Lol at the sheep not voting for Bernie sanders lmao srs

[Unbreakable09]

Any clown who supports Sanders is living in the wrong country. Gtfo and go to Canada or Europe.

Libtards gonna libtard.

[AndYUKnowThis]

Voting for Bernie Sanders is VERY risky. If ANY of his tax plans fail on the 1%, the middle class and low income WILL PAY.

[mynameisuntz]

List countries with all of these aspects and equal contribution, and also list the threshold for wages and quality of life above poverty.

What are you referring to when you say equal contribution?

[ContrarianIndi]

Sadly this. Every election there's one candidate that is basically chosen to represent this specific group: college kids especially liberal arts majors, unemployed stoners, hipsters of all types. Last time it was Ron Paul. This time it is Sanders. This is the real sheep candidate. It's the one that gains you the most ridicule for disagreeing, the one that typically promises free this and that or forgiveness on some financial burden, and that sheep perceive to be the next hero of the down trodden. The closer their platform is to a socialist society, the stronger these hipsters and inexperienced young students will support them.

Sanders supports under age 23 will likely look back and ask wtf they were thinking, when they gain some real world understanding and experience as to finance and politics. For the rest, it's those that remain super ultra liberal either because they are unemployed as "free spirits experiencing all life has to offer the soul" or those that simply hope for more government hand outs every day.

With that said, no candidate is looking ideal. But sanders is the flavor of this election to this demographic, in 2016.

Ron Paul has almost nothing in common with Sanders other than being elderly, removing federal prohibition on pot and less interventionist foreign policy. The similarities end there.

Ron Paul supported economic and individual liberty 100%. Sanders supports neither. Sanders doesn't give a fuk about the constitution, as evident by his willingness to vastly expand the size and scope of the federal government. Ron Paul understood that power corrupts and when you give the federal govt more power, more lobbyists, special interests and bureaucrats will inevitably seize that power, which is why it is essential to keep the federal government heavily limited.

[A-DzO]

Wish Ron Paul was PM here.

[LikeAMachine]

A vote for Bernie is a vote for him to take 10% more of your paycheck, even if you're poor.

/ thread


You're a fukking retard if you think the government is going to pass up a chance to go into EVERYONES pockets.

[HammZ]

Sadly this. Every election there's one candidate that is basically chosen to represent this specific group: college kids especially liberal arts majors, unemployed stoners, hipsters of all types. Last time it was Ron Paul. This time it is Sanders. This is the real sheep candidate. It's the one that gains you the most ridicule for disagreeing, the one that typically promises free this and that or forgiveness on some financial burden, and that sheep perceive to be the next hero of the down trodden. The closer their platform is to a socialist society, the stronger these hipsters and inexperienced young students will support them.

Sanders supports under age 23 will likely look back and ask wtf they were thinking, when they gain some real world understanding and experience as to finance and politics. For the rest, it's those that remain super ultra liberal either because they are unemployed as "free spirits experiencing all life has to offer the soul" or those that simply hope for more government hand outs every day.

With that said, no candidate is looking ideal. But sanders is the flavor of this election to this demographic, in 2016.

Are you seriously comparing Ron Paul to Bernie Sanders lmao?

[Insanity_SC]

Are you seriously comparing Ron Paul to Bernie Sanders lmao?

lol seriously.

about as far apart on the economic policy scale as it gets (in 21st century democracies) plus Bernie is a Populist, even more so than Trump. Ron Paul was not at all.

[Archangel_Lost]

Taxing the rich won't fund his plans. There will be massive taxes on the middle class and corporations will just jump ship overseas.

Every sanders supporter I know is some yuppie english/arts/social studies major salty about student loans with no savings, no house, etc.

[MattyMiscer]

Can we make this ******* OP red already?

[Ghosting]

LOL @ your penor

"But my penor will go up!"

Holy cow, it is Ven an Untz.

Ok, continue political talk

[mynameisuntz]

Holy cow, it is Ven an Untz.

Ok, continue political talk

Damn I knew "ven33" sounded familiar. The volleyball should have been a dead giveaway, I guess.

OG nutmisc dorks in here.

