Bernie Sanders the alternative to Hillary C.
- Thread starter Billy T
- Start date
There is no clever wording going on there. It's an index developed by some of brightest non biased minds in the country (i.e. Harvard). There's no deception. Everyone has access to higher education. But everyone may not be capable or willing to do the work required. The US does have some of the world's best institutions of higher learning. It is rated as the sixth most socially advanced nation in the world. Those are just hardcore facts.
No you didn't. You didn't lose anything. You might not like Bill Clinton, but has been explained to you numerous times, Hillary Clinton isn't Bill Clinton. They are not one and the same. They are different. Hillary Clinton has her own mind. She can make her own decisions and form her own opinions. Women do that you know, ask any married man or formerly married man.
Which of the dozen or more items in my list do you feel were not losses?joe said:
And her own track record, which is somewhat more conservative than Bill's, and includes what is in the running for the worst and most damaging political decision made by a major Democratic politician at least since the KKK faction decamped for Reaganville, and possibly since Reconstruction: the vote to give W&Co blank check authority to invade Iraq using the US military. If you are making comparisons.joe said:
I wasn't arguing that Bill was Hillary. I was arguing that the severe penalty we paid for electing Bill, the seriousness of the losses we suffered and the damages we incurred, should make us very reluctant to strike any more such bargains with fate.
As long as there's somebody on our side to vote for, we should vote for them. Clinton is not on our side.
It's not "supplying" that has been my concern, but "paying for". And of course there are many completely non-magical systems available, tested and debugged and in operation for decades now, that are upwards of 50% more efficient at paying for medical care than the current US system. In fact, there isn't a single system on the planet that is not significantly more efficient in terms of dollar@benefit, than the US system. So I may not have a more efficient system, but hundreds of millions of Europeans do. So copy one of theirs.michael said:
In the first place, I wasn't arguing for "government run", I was arguing for "government paid". In the second place, that hasn't been the case at my local government run University. Or anybody else's, that I know of. They are much cheaper than the private schools, and much better quality than the private for-profit schools, across the board.michael said:
LOL...as I said before, all of them.
Were you not paying attention? And I think you are exaggerating your "dozen or more" which is your custom.Something about drama queens seems apropos.
Except as has been repeatedly pointed out to you now, you have lost nothing, and you have repeatedly conflated Bill's actions with Hillary.
A couple of things, I think your post is very demonstrative of the problem which currently plagues the nation. People on the extreme fringes of the left and the right have drawn battle lines. It's a win loose. It's a war. It's them and us. The last time the nation drew up internal battle lines it resulted the the bloodiest warfare this nation has ever experienced. We are all on the same side. We are all Americans. There is no "them". There is only "us" and we need to begin thinking that way.
There are only problems and solutions. We should be focusing on identifying, understanding and solving our problems and we can only do that if we work together. We have already seen the damage which can be inflicted on the nation when one group, in this case Republicans, decide they would do everything within their power to make another group (i.e. Democrats) look bad even if that threatens the "full faith and credit" of the nation, even if it puts millions of Americans out of work. There is something deeply wrong with that. You don't solve that problem by becoming the problem.
So it's easy to name a couple. Do that. Name some things I listed you do not think of as losses.joe said:
Nonsense. The right extremists are not on the "fringe", but in control of the House and Senate - the Speaker of the House wants to abolish Social Security, Medicare, and the Income Tax, the two major R Presidential candidates wants to torture prisoners and wall off the entire southern border of the country (one), abolish the IRS and write the Ten Commandments into the Constitution (the other). Meanwhile there is no battle force of left "extremists", with any lines drawn. The closest thing to a lefty in the major political sphere is Elizabeth Warren - is that your idea of a "fringe" figure? Is Sanders, with his middle of the road First World standard Medicare expansion and his proposed restoration of the US banking regulations and oversight from 1965?joe said:
What has happened is a resurgence of fascism in the US. The fascist political faction in the US has gained control of a major political Party, and is working at gaining control of the governance of the country. It's not right against left, but fascism against everything else.
The problem is the agenda, policies, and behaviors of the current US Republican Party. How do plan to "solve" it?joe said:
Agreed. Fortunately at least a few of those states are reconsidering.
