feel the Bern

I wonder if you were an atheist in your previous life? And by the way, there are no atheists on a sinking ship.

What about all the bodies floating around after the ship sinks? Are they atheists?

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Feel the Bern

It's super tuesday.
Sanders is expected to do well in: Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, Massachuetts, and Oklahoma.
Total pledged delegates in those states: 288.

Clinton is expected to win in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia.
Total pledged delegates for these states: 571.

Okay, so the votes are counted.
Sanders wins: Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma.
Massachusetts: Clinton 45, Sanders 44 pledged delegates.

Pledged delegates won in 11 states yesterday.
Clinton 500, Sanders 326. More or less! My website source, delegate counts for Vermont and Tennessee didn't add up!!!

The battle continues.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Feel the Bern

1) Speculation isn't theft. Anyone who buys anything is engaged in speculation. Is this hamburger worth $10? Is this house worth $200K?

How about this kind of speculation: "Can Joe Dishwasher and his stay-at-home wife with 2 children afford a $200K home? Yes, yes, yes, and we'll lend him the money with only 5% down!" says Countrywide Morgtage. Why? Because after they lend him the money, they are going to sell his mortgage to some bank in the Netherlands along with thousands of other such mortgages. And that bank is going to divvy up those mortgages and sell some of them to some Russian bank and some to a Swedish bank. By the time the Dishwasher family is foreclosed on, no one knows who owns their mortgage. Apparently you didn't have this happen in Canada, but it did in the states. The result was a chain reaction that came back to hit the balance sheets of U.S. banks in a big way, and it virtually froze all inter-bank lending worldwide. Global liquidity was dried up like never before. The day when Obama took office, Bush had a private meeting in which Obama found out the entire economy was on the verge of collapse. Reports were that Obama came out of those meetings "ashen-faced". And very shortly afterwards came the auto industry bailouts to keep hundreds of thousands of auto industry workers with a job. If that hadn't happened, even you in Canada Tom would have lost everything you had -- poof! No matter what form your savings were in, it would be gone. It would have been a worldwide depression of unimaginable proportions.

The government bailouts that you decry were a reaction to unregulated speculation. If the bailouts were theft, so was the speculation.

2) I am personally opposed to regulations with regard to what adults do to their own bodies. I think all drugs should be legal, not just medical marijuana, for example.

Ok, so you are a Libertarian (fiscally conservative, socially liberal). Unfortunately, Libertarians don't exactly get elected. The vast, vast majority of the right is fiscally and socially conservative, leading to the paradox I mentioned.

The paradox you mentioned comes about because of unbridled regulation as explained above. But the other thing that should be mentioned is that most spending by liberal governments, what you call redistribution of wealth, is usually concentrated in doing things that the free market has no interest in doing -- such as providing health care to those who can't afford it. If everything were unregulated, Marco Rubio style, there'd be no environmental protections. I'm sure you've heard of the lead water crisis in Flint, Michigan. Republican governor trying to save money is what caused it. The result was a different kind of theft: the theft of health for thousands of innocent children. The lesson of Flint and of many other such episodes is that redistribution of wealth is sometimes necessary to get things done that selfish, greedy people won't do on their own.

You may abhor it, but this kind of regulation is not going away anytime soon. You should be thankful you don't live in Flint Michigan.

3) Why does ISIS exist? How is the Middle East a better place since 2001? Millions dead and displaced, trillions of dollars wasted.

Every great society in history has had its share of enemies and attackers. Rome fell to barbarians, not all in one instant, but over decades. It could be argued that the rise of ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorist groups was inevitable. The Middle East has been a hotbed of unrest ever since the formation of Israel in 1948, and perhaps before that.

Now, imagine Rand Paul (or Ron Paul) as President in September 2001. Maybe the Iraq war wouldn't have happened, but SOME sort of revenge act against some group in the Middle East would have. The American people would not stand for anything less.

But Rand Paul today thinks we can just withdraw and let the Middle East sort out its own problems.

4) I am an atheist.

I wonder if you were an atheist in your previous life? And by the way, there are no atheists on a sinking ship.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Feel the Bern

Is this hamburger worth $10?

Does that come with fries?
You should always upscale with cheese.
Cheeseburger for $11.50 would always be a better value option than Hamburger for $10. :)

But bringing the thread back to Bernie Sanders.

It's super tuesday.
Sanders is expected to do well in: Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, Massachuetts, and Oklahoma.
Total pledged delegates in those states: 288.

Clinton is expected to win in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia.
Total pledged delegates for these states: 571.

Most of these states are various forms of proportional delegates, so both candidates will win delegates in most of these states. But clearly the math favours Hillary Clinton.

The media likes to sensationalize it as "Clinton will crush Sanders, it's all over".
But, the contest will continue, and the math will not be so lopsided on Mar 15.
Still an uphill battle, but........