[arn710]

To be completely honest as much as I disagree completely with his stances, I can at least respect people that are voting Sanders because he actually addresses issues that Americans are facing, it's the Hillary Clinton supporters that rustle me, voting for the continuation of the current state of affairs.

Just LOL if you aren't voting for Sanders or Trump. Genuinely don't care which one as long as it's one of those two. Unless you're voting for some outside libertarian just to prove a point, in which case GJDM.

I don't agree with him on a lot of issues and probably won't vote for him but at least he's honest and you know where he stands. You know what you are getting with Bernie unlike 99% of the other candidates. He's not going to go out and quote some bible verse just to appeal to the religious right. He's not going to go act like he's hunting deer to appeal to gun owners.

He is what he is. Wish more politicians were like him.

These sum up my thoughts as well

Some radical change would be good for this country regardless of the direction

[ContrarianIndi]

Not EVERYONE can contribute, as a result of gross inequalities of wealth largely stemming from the inter-mingling of large corporations and government (something that Bernie is pretty much objectively most outspoken about with the track record to back it).



What should that bottom 20% contribute? And some would say this is actually a conservative estimate, depending on how wealth is defined.

Let me also make clear that simply throwing money into welfare programs as they are currently structured would be similarly ridiculous. These are programs which need reform and reinvestment, with reform clearly coming first.

A major problem I see is there's this myopic vision of what social services are (or could be), where there's this focus on the immediate with zero interest in the long-run. Education is a good example. Bernie talks about a publicly-funded higher education system, and everyone complains about costs. His price tag? About $80 billion per year (which would be covered by Wall Street speculation taxes, but let's pretend that's not the case and it would come from some progressive taxation system). Even IF your taxes go up, do you know what the ROI on an educated populace is? When it comes to things like innovation, entrepreneurship, lowering rates of crime, increasing employment, health behaviors, etc.? Everyone is all "but I'll have to pay <marginal amount> more each year!" and they completely overlook what could be saved long-term. It is not only in the best interest of those who would benefit from a debt-free education, but it is in YOUR best interest, too. Even if you are not taking advantage of the program itself.

That is applicable to many of the social programs that are already in place in most major nations (including ours, like infrastructure, police, libraries, public education, etc.) Look at what's happening in Flint as a wonderfully horrific example of why there needs to be strong social programs in place.



This is a ridiculous statement. How much of their taxes are going towards the military-industrial complex? How about towards the prison industry? How about towards arbitrary pharmaceutical prices inflating costs of health care?

Yet we want an educated and healthy populace, both of which will SAVE MONEY LONG-TERM, and you...complain? It's LUDICROUS. How much will taxes go up when ANY of the GOP/HRC increase military presence in the Middle East? But we want to educate Americans and offer them better preventative health (again, both of which will save tons of money long-term) and you...freak out.

The members of the top 20% are more politically connected than everyone else. The Federal government has unconstitutionally seized excess power under the guise of helping the poor, providing security, etc.. and the insiders have gained that power and used it against their competition and to entrench themselves in the upper echelon of society.

Laws and regulations are almost always created by lobbyists. Because we no longer follow the Constitution's prescription of a limited federal government, politicians are currently little more than PR spokesmen for a group of lobbyists.

b-b-but Bernie isn't one of them, he's on our side. He has good intentions.
Doesn't matter. Bernie will continue to expand the federal government and in doing so he will ultimately give lobbyists, bureaucrats and the politically connected more power.

Today in Washington, it is one lobbyist vs another lobbyist, both represented by a politician who argues that one group has the people's interest over another.

Drug company lobbyists vs Hospital lobbyists. Health insurance lobbyists Vs AMA. Nurses unions vs medical equipment manufacturers.

"People" are the only ones left out of the fight and we are only good for paying taxes.

Watch decades old movies like Mr. Smith goes to Washington and voters have the same complaints because the game is the same.

It's all nothing more than political theater and feel good BS.

Johnson & Johnson wants to give welfare to the poor so they can jack up the prices of band aids to equal the welfare increases. The poor never get ahead and the J & J family gets wealthier with taxpayer subsidies.

Large Health Insurance companies want to force people to buy healthcare so they can make more money, and they want more regulations so they can crush the smaller health insurance companies.

Same chit different day.


