Upload
Login or register
x

Bernie Sanders

 
Bernie Sanders. If you're going to leave a political stance in the comments, be unbiased. I'm always up for having my opinion changed if you serve a good-enough

If you're going to leave a political stance in the comments, be unbiased. I'm always up for having my opinion changed if you serve a good-enough point.

2230 AM
at Feller
I' m really tired of "adults" saying that "we
youth only like Bernie Sanders because it' s
the hipster thing to do." **** yen You ruined
this economy and it has been put on us since
we were children. We' had to deal with not
having a home for months en end. Nat having
enough maney for schewl lunches, We' had
to get ****** lots you won' t raise the wages of
pay for college.
We don' t feller Bernie Sanders because it' s
hipster" we feller Bernie because he' s been
screaming about the same **** that wave
been screaming about for years and you
called "adults" won' t listen because we' re
children".
860 notes oqq at E
at Feller
...
+623
Views: 29651
Favorited: 34
Submitted: 09/10/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to ThatFatMummy

Comments(268):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
12345>
[ 268 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
112 comments displayed.
Reply
+317
#1 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
I personally think that it won't really matter who gets elected as the corporations have a firm hold of most power in the US.
Reply
-40
User avatar #148 to #1 - misterbluecoat (09/11/2015) [-]
You say that as if that's really that bad.
Reply
+14
User avatar #202 to #148 - gorillabutts (09/11/2015) [-]
Tell us how it wouldn't be bad? Corporations pay off local candidates through sponsoring campaings. These candidates later become senators and congressmen and carry on the ideologies they had before. Otherwise, a large amount of candidates come from big companies. Look at the Bush's for example. They had the money to campaign thanks to their oil, a factor which later affected decisions such as whether to invade Iraq or not. Oh, and not to mention the large amount of lobbying these companies do to extend copyrights and patents.

These corporations are so embedded into the government that farmers are being taken to pieces by companies such as Monsanto because "trademarked" GMO crops germinate and spread to non-GMO fields, causing these farmers to "illegally" own Monsanto's property. Oh, and if farmers are caught with these GMO crops, then there are lawsuits for days that eventually ruin the farmer and put them out of business, unless, of course, they give in and comply with Monsanto's strict rules and use only their crops. All of this is possible due to lobbying the government to overlook the fact that nature does what nature wants, and that GMOs will spread if left outside a controlled environment.

And that's just one of the ****** corporations that are so greatly intertwined with the government. Now imagine at least 20 more of these, all with their own agendas for success telling the American government what to do to make the corporation's life easier. Is it still good now? It's not like the American economy is actually booming, especially with that ever-increasing debt hanging above the heads of all...
Reply
-105
User avatar #3 to #1 - platinumaltaria (09/10/2015) [-]
Tin foil hats, gentlemen!
Reply
+83
#60 to #3 - dorg (09/10/2015) [-]
**dorg used "*roll picture*"**
**dorg rolled image** www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
You don't even need a tinfoil hat for this one... Thinking that corporations are not the mayor power in the USA is just naive.
Reply
+5
#162 to #60 - hackhazardly (09/11/2015) [-]
I dunno, I like to ware mine anyway. Just as a precaution.
Reply
+4
#172 to #162 - vorarephilia (09/11/2015) [-]
and mine is stylin
Reply
+1
User avatar #136 to #60 - mountaindewkie (09/11/2015) [-]
If Bernie or Ben Carson doesnt get elected the US is ******
Reply
+1
User avatar #145 to #136 - protectorofjam (09/11/2015) [-]
Lets just hope we're making the right choice
Reply
+1
User avatar #248 to #145 - hetzerdk (09/11/2015) [-]
Are you still this optimistic?
Reply
0
User avatar #262 to #248 - protectorofjam (09/11/2015) [-]
I am. Just confused and spun around
Reply
+27
#11 to #3 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
Translation: Doublethink! Doublethink! Double ungood anticitizen!
Reply
+2
User avatar #204 to #11 - theasexualgamer ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
I just read 1984. Doubleplusgood book.
Reply
+5
User avatar #18 to #3 - MegaAwesomeSauce (09/10/2015) [-]
Well he's not incorrect. Lobby holds a lot of power in US politics. Every major media outlet is owned and operated by one of the big corporations, and this means that the best means of promoting your campaign is controlled and regulated by a major corporation. If you're not in line with the interests of these corporations, do you think it likely that they'll have you on air? And that's just an example of how corporations have a grasp on the election process...
Reply
+5
User avatar #17 to #3 - nothingtodoinlife (09/10/2015) [-]
It does have SOME merit though. Ever since the Citizens United decision laid out by the Supreme Court in 2010, "Political speech is indispensable to a democracy, which is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation.(CIT v. FEC)" This granted them the ability to donate large sums of money to candidates, which is a huge factor in deciding whether a candidate will actually be able to be a legitimate candidate for presidency (In 2012 there was over $2.6 billion spent on the presidential race alone)