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Feel the Bern

1) Redistribution of wealth by speculators is theft. Legal theft, but immoral all the same. We aren't talking about accumulating for something basic like shelter or food. No one "needs" a gated 40,000 square foot mansion.

2) The Right decries government regulation. Their solution? Regulate against a woman's right to choose, against a poor person's access to affordable health care, against medical marijuana. Insanity.

3) Rand Paul.... yeah, you and everyone in ISIS would love him for President.


Not sure Tom if you are Christian like so many of the extreme right in the U.S., but when it comes to the religious right, there's two things I do remember from the New Testament of the Bible that I'm sure that group would rather forget. First, Jesus said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's". And second, although he never took any action against the government of the day, he did throw the MONEY MAKERS out of the temple.

1) Speculation isn't theft. Anyone who buys anything is engaged in speculation. Is this hamburger worth $10? Is this house worth $200K?

2) I am personally opposed to regulations with regard to what adults do to their own bodies. I think all drugs should be legal, not just medical marijuana, for example.

3) Why does ISIS exist? How is the Middle East a better place since 2001? Millions dead and displaced, trillions of dollars wasted.

4) I am an atheist.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Feel the Bern

Re your point 1), I thought you were a 'hand up' (rather than 'hand out') sort of person. Why do you object to helping low-income people, or their children, with educational expenses? Helping someone to improve their income generating prospects, thereby reducing their reliance on government assistance programs, would be a plus in your Ayn Rand world, wouldn't it?

That's an excellent question, and I am happy to answer it.

Let's say you are going to get a degree, and the degree is worth $50K to you. In other words, if you had the money or the ability to get a loan, you would be willing to pay up to $50K. You aren't willing to spend more, and like someone shopping for a car, or a house, or chicken burgers, you are price conscious. You expect value for your money and will shop around for the best value at the best price.

Now, let's say you can get a "free" education. You don't care what it costs. You are not price sensitive. You are okay if the actual cost is $100K. Since you won't argue price, those supplying the service are not likely to do what they can to cut costs. They aren't going to bill you anyway, so really what do you care? The end result is a $50K degree and $50K of waste.

There is no price discovery in government-provided services. How can there be?

P.S. A lot of people without degrees do well. If you were to exclude jobs where a degree is a strict requirement (e.g. doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc.) how beneficial on average is a degree when the cost of getting the degree is factored in? What percentage get a job in their field? If they don't end up in a job in their field why do they need the degree in the first place?

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Feel the Bern

1) Redistribution of wealth by government is theft. Legal theft, but immoral all the same. We aren't talking about providing for something basic like shelter or food. No one "needs" a two-year community college diploma.

2) The Left decries the bailouts. Government bailouts. Their solution? More government. Insanity.

3) The only guy from the Democrats or Republicans I would have voted for if I were an American was Rand Paul. He's no Ron, but he was the best of the bunch as far as I could tell.

1) Redistribution of wealth by speculators is theft. Legal theft, but immoral all the same. We aren't talking about accumulating for something basic like shelter or food. No one "needs" a gated 40,000 square foot mansion.

2) The Right decries government regulation. Their solution? Regulate against a woman's right to choose, against a poor person's access to affordable health care, against medical marijuana. Insanity.

3) Rand Paul.... yeah, you and everyone in ISIS would love him for President.


Not sure Tom if you are Christian like so many of the extreme right in the U.S., but when it comes to the religious right, there's two things I do remember from the New Testament of the Bible that I'm sure that group would rather forget. First, Jesus said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's". And second, although he never took any action against the government of the day, he did throw the MONEY MAKERS out of the temple.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Feel the Bern

1) Redistribution of wealth by government is theft. Legal theft, but immoral all the same. We aren't talking about providing for something basic like shelter or food. No one "needs" a two-year community college diploma.

2) The Left decries the bailouts. Government bailouts. Their solution? More government. Insanity.

3) The only guy from the Democrats or Republicans I would have voted for if I were an American was Rand Paul. He's no Ron, but he was the best of the bunch as far as I could tell.

Re your point 1), I thought you were a 'hand up' (rather than 'hand out') sort of person. Why do you object to helping low-income people, or their children, with educational expenses? Helping someone to improve their income generating prospects, thereby reducing their reliance on government assistance programs, would be a plus in your Ayn Rand world, wouldn't it?

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Feel the Bern

You get the message, but it seems you actually don't understand it. If you did, you'd understand that the words "work" and "earn" even in the U.S. capitalist economy are left wide open, to anyone's interpretation.