As for the free college, that's a horrible idea. Most people who are going to college now, should not be going to college.

It's funny how people always get butthurt against certain industries. "Oh, those evil oil industry are fuking us over." "Those evil Health insurance companies are fukking us over for more money.."

But the College industry is so great, everyone needs to go to college, it's fantastic.

1) Most people don't need to go to college unless they're pursuing a STEM degree. Before the government inflated the college bubble, people got by fine in life and were able to get solid corporate jobs without spending a fukload of money going to college and getting a degree. High school used to prepare students for life. Today, HS prepares you for college. Now you need a degree to get a basic clerical job because everybody and there brother has a degree thanks to the govt fuking things up with federally ensured student loans, pell grants etc. The federal government needs to stay the fuk out of college.

Today students are literally paying money to waste their time. Under a Sanders government, we'd be paying over 80 billion to encourage kids to waste their time. And when EVERYONE goes to college, anybody who wants a decent job will need to waste 4 years of their life in order to get a piece of paper. It will be even worse than it is now. Not having a college degree will be like not having a HS diploma.

Next, everyone will need a Masters degree because a bachelor's degree will be absolutely worthless. And I'm sure people will then be caterwauling for the government to pay for their masters degree. Then when that happens we'll all need to get Ph.D's in order to set ourselves apart... And then people will be whining for free Ph.D's.

At that point, we will have a bunch of 28-33 year olds who have spent nearly their entire lives in school. The vast majority of people do not need 22 years of schooling. It's literally a massive waste of resources and productivity.

Fact is, the college industry has profited so much off of lobbying Washington. The Federal Government doles out FAFSA pell grants left and right to the tune of almost $6000 per semester to almost anyone with a mouth. What do universities and book companies do? They jack up the price of books and tuition, to get more of that money. Same with student loans. They know kids can get the loans because the federal government ensures private student loans and even gives out federal loans. Banks know they'll get paid even if the retard spending $80,000 on a sociology degree can't pay it back.

[mynameisuntz]

The members of the top 20% are more politically connected than everyone else. The Federal government has unconstitutionally seized excess power under the guise of helping the poor, providing security, etc.. and the insiders have gained that power and used it against their competition and to entrench themselves in the upper echelon of society.

Laws and regulations are almost always created by lobbyists. Because we no longer follow the Constitution's prescription of a limited federal government, politicians are currently little more than PR spokesmen for a group of lobbyists.

b-b-but Bernie isn't one of them, he's on our side. He has good intentions.
Doesn't matter. Bernie will continue to expand the federal government and in doing so he will ultimately give lobbyists, bureaucrats and the politically connected more power.

Today in Washington, it is one lobbyist vs another lobbyist, both represented by a politician who argues that one group has the people's interest over another.

Drug company lobbyists vs Hospital lobbyists. Health insurance lobbyists Vs AMA. Nurses unions vs medical equipment manufacturers.

"People" are the only ones left out of the fight and we are only good for paying taxes.

Watch decades old movies like Mr. Smith goes to Washington and voters have the same complaints because the game is the same.

It's all nothing more than political theater and feel good BS.

Johnson & Johnson wants to give welfare to the poor so they can jack up the prices of band aids to equal the welfare increases. The poor never get ahead and the J & J family gets wealthier with taxpayer subsidies.

Large Health Insurance companies want to force people to buy healthcare so they can make more money, and they want more regulations so they can crush the smaller health insurance companies.

Same chit different day.


As for the free college, that's a horrible idea. Most people who are going to college now, should not be going to college.

It's funny how people always get butthurt against certain industries. "Oh, those evil oil industry are fuking us over." "Those evil Health insurance companies are fukking us over for more money.."

But the College industry is so great, everyone needs to go to college, it's fantastic.

1) Most people don't need to go to college unless they're pursuing a STEM degree. Before the government inflated the college bubble, people got by fine in life and were able to get solid corporate jobs without spending a fukload of money going to college and getting a degree. High school used to prepare students for life. Today, HS prepares you for college. Now you need a degree to get a basic clerical job because everybody and there brother has a degree thanks to the govt fuking things up with federally ensured student loans, pell grants etc. The federal government needs to stay the fuk out of college.