www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/

These corporations that are large and with endless pockets have the politicians ears because they know they are a great resource to have. Not saying they run the country, just saying they do hold a majority of the chips. Personally I don't believe anything will change until people in the US actually get a basic knowledge of the powers that each branch hold in the government, a basic sense of macroeconomics, and some common ******* sense. I'm more worried about the general population's knowledge and decision making skills than the amount of money being spent on the candidates themselves.

TL;DR: It's not a conspiracy theory because it holds merit, but its also not a full blown oligarchy.
Reply
0
#128 to #3 - anon (09/11/2015) [-]
Nice to see you again, Mr. Goldbergstein.
Reply
0
#115 to #3 - anon (09/11/2015) [-]
If you go to a university and take Political Science 101, you will immediately be told that major elections are one of the least important factors in modern American politics. You will be told that the real power rests with party leaders, small-state senators, and executive agency heads. These individuals then give a very open ear to lobbyists of all sorts, and corporations are often the most aggressive lobbyists.
Reply
0
User avatar #25 to #1 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
That's Bernie Sander's primary concern.... So really, it will matter who you vote for.
Reply
+1
#19 to #1 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
AKA Modern Capitalism
Reply
+1
#100 to #1 - innocentbabies (09/10/2015) [-]
That's why domestic policy doesn't bother me that much. Although Trump seems like he's too full of himself and may not listen to people who try to talk him down when NK, China, Russia, etc. . . do something.
Reply
+4
#34 to #1 - ygdosst ONLINE (09/10/2015) [-]
Bernie's the only person that actually matters voting for, because the only person that will try to impede that is Bernie, by shutting down the TPP

And if he get's JFK'ed then you ******* bet there's going to be Molotovs going through bank windows.
Reply
+20
#39 - tuhuar (09/10/2015) [-]
I'll just leave this here in lieu of actually talking politics. Regardless of my actual political views, I like this image a lot.
Reply
+13
User avatar #42 - enduro (09/10/2015) [-]
I'm just sitting here thinking that you should charge your phone
Reply
+12
#24 - adu (09/10/2015) [-]
>thinking Bernie will help the economy
Reply
-1
#27 to #24 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
>thinking trump will help the economy
Also, I'm not sure what kind of reaction this image is supposed to be making. But I'm using it anyway.
Reply
+2
#29 to #27 - adu (09/10/2015) [-]
>thinking I care about the orange bastard
Reply
+12
#49 to #29 - kevinzheng (09/10/2015) [-]
When you nutted but she keep sucking.
Reply
-3
User avatar #30 to #29 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
I kinda figured. It was just a shot in the dark.
Reply
+87
User avatar #20 - lean (09/10/2015) [-]
I am just going to say this:
Bernie's immediate plan is to raise taxes, and not just the top tier.
He has ideals concerning vastly expensive social benefit package plans, the overwhelming majority of which are open ended regarding funding. Our current congress has busted budgets repeatedly, despite having 7 consecutive quarters of record revenue, and may I add despite a democrat majority of congress during the Obama administration. We can't afford the social policies currently enacted despite record funding. Does Bernie seek to reform government spending? No. He seeks to compound it, and raise the funding from the record low labor force participants (under 62% of working age population) via tax increases. How exactly does that help the economy?

Our government has a spending problem, not a money problem. In typical leftist ideology, Bernie seeks to spend his way out of if. One day he will run out of other people's money to spend.
Reply
+17
#109 to #20 - dwarfman (09/10/2015) [-]
Tax reform is one of the many problems we need to tackle but you're right: Spending must be first. I don't just mean the welfare **** that the reds have a hard-on for screaming about or the military like the blue cry their eyes out over: All of it! We need more auditors, better auditors to reign in our waste. More importantly: Turn them loose on the economy particularly the big banks to prevent another 2008.