The message of Bernie Sanders, at least in part, is that there are already plenty of people getting stuff that they didn't work for or earn. Who would these people be? Sanders speaks a lot about millionaires and billionaires, but I would venture to guess he doesn't tar them all with the same brush. For example, Sanders might say that Bill Gates fully deserves his immense wealth for the work he did with Microsoft. The people that Sanders points to are Wall Street bankers and traders, who earn money on speculation and in doing so can cause great harm to the overall economy. And you should know that Donald Trump will, if elected President, target at least in his tax plan many of the same people. He has said that the "hedge fund people" are not going to like him.

So one question with Sanders becomes: is it worth giving students free university education in return for taking back some of the "disproportionate" wealth of Wall Street speculators? Much of that wealth is being parked in the Cayman Islands or other tax havens worldwide including real estate. Very little of it is being put back into the U.S. economy to generate jobs and businesses. Whereas allowing U.S. students to graduate with university degrees and have very little, if any, debt to pay back would immediately bring about a middle-class wealth effect that would, in Sanders' view, generate an explosion of economic activity that just isn't happening right now. And that isn't even to mention the benefits to science and research and engineering that could accrue within the U.S.

Looking at this through a puritanical lens isn't seeing the big picture. We already have violation of puritanical ethics on a large scale, doing damage to the economy and causing an increasing polarization that is decimating the middle class. How long that can continue is anyone's guess. What's interesting is that there are some members of the millionaire / billionaire class that are calling for higher taxes on themselves and their peers, recognizing that a readjustment seems almost necessary at this point.

Personally, I'll take Sanders over Rubio or Cruz any time. Between Sanders, Trump or Clinton, I think Clinton may be the safest choice, with Sanders still worth consideration.

1) Redistribution of wealth by government is theft. Legal theft, but immoral all the same. We aren't talking about providing for something basic like shelter or food. No one "needs" a two-year community college diploma.

2) The Left decries the bailouts. Government bailouts. Their solution? More government. Insanity.

3) The only guy from the Democrats or Republicans I would have voted for if I were an American was Rand Paul. He's no Ron, but he was the best of the bunch as far as I could tell.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Feel the Bern

People want free stuff that they didn't work for and didn't earn. I get the message.

You get the message, but it seems you actually don't understand it. If you did, you'd understand that the words "work" and "earn" even in the U.S. capitalist economy are left wide open, to anyone's interpretation.

The message of Bernie Sanders, at least in part, is that there are already plenty of people getting stuff that they didn't work for or earn. Who would these people be? Sanders speaks a lot about millionaires and billionaires, but I would venture to guess he doesn't tar them all with the same brush. For example, Sanders might say that Bill Gates fully deserves his immense wealth for the work he did with Microsoft. The people that Sanders points to are Wall Street bankers and traders, who earn money on speculation and in doing so can cause great harm to the overall economy. And you should know that Donald Trump will, if elected President, target at least in his tax plan many of the same people. He has said that the "hedge fund people" are not going to like him.

So one question with Sanders becomes: is it worth giving students free university education in return for taking back some of the "disproportionate" wealth of Wall Street speculators? Much of that wealth is being parked in the Cayman Islands or other tax havens worldwide including real estate. Very little of it is being put back into the U.S. economy to generate jobs and businesses. Whereas allowing U.S. students to graduate with university degrees and have very little, if any, debt to pay back would immediately bring about a middle-class wealth effect that would, in Sanders' view, generate an explosion of economic activity that just isn't happening right now. And that isn't even to mention the benefits to science and research and engineering that could accrue within the U.S.

Looking at this through a puritanical lens isn't seeing the big picture. We already have violation of puritanical ethics on a large scale, doing damage to the economy and causing an increasing polarization that is decimating the middle class. How long that can continue is anyone's guess. What's interesting is that there are some members of the millionaire / billionaire class that are calling for higher taxes on themselves and their peers, recognizing that a readjustment seems almost necessary at this point.

Personally, I'll take Sanders over Rubio or Cruz any time. Between Sanders, Trump or Clinton, I think Clinton may be the safest choice, with Sanders still worth consideration.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Feel the Bern

People want free stuff that they didn't work for and didn't earn. I get the message.

No Tom. With all due respect, you don't get the message.
You're not feeling the Bern!

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Feel the Bern

People want free stuff that they didn't work for and didn't earn. I get the message.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Feel the Bern

That sounds about right to me. He's a way better conman than Bernie Sanders, for example, who is at best average.

Well, I disagree with the label of conman for Bernie Sanders.

In longer interviews, Bernie will explain that he can't accomplish what he has promised unless he gets massive public support after the election. That's why he is asking for a political revolution. I fear many are not hearing that part of the message.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Feel the Bern

Is that the same magazine of journalistic excellence that published the article "A Rape On Campus" in late 2014?

I am not familiar with that article, nor Rolling Stone magazine except for the Matt Taibbi articles.