Today students are literally paying money to waste their time. Under a Sanders government, we'd be paying over 80 billion to encourage kids to waste their time. And when EVERYONE goes to college, anybody who wants a decent job will need to waste 4 years of their life in order to get a piece of paper. It will be even worse than it is now. Not having a college degree will be like not having a HS diploma.

Next, everyone will need a Masters degree because a bachelor's degree will be absolutely worthless. And I'm sure people will then be caterwauling for the government to pay for their masters degree. Then when that happens we'll all need to get Ph.D's in order to set ourselves apart... And then people will be whining for free Ph.D's.

At that point, we will have a bunch of 28-33 year olds who have spent nearly their entire lives in school. The vast majority of people do not need 22 years of schooling. It's literally a massive waste of resources and productivity.

Fact is, the college industry has profited so much off of lobbying Washington. The Federal Government doles out FAFSA pell grants left and right to the tune of almost $6000 per semester to almost anyone with a mouth. What do universities and book companies do? They jack up the price of books and tuition, to get more of that money. Same with student loans. They know kids can get the loans because the federal government ensures private student loans and even gives out federal loans. Banks know they'll get paid even if the retard spending $80,000 on a sociology degree can't pay it back.

I ignored most of what you said because it just sounds like rhetoric and assumptions. Bottom line: other countries do significantly better than we do in virtually all meaningful metrics that define and predict flourishing nations. If they can do it, so can we.

[drFEEL]

If the GOP has done one thing brilliantly, it's been convincing the masses to vote against their best interests. This schema of "more taxes = bad" is just beyond naive. Meanwhile as we cling to such idiocy, other major nations are enjoying less costly healthcare, debt-free higher education, less poverty and crime, and greater quality of life.

"But my taxes will go up!"

you are the biggest ******* on these boards srs. a living cuck *******.

"please daddy government take all my money and shove your dick up my ass. Im sure you have my best interest"

[zinkhan99]

What are you referring to when you say equal contribution?

I have probably worded it wrong, I meant a system in which majority is contributing to these social programs and not just getting benefits.

[VoxExMachina]

If you don't actually pay taxes, you shouldn't get to vote.

That'd be the end of Sanders.

[hotsaucebrah]

I do like how he pointed out that we can always come up with trillions for wars but when it goes to spending that on the nation's citizens it's somehow prohibitively expensive.

Anyhow, anyone who knows how the real world works knows where his ideas will lead. Maybe not recently but he has advocated the seizing of corporate assets (Sanders regularly called for public takeovers of various businesses, including utilities and the oil industry, Venezuela anyone?), praised the Sandanistas, says silly things like “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country." I don't think he's a bad person but he has a lot of dated, unrealistic ideas that appeal to emotion.

I wish we could just have some sane, Gary Johnson type in the presidency. Ted Cruz, Trump, Sanders, and Clinton? Is this real life?

[Archangel_Lost]

Bernie supporter: poohoo I can't afford $300 a month for healthcare! Brb paying $300 extra in taxes for "free" healthcare

Every sanders supporter should donate the entirety of their tax returns to his campaign if they support his ideas so much

[Foe1605]

I ignored most of what you said because it just sounds like rhetoric and assumptions. Bottom line: other countries do significantly better than we do in virtually all meaningful metrics that define and predict flourishing nations. If they can do it, so can we.

Really? All of your seemingly educated posts and this is all you can muster? All of the above points and concerns are completely valid. Where's the ROI on a bunch of 6 year liberal arts majors? How many of the students who go to school for free under this plan do you really expect to go into a career that actually produces something? I'll gladly be the student pursuing an engineering degree, who works 40 hours per week to pay for it, because he's the one who's actually going to get out there in the real world and accomplish something. Not some entitled punk who skates by on the bare minimum, because he feels he deserves his "college experience."

[residesinAZ]

What I admire about Sanders is he admits he'll be raising taxes. He doesn't just promise Healthcare and pretend its not going to cost many people a lot more than before.

[ContrarianIndi]

Can somebody please explain how we're going to fund all this bullchit when interest rates go up, the economy implodes and we're all literally chitting in gutters?

We have 19 trillion in debt. The socialists has driven us here and have encouraged a massive speculative bubbles via record low interest rates, in order to prop up the economy after the bursting of the previous bubble that was created the exact same way.