To reform welfare we need a simple rule: if you're healthy you work. No healthy adult should be on welfare (I am including mental health in this) but I respect we have working poor. Their biggest problem ends up being their benefits drop suddenly at given income brackets meaning despite making more at work they're worse off from the loss of said benefits. Now smooth that, take a percent here a percent there until around the 30k-40k mark it phases completely. The child tax credits need to be expanded as well but only for middle (60k-150k) earners. White trash, ******* , and illegals don't need to have more children but our actual wage earners do! (Hence why I love Colorado's birth control program)

Spending can be tackled with better bookkeeping but more importantly: an easing of regulation for the purchase of goods/services by government departments. We do need to turn more services to the states but again that must be gradual. State governments are beyond mismanaged and to leave these essential functions in their hands. (Looking at you Kansas you red **** stains)

Taxes. Grab your pitchforks for this next one: The only tax should be the income tax. There I said it. What I propose is a removal of the corporate tax for manufacturing to attract them back. Now if the tax is dropped companies will issue more dividends/stock options so the rich ***** can take advantage. The way around this is to increase the capital gains of that bracket. "But Dwarfman now they won't invest and create jobs!" No, but the company will since it now has more capital to invest in itself instead of paying out a $50m bonus to a glorified manager who would now have $30m go to Uncle Sam.
Reply
+1
#221 to #109 - fuckinjunk (09/11/2015) [-]
Thank you for typing that out so I didn't have to.
Reply
+1
#220 to #109 - jacg (09/11/2015) [-]
I love what you are saying other than that last one. I really don't know enough economics to guess as to how that would turn out, so I'll withold judgement.
What I can say is that many of the largest corps nowadays pay either barely any or no taxes, and we do have a real problem with Corp welfare handouts that just wind up in some rich guy's pocket.

Personally, I think we need to invest heavily in education and our space program. During the space race, the US still had a huge number of jobs that have now been shipped overseas. We paid more, but no one else knew how to do what we were doing. The research + companies started here, and stayed here to stay at the forefront.
We can recapture that with better education for our populace. A better educated workforce produces more valuable commodities and services, which in turn increases GDP. What's not to like?
Reply
+1
User avatar #254 to #220 - dwarfman (09/11/2015) [-]
We're in the middle of an education crisis and is part of our current problem. We need to start at elementary and work our way up (college is good thankfully) but as for the tax my rule is: Don't hit the company hit the employees
Reply
+9
User avatar #167 - darksideofthebeast (09/11/2015) [-]
>15$ an hour
>good idea
Reply
+1
User avatar #177 to #167 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
I don't know about you, but I'm working 40 hours/week.
Being paid minimum wage, I hardly have enough money to pay rent & eat. I'd like to save up for college but that won't happen unless either my tuition drops drastically, or I start making more money.
Reply
+2
User avatar #241 to #177 - synthane (09/11/2015) [-]
Sorry, dude. Raising the minimum wage won't actually help you. Whenever minimum wage goes up, inflation spikes. College tuition rises substantially faster than other forms of inflation. The best case scenario is that you will be better off for the first year, then inflation catches up and you are back where you started. The actually likely scenario is that you'll be mildly better off for a brief period of time and end up worse off as far as your chances at college are concerned.
Reply
+1
User avatar #250 to #241 - wraithguard (09/11/2015) [-]
The problem isn't that he isn't making enough to pay for college. The problem is that college, like health care, has become insanely expensive.
Reply
+2
User avatar #240 to #177 - darksideofthebeast (09/11/2015) [-]
I agree for raising it to 10/11 an hour, but 15?
Do you realize what that would do? REAL jobs hourly rate would have to be raised TREMENDOUSLY and also, all the prices of food, gas and other things would be raised A LOT.
And minimum wage jobs would start finding ways to hire less people and they would fire people for stupid **** ...
It's not good.
Reply
+3
#180 to #177 - masanori ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
If the minimum wage is raised enough to offset the cost of college for you, you probably won't have a job at all. I'm sorry, but you need to increase your value as a member of the workforce, not rely on a government mandate to do it for you especially when it will actually destroy the economy and increase unemployment and won't actually solve any of our current problems .
Reply
-1
User avatar #184 to #180 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
You can't assume someone just wants to raise the minimum wage with no plan to back it up
Reply
-1
User avatar #182 to #180 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
As I said in a previous comment
The unemployment won't drop nearly as much as you're making it sound if Bernie was actually allowed to intervene the way he wants, and make unions easier to form seeing as how they're practically impossible now
Reply
+3
#183 to #182 - masanori ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
Unions are not good for low skilled, low pay workers.
Reply
-3
User avatar #185 to #183 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
In this case, yes they are.
Reply
+1
#186 to #185 - masanori ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
In what case?
Reply
-1
User avatar #207 to #186 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
no really, why are they not? I really do wanna know that.
Reply
-1
#208 to #207 - masanori ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
I'll explain it to you later. I'm actually at work right now and it's going to take more than the few spare minutes I have here and there to explain it.
Reply
-1
User avatar #188 to #186 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/11/2015) [-]
In the case of keeping the jobs they've had for years, but they suddenly lose because the people who have 45-billion dollars are dropping down to a "measly" 30 billion?

