Americans: Bernie Sanders or Hilary Clinton

[Cato]

I wonder how many more years it would take to flush the entire middle class down the toilet under republican leadership.

Somehow reminded me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ0epRjfGLw

[Minimalist]

I will never cast a vote for Hillary Clinton. I will have no problem casting a vote for Sanders if I'm given the opportunity.

Since we're discussing votes, there is one person in the GOP clown car that I would actually consider voting for. There is plenty not to like, but I would vote for John Kasich over Clinton. He doesn't have a hope in hell of getting the nomination, but he's the only person in the GOP field that resembles a statesman.

Just another scumbag who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big business motherfuckers.  "Screw the working man...but give him a flag to wave" seems to be their fucking motto.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/...ights.html

John Kasich halts union rights for home health-care, child-care workers

[Minimalist]

Hillary's complicity with the vast right wing conspiracy working against her continues to be the mystery of the fucking ages.

It's not a "right wing conspiracy." She's being investigated by the FBI. How she is still a serious candidate to be president of the United States, I have no idea.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015...es-emails/

C/L you do know that the WashingtonTimes is a moonie website, right?  Don't put too much stock in anything those korean shits write.

[Pyrrho]

What I meant was, what kind of policies/ideals would make someone a "real liberal" that people like Bernie don't have?

Here you go, dear.

Bernie's close enough for me.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Bernie is clearly a step in the right direction.  Here, though, is an example of something that goes beyond what Bernie supports:

http://www.basicincomeaction.org

I think it is a great idea, as it could replace both welfare and social security as presently implemented, and streamline the bureaucracy needed to administer such programs, as eligibility would be simplified.  It can be paid for by making rich people pay their fair share in taxes (which is an idea Bernie supports).

I remember as a college student getting federal aid for attending school, that part of it was based on financial need.  Which meant that if I worked all summer long and saved up money, they would punish me by giving me less money.  Thus, the program in place discouraged such things.  What I did was just attend classes in the summer, as I did not want to work for crap wages and then get less government money.

The same sort of thing happens with social security for disabled people.  I know someone who is crippled* from having polio as a child, and if she works too much, the government will cut aid to her.  So she has to be careful about exactly how much money she earns to avoid being punished for working.

Such programs are insane.  If everyone had a guaranteed living wage, no matter what they earned, then people would not be incentivized to not work more, because every additional bit of income would mean more money they have to spend.  As it is now, earning slightly above a threshold is punished with reduced benefits.


____________________________
*For the benefit of those who do not like the word "crippled," that is how she would describe it.  She is not "differently abled," as she has not gained some magic superpower to compensate.  She cannot walk properly, and using nice sounding words does not change the harsh reality.  She hates fucking bullshit like that, as it is just a bad thing to be crippled from polio.

[Whateverist]

Anyone who runs on supporting that is unelectable. Any president elected who covertly wants to implement that would find out just how weak the office of the president of the united states truly is.

I'd like to see us move much closer to that than we are but I recognize that such a great journey begins with small steps.

[abaris]

C/L you do know that the WashingtonTimes is a moonie website, right?  Don't put too much stock in anything those korean shits write.

Woodward and Bernstein wouldn't get a foot in the door these days.

[vorlon13]

. . . streamline the bureaucracy . . .





thanx Pyrrho

[Neo-Scholastic]

I wonder how many more years it would take to flush the entire middle class down the toilet under republican leadership.

You cannot can lay the decline of the Middle Class all at the feet of the Republican party. The Congressional Republicans only make show votes. Obama has pretty much gotten every thing he's wanted. Even then, I'm entirely convinced that the very existence of a 'middle class' isn't just a historical anomaly. Perhaps, the rich-poor divide is the default position and trying to cling to the model of how we think things should be versus how they actually work may blind us to other possible, perhaps even more effective, social orders.

I mean, in the West we have already largely solved the problem of absolute poverty. Our poor have cable television, cell phones, and indoor plumbing. What we have now is relative poverty in which the poor do have enough to live but just not as much as others that unsurprisingly live better. Any remaining absolute poverty is largely the result of poor decisions, mental illness, or evil. Those problems require a different kind of intervention that 'basic income'.

[abaris]

Perhaps, the rich-poor divide is the default position and trying to cling to the model of how we think things should be versus how they actually work may blind us to other possible, perhaps even more effective, social orders.

It certainly was in feudal Europe. Something to strive for?

[downbeatplumb]

I wonder how many more years it would take to flush the entire middle class down the toilet under republican leadership.

You cannot can lay the decline of the Middle Class all at the feet of the Republican party. The Congressional Republicans only make show votes. Obama has pretty much gotten every thing he's wanted. Even then, I'm entirely convinced that the very existence of a 'middle class' isn't just a historical anomaly. Perhaps, the rich-poor divide is the default position and trying to cling to the model of how we think things should be versus how they actually work may blind us to other possible, perhaps even more effective, social orders.

I mean, in the West we have already largely solved the problem of absolute poverty. Our poor have cable television, cell phones, and indoor plumbing. What we have now is relative poverty in which the poor do have enough to live but just not as much as others that unsurprisingly live better. Any remaining absolute poverty is largely the result of poor decisions, mental illness, or evil. Those problems require a different kind of intervention that 'basic income'.

Not in the UK they don't, we have an underclass that has developed under the tories that relies on food hand outs, do not have enough money so get more and more in debt that they will never pay and have inadequate housing, we often have exposes on this issue but the government is now entirely made up of millionaires who completely lack empathy. I'm pretty sure this also the case for the US.