Definitely. All those things are considerations. There are no perfect choices; at some point you have to make decisions that limit your possible futures.
Most students can't afford the payments on a mortgage right after they graduate. (I certainly couldn't.) So it makes sense that such a line wouldn't work.
It should be noted that for years that line DID work. Mortgage lenders were lending to anyone without regard for ability to pay. And many people got away with it - they'd buy a home they couldn't afford, sit on it for six months while barely making the payments, then sell it for far more than they paid. Then use the profits to get a mortgage on an even bigger house. This, of course, worked until the real estate market collapsed in 2008. Nowadays most lenders are a lot more careful.
LOL...I have, repeatedly told you all of them. If you don't get that, it's on you. Now if you think you have lost something, then spell it out. What have you lost and how was it lost, and why was it lost?
You, and those like you, are my "idea" of a left wing fringe figure. The Bernie you so love is a fringe figure, and yes Warren is a left wing fringer too. You left fringe left wingers have your battle forces and battle lines drawn too. But you, like your right wing counterparts are oblivious too them and scapegoat all of your transgressions on the other guys. Aside from your ideological planks, you are no different from the right wingers you like to rail about. You both demonize the other. You both disregard inconvenient facts and reason in favor of your ideological beliefs. You both misuse words in order to inflame passions and suppress reason.
That's nonsense. While there has been a resurgence of nationalism around the world, including the US, that alone isn't fascism. We haven't seen a rise of fascism in the US. The Republicans you claim are fascists are small government people - remember? They argue for less government. This is an example of what I wrote about in the previous paragraph.
Well, Republicans are a very big part of the problem, of that there is no doubt. But you are also very much a part of the problem - people like you who play upon and depend upon identity politics, people who divided the world into them and us just as Republicans have done and continue to do. As previously pointed out to you, it's all us all the time. We need to work together. That doesn't mean sacrificing your beliefs. But it does require some honesty and listening to the other guy.
The solution isn't to become another Republican like party on the left of the political spectrum.
That is true of society as well. The US is limiting its possible futures: by saddling its most accomplished citizens with significant debt as the additional price - beyond the work and the opportunity cost - of that accomplishment; by allowing disease and accident (or even childbirth) to impose large financial as well as other costs; and by setting up very large uncertainty costs contingent on some major decisions of wide social effect.billvon said:
All this risk, opportunity cost, and uncertainty, has to be paid for. On top of tuition. There is no free lunch.
example: They removed the vocational machining and metalwork shops from the high schools in my area about thirty years ago. The for-profit trade schools picked up a lot of the machinery (high quality mills and lathes, etc), but demand was light, for a variety of reasons mostly attendant on cost and availability to the post-high school population,
there were much greater opportunity costs, direct costs, and uncertainty costs, than in a public high school class
so these programs shrank. Meanwhile the union apprenticeships vanished with the unions. The pipeline of new machinists dried up. For a while nobody noticed - the innovations in machining tools picked up the slack, made each machinist far more productive. But they got old.
Now our entire society is short about half the journeyman level, competent and experienced and reliable setup machinists, that it needs for full prosperity. It is also short - and will remain short, indefinitely - of the kinds of engineering and design and management expertise it used to get from the machine floor. And it is and will remain short, indefinitely, of the capital investment that used to be directed at employing this expertise - this kind of expertise and available skill is part of what is called "opportunity", in a capitalist economy. So full prosperity is not going to be available, for at least ten years if ever.
Choices have consequences.
And in the case of student loan debt and median rent vs the median job, that puts buying a house out of reach long term. Also, marrying and having children.billvon said:
Not for "years". That binge didn't last long (and it was illegal, btw).billvon said:
The normal amount of student loan debt now carried is about equivalent to a down payment on a cheap house; so where in the old days the student would be saving for a down payment from year one, in the new world they are paying off their student loans - instead.
Last edited:
I already listed several. You appear to be unwilling to discuss any of them - and I can understand why. It's because when you name them, as I did, they are quite obviously significant losses to anyone with liberal values.joe said:
Uh, hello?joe said:
We have seen a rise in fascism in the US as obvious as it is dangerous. The only people who can't see it are those gullible enough to actually believe the current Republican Party actually stands for, or favors in any way, "small government".joe said:
And the worry is that there are enough of such gullible folks - the authoritarians in the Democratic Party, the Clinton base, is a lot of people - to create significant cooperation even (all they need is acquiescence) with the Republican agenda.