We're literally creating all kinds of money.



But Bernie is gonna save us with free college and making the rich pay for everything.

We need to do everything we can to pay down debt NOW. We need to cut everything a fukload, Now. We're not going to be doing CHIT when interest rates go up. The federal budget will be absolutely nuked if and when the interest payments on 19 trillion dollars goes up. 5% on 19 trillion is just about 1 trillion dollars. That's 1 trillion dollars a year in INTEREST payments alone. fukking lol

And if they don't raise interest rates, we'll be on that Zimbabwe time with massive inflation, which is just as bad.

[Jayl12345]

Bernie supporter: poohoo I can't afford $300 a month for healthcare! Brb paying $300 extra in taxes for "free" healthcare

Every sanders supporter should donate the entirety of their tax returns to his campaign if they support his ideas so much

LOL, I agree. Sadly, most Bernie supporters don't have a paycheck to deduct extra from. I'm not trying to be funny, the percentages on his support from the unemployed and living assistance masses are impressive.












And sad.

[drFEEL]

Not EVERYONE can contribute, as a result of gross inequalities of wealth largely stemming from the inter-mingling of large corporations and government (something that Bernie is pretty much objectively most outspoken about with the track record to back it).



What should that bottom 20% contribute? And some would say this is actually a conservative estimate, depending on how

this is that beta fuken attitude of yours. do you even know what the top 20% make? if you are at 100k per year you are the TOP 10%. the majority of those making 100k are not making it by "intermingling of governments and corporations". They are making it by investing in themselves, slaving away at their jobs or school, and working there ass off so they can offer a GREAT DEAL OF VALUE to the rest of society. they deserve to enjoy the fruits of their labor and support THEIR FAMILY. They dont sacrifice their lives so they can support jose and jayquans 9 illegitimate children while they sit around, smoke the ganj, and wait for their new mix tape to drop.

[mynameisuntz]

I have probably worded it wrong, I meant a system in which majority is contributing to these social programs and not just getting benefits.

I'm not sure I have that information, may I ask the basis of your question? We know that investment via social programs leads to these improved outcomes. What is your concern with that specifically?

If you don't actually pay taxes, you shouldn't get to vote.

That'd be the end of Sanders.

So people who lost their jobs due to the economic meltdown resulting from private industry deregulation (with much help from the government) who now live in poverty and thus do not qualify to pay taxes should not get to vote? Or people who had to declare bankruptcy to afford cancer treatment? No vote for them, either?

Do you actually believe that?

I do like how he pointed out that we can always come up with trillions for wars but when it goes to spending that on the nation's citizens it's somehow prohibitively expensive.

Ignoring the rest because I think it's mistaken, but this is so important. How many people on these boards are blood thirsty to nuke ISIS without questioning the cost but put up a fight to save American lives via improved healthcare? It's amazing. But like, in the most horrible way imaginable.

[bruverend]

you say tax the wealthy, what happens when all the wealthy people move to a new country and denounce their american citizenship? who do they tax then?

[anonymous]

Sorry you got triggered over a joke not Srs libtard

Voting for cucky sanders to give your money to BLM

Calling other people libtards

Pick one

[VoxExMachina]

So people who lost their jobs due to the economic meltdown resulting from private industry deregulation (with much help from the government) who now live in poverty and thus do not qualify to pay taxes should not get to vote? Or people who had to declare bankruptcy to afford cancer treatment? No vote for them, either?

You don't earn it, you don't decide how to spend it.

If you've been a taxpaying citizen all your life, then fine. If you're costing the economy more than you're contributing, no.

[ContrarianIndi]

I ignored most of what you said because it just sounds like rhetoric and assumptions. Bottom line: other countries do significantly better than we do in virtually all meaningful metrics that define and predict flourishing nations. If they can do it, so can we.

It's not just rhetoric or assumptions. One of my best m8s is a staffer in DC and has seen it first hand. That's literally all Washington is. It's a massive power grab. Just about every single program is created to benefit the politically connected businesses and insiders that lobby for them. When Bernie expands the government, we'll be getting a chitload more of that.

What a shame that we don't value economic freedom as much as we value freedom of speech.