Seriously, tell me why they're NOT good for low-skilled, low-pay jobs?
Reply
0
User avatar #223 to #188 - dorfdorfdorf (09/11/2015) [-]
please tell us why they are
Reply
+2
User avatar #168 to #167 - darksideofthebeast (09/11/2015) [-]
for minimum wage*
Reply
+36
#21 - pleasejustdie (09/10/2015) [-]
Sanders has some good points to make, but he feels far too left wing for me. America really needs a more center of the spectrum candidate.
0
#69 to #21 - drekinn has deleted their comment [-]
Reply
-3
User avatar #154 to #21 - izazi (09/11/2015) [-]
so in other words... you want an independent rather than a democrat or republican...
Reply
-2
User avatar #146 to #21 - protectorofjam (09/11/2015) [-]
That's a good point, but unfortunatly he's our best option for now.
Reply
+1
User avatar #190 to #21 - manza (09/11/2015) [-]
I love this site for not screaming SANDERS 2016. I ******* hate Reddit right now, they ******* love him for some reason. Nobody else, not even another democratic candidate. Sanders looks like Obama Mark II to me.
Reply
0
User avatar #242 to #190 - synthane (09/11/2015) [-]
I remember seeing something a while back about him having a team specifically for raising his popularity on the internet with a focus on Reddit in particular. Don't know if it was true or not, though.
Reply
+12
#96 to #21 - trollmetoday (09/10/2015) [-]
Welcome aboard.
Reply
+12
#4 - platinumaltaria (09/10/2015) [-]
I'm just gonna leave this here before the next level salt comes.

Progressives =/= Liberals
Bernie =/= Progressive
Reply
-3
User avatar #12 to #4 - NoXV (09/10/2015) [-]
I don't agree with everyone acting like Bernie Sanders will single-handedly save the US. I highly doubt he'll have much of an impact even on the off chance he does end up running and getting elected. But I do think he's better than the competition.
Reply
+6
User avatar #13 to #12 - NoXV (09/10/2015) [-]
Which isn't saying much.
Reply
-2
User avatar #14 to #12 - platinumaltaria (09/10/2015) [-]
Oh certainly, politics in america is so hampered by your current system; but it would be a step in the right direction.
Reply
-2
User avatar #126 to #12 - notanotheraccount (09/11/2015) [-]
If things were different in the government but the same for everything else, he probably would make a difference, and **** , if he can do that and is willing to actually try with the government how it is right now, he has my vote.
Reply
+14
#89 - dakkadakka (09/10/2015) [-]
Sanders is an anti-gun piece of **** and for that if I were American I could never vote for him
>tfw no socially liberal pro-liberty candidates this side of the pond or that
Reply
0
#120 to #89 - layxe (09/11/2015) [-]
i know he doesnt agree with them, but i thought he was neutral on guns
Reply
+8
#124 to #120 - dakkadakka (09/11/2015) [-]
He wants "common sense" gun laws and doesn't think people "need" assault weapons or any weapon other than hunting guns. He also voted for a bunch of measures I can't remember, though they were on /k/ earlier, though the thread 404'd
He's a ******* anti and people need to stop defending him.
Reply
-7
#130 to #124 - layxe (09/11/2015) [-]
i guess the person called dakkadakka knows, but honestly assault rifles might be a bit far. dont get me wrong i love guns and have often thought of moving to the US for the guns but letting anyone who wants have military grade stuff is maybe not the best idea. at least he doesnt want to take all guns
Reply
+10
#131 to #130 - dakkadakka (09/11/2015) [-]
You need to wait an age and get a permit for select fire weapons.
What libruls and anti-gun faggots are referring to when saying "baby-killing assault weapons" are in fact regular semi-automatic rifles that just happen to look black and scary.