Last edited:
As previously and repeatedly noted, if you want to discuss a few, name them and explain why you think you lost something. I remind you, you need evidence...not just allegations based on other allegations or something you just made up.
Yes...hello.
Oh, well then you should be able to explain it and prove it with evidence and reason. So go for it.
There are gullible and ignorant folks on both sides of the ideological divide. But drawing lines, pointing fingers, and slandering and lying to ourselves and each other isn't going to solve our problems. It just further polarizes the nation and it benefits folks like the Kochs.
I named them already. I have no need of discussion - they were merely evidence, stuff known to any peruser of recent American political history, in support of my point at the time: the penalty for electing somebody like Clinton is not, historically, small. If history is any guide, this is going to hurt.joe said:
For some in some areas, yes. In areas with low costs of living, no.
Getting married and having children is quite cheap. It's raising them that is expensive.
2003-2006 was the height of the subprime mortgage bubble, during which the percentage of subprime mortgages went from 7% to 24% of the market. And while there were cases of fraud during that time, the vast majority were perfectly legal (although arguably foolish) transactions.
And rapidly increasing their ability to pay a mortgage. An average engineering graduate starts at $64K a year. At that salary she may not be able to afford a mortgage. Ten years later she is making $95,000 a year - in other words, making almost $30,000 more than the time she was barely able to afford his apartment at $1000 a month. A mortgage is now within her grasp, if home ownership is her goal.
There are some areas with high pay and low cost of living, but not many. In all others, the problem remains.billvon said:
We are talking about people with enough foresight, etc, to aspire to and obtain a college education.billvon said:
And having them is not reliably cheap. In particular, health insurance that covers the full cost of a difficult childbirth (no, they all don't - read the fine print) - as the sane would plan - is quite expensive. Student loan payments on top of that? Serious burden.
btw: Recently published research indicates that the difficult economic circumstances in East Germany after the Wall fell caused a sociological skewing in the personality of the average mother giving birth - the responsible and prudent young East German woman of the time avoided pregnancy or aborted, resulting in an entire generational cohort of children born to irresponsible, impulsive, or (in the term used by the study) "risk-taking" young women. It turns out that "risk-taking" is partly heritable, and East Germany has been enduring a small crime wave from a generation of youths prone to dropping out of school and not getting jobs and doing drugs. Something to put in the pipe and smoke, when considering not only the Crash in the US but race relations, welfare policy, health insurance, and educational expenses , over these many years.
When you raise the ante, who is more likely to fold?
The example you presented, and any others relevant to this thread, was illegal, and was also a very small percentage of the subprime mortgages.billvon said:
Tangent to the thread, but significant, is the observation that outright fraud was not nearly as small a proportion of the bad debt as "vast majority were legal" implies. And that most of the subprime mortgages issued legally in that time did not default - at least, not until the Crash hit and took out prime mortgages with them.
And the average engineering graduate is relevant here how?billvon said:
The average college grad is now paying off student loans with the money that in the good old days of government-paid college they were saving for a down payment or using to start a family or both. That will have large effects on the general society. And that is the successful student - the one no longer facing the uncertainty costs of the initial decisions.
Alternatives exclude. There is no free lunch. Society will pay for this setup, one way or another.
Last edited:
Agreed. It's not a panacea, just a solution.
Yes, we are. (Of course, those who do not have no loans to pay back. Is that a good decision on their part? Usually not.)
LIVING is not reliably cheap. Some people get into traumatic accidents at age 20 that result in hospital stays that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most, of course, do not - just as most deliveries are pretty routine.
An example of someone who both has large school loans to pay off and whose income will rise with time (which is what we were talking about.)
Definitely true. You pay for education one way or another.
It's not a solution. It doesn't solve the problem.billvon said:
So how will the sane plan - since the risk of living is unavoidable regardless, while the added risk of childbirth is not only avoidable but much larger and far more expensive to insure against?billvon said:
We were not talking about the existence of successful students who can pay off their student loans. Those were understood to exist.billvon said:
Some ways involve much higher uncertainty costs, financing costs, and drag on the economy, in return for significantly less benefit to the society paying. I illustrated with the machinist example, noting some of the consequences.billvon said:
Don't pay for education in those ways - right?