If you can drive past speeding traffic inches away from oncoming cars without flinching, you can trust your fellow man to be armed, I always say.
Reply
+3
#132 to #131 - layxe (09/11/2015) [-]
you have now changed my mind on this
Reply
+3
#133 to #132 - dakkadakka (09/11/2015) [-]
Welcome to the team
The media is so manipulative in its use of scary terms to deter those who don't particularly pay attention to such things, such as:
-assault weapons
-high-capacity clips (meaning standard capacity magazines)
-barrel shroud (literally there to help cool the gun)
-tactical military style rifle (AR-15 or some other black rifle that looks menacing to puffs, but actually is no more deadly than a M1)
-"but assault weapons are no good for hunting, you'd rip it apart" (.223 is garbage at hunting compared to .243 or .308 or other larger calibres. .223 (5.56) is literally just a high velocity .22 round.)

I could rant on, but I'd be preaching to the converted.
Reply
0
#161 to #133 - layxe (09/11/2015) [-]
yea, i live in austtralia, so i know all about media being controlled by biased people. our prime ministers pretty much get in depending on who can ******** to the most people. they lied that refugee's were throwing their chilren into the water to kill them in rotest, but they were trying to save them from a sinking boat. the navy sailor who called them out was discharged.
Reply
0
#260 to #161 - dakkadakka (09/11/2015) [-]
I pray the UK doesn't follow AU in its example on gun laws after this law review.
Hard to believe another country has it worse than us, but AU managed it. Poor sods.
Reply
0
#134 to #130 - dakkadakka (09/11/2015) [-]
I should also add that "military-grade" is actually pretty bog standard and ****** .
I wouldn't use a military issue trigger on any weapon willingly, since they are garbage and cheap.
I mean I wouldn't anyway since I live in the UK and am severely restricted in what I can own.
Reply
+4
User avatar #107 to #89 - jzwangpk (09/10/2015) [-]
Tell me about it. I like his stances on other stuff but his anti-gun stance is a complete no-go for me, and there's no other candidates that are particularly appealing.
Reply
+2
#108 to #107 - dakkadakka (09/10/2015) [-]
I'd go for Rand Paul if I were... What's the term for citizens over there... Ah, free.
Reply
+5
User avatar #150 - kiaserzerg (09/11/2015) [-]
no matter who wins, we are ****** , bernie showed the world he is a pussy who will bow, hillary is a criminal, and trump is a joke.
Reply
0
#237 to #150 - anon (09/11/2015) [-]
It's going to be Jeb Bush
Reply
+17
User avatar #72 - heartlessrobot (09/10/2015) [-]
Because what he's suggesting will ONLY increase the debt and worsen the economy. We need a stronger workforce and cheap labor, not less of a workforce and more expensive labor.
Reply
-4
User avatar #73 to #72 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
He wants to create a bigger workforce via fixing up our roads & railways.

As for "we need cheaper labor", I'd like to assume you're being sarcastic.
Reply
+3
User avatar #75 to #73 - heartlessrobot (09/10/2015) [-]
We need a lot of people working current wages on those roads and railways if we're gonna afford fixing them up.
If we raise minimum wages, we're gonna have people fired and replaced with computers to avoid paying more higher wages. Unless we make that illegal.
Reply
-4
User avatar #76 to #75 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
Which is the exact reason why he wants to make forming a union easier than it currently is... because right now, it's practically impossible.
Reply
+3
User avatar #77 to #76 - heartlessrobot (09/10/2015) [-]
That's because unions are no better than the mob.
My dad was unemployed for months because where he worked got shut down. Two guys were caught stealing from the company, so his boss fired them. Union tried to fine him if he didn't hire them back, he absolutely refused to do either, and the whole business got shut down because of it.
Reply
-5
User avatar #79 to #77 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
Like, either you're leaving out / you don't know some major details, or you're just making stuff up at this point because that's really not what unions are for dude.
Reply
-4
User avatar #78 to #77 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
You'll have to forgive me if I don't believe that. That's just a little too unrealistic for me.
Reply
+5
User avatar #111 to #78 - FlameBreaker (09/10/2015) [-]
Sounds very legit to me. I've worked with high-ups in my company very intimately. As in on a basis where we amiably talk and chat during breaks. These guys **** their pants at the mention of unions or even at the CHANCE of upsetting one.