It is A solution. It works. It's not for everyone. (Nor will there be any solution that solves the problem for everyone, everywhere.)
OK, so we have another solution that works. Great; we have a model as to how to proceed.
Yep. And some ways involve crippling taxes. Some ways put schools into bankruptcy. There are lots of ways to do it wrong.
It's not a solution to the problem we have. It's an illustration of the problem.billvon said:
That's not a solution that works. That is a description of part of the problem.billvon said:
Describing how some people manage to pay for their college educations under the current system does not solve the problem we have with it. It illustrates the problem.
We should be cautious, and maybe only try ways that have been proven to work well in places like the US. The GI Bill, for example, worked very well.billvon said:
But if we want to avoid doing it wrong, we should make some significant changes in a hurry. The way we are setting things up, increasingly, as we move away from government paid education, has a miserable track record anywhere it's been tried. It's normally the resort of countries that have given up, for some reason, on educating much of their population.
¿Whence Looks Tomorrow?
One way of looking at today:
I recall↑ Walter Shapiro↱, who suggested, a couple weeks ago:
And if Benen's observation is reasonably correct, and if the tone we hear from Alex Seitz-Wald's↱ report holds―
―this would be the day the Democratic nomination contest is expected to start looking forward; this is the day we turn our eyes to November.
Yeah, we'll have to see how that goes. We'll see what we see tomorrow, and the day after that, and so on.
Bernie Sanders has helped a movement find its voice; now he needs to help it find its way. The United States will need these voices; it may not be their year, but we need to keep them in the discussion because someday it might be, and better sooner than later.
Seitz-Wald also noted Charles Chamberlain of Democracy for America, a Sanders-supporting PAC: "The question right now isn't whether the movement behind Bernie Sanders is going to continue winning delegates and states in the weeks ahead, it's whether the Democratic establishment is going to bring our party together by embracing our fight". It's a pretty good line.
____________________
Notes:
Benen, Steve. "Following Clinton's victories, Sanders targets new goals". msnbc. 27 April 2016. msnbc.com. 27 April 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/26tMRBt
Seitz-Wald, Alex. "Clinton victories spell beginning of the end for Sanders". msnbc. 26 April 2016. msnbc.com. 27 April 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/26sWjFa
Shapiro, Walter. "Late to Discern the Bern". Roll Call. 13 April 2016. RollCall.com. 27 April 2016. http://bit.ly/1qRG98j
One way of looking at today:
Recognizing the writing on the wall, Sanders' aides conceded yesterday that the campaign will "reassess" its strategy going forward. While that's often a euphemism for "quit," that's not the case here: Sanders isn't prepared to walk away, but he is prepared to shift his focus in light of the recent results. Consider the statement his campaign issued last night:
"I congratulate Secretary Clinton on her victories tonight, and I look forward to issue-oriented campaigns in the 14 contests to come. […]
"The people in every state in this country should have the right to determine who they want as president and what the agenda of the Democratic Party should be. That's why we are in this race until the last vote is cast. That is why this campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform that calls for a $15 an hour minimum wage, an end to our disastrous trade policies, a Medicare-for-all health care system, breaking up Wall Street financial institutions, ending fracking in our country, making public colleges and universities tuition free and passing a carbon tax so we can effectively address the planetary crisis of climate change."
"The people in every state in this country should have the right to determine who they want as president and what the agenda of the Democratic Party should be. That's why we are in this race until the last vote is cast. That is why this campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform that calls for a $15 an hour minimum wage, an end to our disastrous trade policies, a Medicare-for-all health care system, breaking up Wall Street financial institutions, ending fracking in our country, making public colleges and universities tuition free and passing a carbon tax so we can effectively address the planetary crisis of climate change."
Over the last couple of months, each of the Sanders campaign's election-night statements have included at least one reference to his "path to the nomination." This one did not. It wasn't an accidental omission.
Sanders started the race as an issue-oriented candidate who didn't expect to be the party's nominee, and the recent results have brought him full circle. He's not done fighting; he's just going to fight for something new: he can't catch Clinton through the ballot box, but he can "fight for a progressive party platform."
And as MSNBC's Alex Seitz-Wald noted, the Democratic frontrunner is ready to adapt her message accordingly.
Sanders started the race as an issue-oriented candidate who didn't expect to be the party's nominee, and the recent results have brought him full circle. He's not done fighting; he's just going to fight for something new: he can't catch Clinton through the ballot box, but he can "fight for a progressive party platform."
And as MSNBC's Alex Seitz-Wald noted, the Democratic frontrunner is ready to adapt her message accordingly.
I recall↑ Walter Shapiro↱, who suggested, a couple weeks ago:
So the biggest question ... is how the Vermont senator can let his most fervent supporters down gently. For the fall election may partly depend on how Bernie Sanders, that most unlikely presidential crusader, handles defeat.
And if Benen's observation is reasonably correct, and if the tone we hear from Alex Seitz-Wald's↱ report holds―
Onstage in a city where she will in all likelihood will be crowned the Democratic presidential nominee in July, Hillary Clinton on Tuesday moved to embrace Bernie Sanders' supporters as she expanded her already significant delegate lead in the day's primaries ....
.... On Tuesday, Clinton not only praised her rival but elevated his issues and made common cause with his voters.
"I applaud Senator Sanders and his millions of supporters," she said.
She ticked through his core issues – curbing big money in politics and economic inequality, addressing climate change – and explained they are her priorities, too.
"In this election, we will have to stand together and work hard to prevail over candidates on the other side," Clinton said. "And I know together we will get that done."
.... On Tuesday, Clinton not only praised her rival but elevated his issues and made common cause with his voters.
"I applaud Senator Sanders and his millions of supporters," she said.
She ticked through his core issues – curbing big money in politics and economic inequality, addressing climate change – and explained they are her priorities, too.
"In this election, we will have to stand together and work hard to prevail over candidates on the other side," Clinton said. "And I know together we will get that done."
―this would be the day the Democratic nomination contest is expected to start looking forward; this is the day we turn our eyes to November.
Yeah, we'll have to see how that goes. We'll see what we see tomorrow, and the day after that, and so on.
Bernie Sanders has helped a movement find its voice; now he needs to help it find its way. The United States will need these voices; it may not be their year, but we need to keep them in the discussion because someday it might be, and better sooner than later.
Sanders addressed more than 6,400 people and made it clear he has no interest in dropping out. Notably, he spoke about his campaign as a movement with more important goals than winning.
"This campaign is not just about electing a president, it is about transforming a nation," he said to cheers. "The fight that we are waging is not easy fight, but I know you are prepared to wage that fight against the one percent, against the billionaire class."
In a statement late Tuesday, Sanders once again said he's still in this race until the last vote is cast, but also seemed to have one eye on things he would like added to the Democratic Party's platform.
"This campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform," he said, listing items he wants included.
"This campaign is not just about electing a president, it is about transforming a nation," he said to cheers. "The fight that we are waging is not easy fight, but I know you are prepared to wage that fight against the one percent, against the billionaire class."
In a statement late Tuesday, Sanders once again said he's still in this race until the last vote is cast, but also seemed to have one eye on things he would like added to the Democratic Party's platform.
"This campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform," he said, listing items he wants included.
Seitz-Wald also noted Charles Chamberlain of Democracy for America, a Sanders-supporting PAC: "The question right now isn't whether the movement behind Bernie Sanders is going to continue winning delegates and states in the weeks ahead, it's whether the Democratic establishment is going to bring our party together by embracing our fight". It's a pretty good line.
____________________
Notes:
Benen, Steve. "Following Clinton's victories, Sanders targets new goals". msnbc. 27 April 2016. msnbc.com. 27 April 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/26tMRBt
Seitz-Wald, Alex. "Clinton victories spell beginning of the end for Sanders". msnbc. 26 April 2016. msnbc.com. 27 April 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/26sWjFa
Shapiro, Walter. "Late to Discern the Bern". Roll Call. 13 April 2016. RollCall.com. 27 April 2016. http://bit.ly/1qRG98j