These guys have so much muscle, and are pretty much untouchable because they know they can **** over your entire business by indirectly shutting down all work in it. And the worst part is, they can fuss and whine and sue left right and center, and doing so is all perfectly legal. Companies can't do **** if most of their labor is under a strong union since the second the unions come in, it's ultimatums and concealed threats everywhere.

I remember a story the District Manager told me once, where some guy always smoked inside the building (which is not allowed) and pretty much never did anything but always stayed overtime. At one point, he starts cussing out the DM, who snaps and fires him then and there. So off goes Mr. Worker's Rights, and gets the union involved saying that it's illegal to fire someone over "a personal dispute or argument".

The DM got fined, and HR was forced to give him a 2 month "vacation" without pay to punish the poor guy
Reply
0
User avatar #244 to #111 - synthane (09/11/2015) [-]
Yeah, unions are bad news now. They have outlived their usefulness. They were started in a time where it was nearly impossible for an individual to be heard in a widespread fashion to defend the workers. Now anyone can get people to see them, and businesses need to maintain a good public standing. The unions just mess things up now.
Reply
+13
#68 - justtocomment (09/10/2015) [-]
Bernie is counting on this exact mentality. He wants you to think "See! These ideas I've had about the economy since Jr. High aren't crazy or uninformed!" So that the disenfranchised and uneducated masses will throw support at him.
I always lay this challenge before anyone in support of everything Bernie (the slef-proclaimed socialist) wants to do: show me one country in a socialist system and tell me their income tax rate and cost of a gallon of gas. Find me one that has a comparable income tax rate, and I promise gas will be nearly $9 a gallon - gas that expensive means literally everything else will be that much more expensive.
Reply
+28
#15 - boothead (09/10/2015) [-]
Hey guys, lets vote the biggest socialist ever to run in while almost every other left wing socialist Country in the world fails! What could go wrong!?
We get it, you have no idea how to money and you're not middle class, get your ******* Bernie Sanders cock lust out of here
Reply
-4
User avatar #137 to #15 - bronybox (09/11/2015) [-]
The U.S. is failing harder economically than the successful Socialist countries though?
Reply
0
User avatar #247 to #137 - somuchfreedom (09/11/2015) [-]
yeah, no
Reply
-2
User avatar #99 to #15 - PenguinsOfMars (09/10/2015) [-]
yeah but why do you act like socialism is a bad word?
Reply
-4
#83 to #15 - imbehindu (09/10/2015) [-]
I've always lived comfortably. I grew up in a large spacious house, never had to share a bedroom. Both of my parents are full time employed. I would say that we're definitely somewhere in the middle class. If I got to choose who the US elected it's president I would rather castrate myself with a rusty spoon than pick anyone other than Bernie. Granted I know that left-wing right-wing are very different in American, hell Bernie would be centre spectrum in most European countries, and I also know that Europe is failing economically, which is what I assume you mean by every other left-wing socialist country. However, I think it's more of most of the world is failing economically, just because the US is further right, doesn't make it any better than the rest of us economically, it's actually worse, you have the largest national debt in the world. You rank 15th in debt per capita if we include Luxembourg, Monaco and Hong Kong as countries. The US hasn't adjusted to the 21st century social reforms because while those adjustments were happening you were in the cold war, and things like the Red-Scare drove Americans to be terrified of the word "left" because you made it synonymous to "Soviet Stalin-Lover". I don't believe in redistribution of wealth, like **** it if some genius makes 80bn dollars good for them, but I'm glad I live in a country where my aunt didn't go bankrupt for having cancer, and I'm glad I live in a country where my friend didn't lose his house because his mother got genetic arthritis making her too sick too work. You can waffle on about insurance this and insurance that, but we all pay insurance, here we call them "taxes". It's our form of insurance, only it applies to everyone, even those who can't pay them. And **** it I don't care if 45% of my wages get taken through various routes, because I know that that money, even if it's not used to treat me, makes the lives of everyone I know better, the lives of everyone I'll ever meet even. That money can be used to treat children with cystic fibrosis, it can be used to ensure that all the children here are entitled to the same free education. We pay insurance here that not only insures us, but it insures the entire nation as a whole is a better place, and I only need to look at the poor and "2nd class citizens" in the US to remind myself of why I don't get to spend half my paycheck. We all accept the sacrifices to make our country a better place. And that is what it means to be a patriot. And to be free. Freedom isn't just being allowed to do what you want, freedom is being able to in the knowledge that if you **** up people will catch you and you will still be free, not sleeping in a box and ******** in an alleyway outside a liquor store because you tried and failed to be free.
Rant over. I applaud anyone who actually read that.
Reply
0
User avatar #246 to #83 - somuchfreedom (09/11/2015) [-]
Freedom is not however being forced to catch your neighbor against your will. You should be free to sink or swimm. Do I believe in unbridled capitalism? We have seen the dangers of that, but the idea that it is the governments job to take half your **** and hand it out to everyone else is detestable to me on the highest level.
Reply
0
#251 to #246 - imbehindu (09/11/2015) [-]
Well it's not detestable for me, it's quite nice really. There's no class warfare here. We treat people like people. I see the cold war's influence is still going strong on you anyway
Reply
0
User avatar #256 to #251 - somuchfreedom (09/11/2015) [-]
Me sharing an idealogical difference with you does not mean that I am somehow brainwashed. I was not even born during the cold war
Reply
0
#265 to #256 - imbehindu (09/11/2015) [-]
It influenced your entire country, and changed it's social structure completely.
Reply
0
User avatar #267 to #265 - somuchfreedom (09/12/2015) [-]
yes, during that period, it built this nation into the greatest economic and military power in the world. But seriously, you can't just discount someones political views because of where they are raised. Since you grew up in a socialist country, by your logic I don't have to take your opinion on capitalism seriously at all
Reply
-2
User avatar #63 to #15 - astraea (09/10/2015) [-]
"while almost every other left wing socialist Country in the world fails"
what countries though
Reply
-1
#71 to #15 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
Reply
+7
User avatar #105 to #71 - brassydolphin (09/10/2015) [-]
The nordics have succeeded despite of socialism, not because of it
Reply
+4
#82 to #71 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
Success also breeds increased rates of rape and murder, apparently.
Reply
-2
#213 to #71 - brainbug (09/11/2015) [-]
>97.1% white.
Reply
+1
User avatar #249 to #213 - wraithguard (09/11/2015) [-]
for now
Reply
+3
#85 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
This person is really just as ignorant, he assigns the blame to the entire older generation like "Uuhh I was dealt a **** hand in life and its all yur fault, not mine." and its really just some angsty hipster ************ ranting about people disagreeing with him by proving their point.

On a political perspective, Bernie is competent, and has good intentions, however I believe he is unwilling to tackle some of the nation's issues like immigration due to the politcal correctness leash around him. Also, many of the solutions he offers, takes into account very little factors that makes the situation the way it is. He isnt bad, hes just ill prepared.
Reply
+3
#94 to #85 - containlettersonly (09/10/2015) [-]
Anyone who has access to the internet and believes in the gender wage gap and a $15 an hour minimum wage is not fit to run a McDonalds let alone The United States.
Reply
+11
#32 - anon (09/10/2015) [-]
Of course the "youth" screams about Bernie Sanders because he promises a wonderful solution to all of American's problems.

But the harsh, real truth is that economics is innately a zero-sum game with winners and losers, and you can't just suddenly fix all the problems in the world a la Sanders style.

That, and he believes in the ******** "social justice" spiel.

Socialist with a belief in racism? White people better get their pocketbooks out, because there's no way in hell those underprivileged minorities are footing the bill for anything.
Reply
-6
User avatar #33 to #32 - ThatFatMummy [OP](09/10/2015) [-]
With bernie sander's plan, the "losers" you're talking about are the super-rich billionaires..... at least, the biggest losers.
Reply
+5
#174 - thekieran ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
Bernie's economic plan in a nutshell
Reply
+2
User avatar #217 - AnomynousUser (09/11/2015) [-]
Yeah, these socialist ideals, policies, and programs have gotten us into the current situation, so let's vote in another socialist to fix it! That'll show those old fogies!
Reply
+2
#170 - dingdongpancakes (09/11/2015) [-]
>voting for a massive socialist
>ever
Reply
+2
#152 - thenoahgoesree ONLINE (09/11/2015) [-]
jesus christ charge your phone
Reply
0
User avatar #165 to #152 - grimsho (09/11/2015) [-]
But rule #1 of posting phone screenshots is to let it get below 20% before taking the picture.
12345>
[ 268 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)