Why doesnt the press call Bernie's bluff and excuse

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Every other country in the world pays dramatically less per capita than we do, maybe we could take the trillions in savings and put it towards other things that actually help Americans.

Why dont you explain to us why you want Americans to continue to go bankrupt from medical debt and how you're going to pay for that.

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

100 trillion would appear to be a number blown up beyond even Trumpian hyperbole. But the point is well taken. Bernie has not reconciled the cost nor the impact of his platform planks. He has not reconciled the cost. He is way off on M4A and his other free stuff planks are illogically funded. Neither has he addressed the impact of his plans on what is still a CAPITALIST country in spite of all efforts from the far Left to claim that its not in a wild eyed effort to offer that we are already a Socialist country.

Trumpettes and Bernie Bros should get together. There is not much to distinguish between them when it comes to short term transactional nonsense regardless of the collateral damage. If its Trump v Bernie we will have an election of "we don't want more brown people" vs "we don't want to be responsible for our own obligations". That will be the crux of the election.

Notice that even Healthcare gets shoved to the sideline.

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

To be fair, Bernie said on 60 Minutes that it would be 30 trillion dollars.

And like with all government stuff it will cost twice as much, so 60 trillion.

RabidAlpaca said:

Every other country in the world pays dramatically less per capita than we do, maybe we could take the trillions in savings and put it towards other things that actually help Americans.

Why dont you explain to us why you want Americans to continue to go bankrupt from medical debt and how you're going to pay for that.

Click to expand...

But that is totally wrong. Look at Sweden that the left hold up all the time. Their income tax is nearly 60% and they have a VAT of 26%. The add in what their tax on a gallon of gas is!!!! The is "dramatically less" I dont think so.

swing_voter said:

To be fair, Bernie said on 60 Minutes that it would be 30 trillion dollars.

And like with all government stuff it will cost twice as much, so 60 trillion.

Click to expand...

Sure Bernie said 30 trillion, but independent people say it will add up to at least 100 trillion over 10 years.

As soon as people start saying "we can take the savings...." from creating a socialized health care plan, what they are saying without saying it is "we are going to tax the **** out of you".

How much.

Well...you know...I mean...people already pay a lot for health care.....

How much.

Why do people ask "how much?" they never seem to care when it is them paying for their own insurance plans, premiums and deductibles that we caused to go through the roof...so...I mean...why should they care if we tax them more....

How much.

Look...if we had to actuall add up all the programs we are offering plus the green new deal and promising to give everyone a living 'wage' even if they arent working and providing housing and food and water and clothing all as a 'right...sure...its going to cost a lot of money...and that means everyone will have to pay more taxes....

How much.

How much...how much...do you ask how much when we talk about fighting wars or natural disasters? I mean...the cost of things like free education...free college...paying off student loan debt...that all costs money too...

How much...

Maybe...I dont know....roughly...across the board...for everyone...I mean...who knows...but...maybe...70....80%...BUT...you will have FREE health care...and FREE college (even if you dont go to college it will be free for those you are paying for) and your tax dollars will be giving unemployed people a livable wage so they dont have to work and its all FREE....so really...thats a bargain at 70-80%...maybe, It could be more. Or it could totally bankrupt everything. BUT STILL...its all FREE.

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

Here's the deal:

We ain't getting a wall, we ain't getting Medicare-for all!

So take your ideological pick, knowing full-well you'll only get a slight amount of what you want - but that's better than the slight amount the other guy will take away!

Chomsky said:

Here's the deal:

We ain't getting a wall, we ain't getting Medicare-for all!

So take your ideological pick, knowing full-well you'll only get a slight amount of what you want - but that's better than the slight amount the other guy will take away!

Click to expand...

Christ we are fvcked up, aren't we!

jnug said:

Christ we are fvcked up, aren't we!

Click to expand...

Actually, that's the way it was designed to be!

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

That number changes every time you guys talk about it.

Bernie Sanders knows many people, particularly young people, are complete idiots by equating savings to income.

It's like a person buys a new truck being asked how much it costs? Answer: "I saved $6000 over sticker price!"

Of course, that is just a diversion. The truthful answer is "I spent $42,000."

Most Socialist Sanders supporters are just to stupid to grasp the difference. Savings is not income.

Of course, that is before the question of name anything the government is more efficient at than the private sector? We know how absurdly wasteful and corrupt government spending is by military spending. Private business doesn't spend $600 for a toilet seat and $900 for a hammer.

There is no free anything.

What Sanders is promising is "The government will take most your money, siphon off 75% for itself and give the other 25% to other people." And truly ignorant young white people cheer! "Yeah! At 25 I will be paying for 90 year old's heart surgery!"

Do you really want to pay Cheryl's $250,000 college loans for her law degree from a 2nd rate law school - so she can fulfill her dream of billing you $300 an hour with a 6 figure income by age 30? Bernie Sanders says that is the duty of everyone making over $14 an hour - to pay for Cheryl to get rich at their expense.

Sander's program truly is the REAL welfare for the rich. Working people to pay for the educations of their bosses and the elites.

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

Cut the drug war to cut spending!

joko104 said:

Of course, that is before the question of name anything the government is more efficient at than the private sector?

Click to expand...

Healthcare.

joko104 said:

There is no free anything.

What Sanders is promising is "The government will take most your money, siphon off 75% for itself and give the other 25% to other people." And truly ignorant young white people cheer! "Yeah! At 25 I will be paying for 90 year old's heart surgery!"

Do you really want to pay Cheryl's $250,000 college loans for her law degree from a 2nd rate law school - so she can fulfill her dream of billing you $300 an hour with a 6 figure income by age 30? Bernie Sanders says that is the duty of everyone making over $14 an hour - to pay for Cheryl to get rich at their expense.

Sander's program truly is the REAL welfare for the rich. Working people to pay for the educations of their bosses and the elites.

Click to expand...

First off, don't make numbers up. Government "siphoning off 75% for itself?" And doing what with it? Rolling around in a Scrooge McDuck pile of coins? Come on.

You don't think working people want to go to college? You didn't mention them. For some reason, it doesn't occur to you that Steve now has an equal chance to Cheryl to go get that six figure income. That's what you right wingers hate. You hate equal opportunity.

End the drug war so we can use "drug money" to pay for healthcare!

Logical1 said:

But that is totally wrong. Look at Sweden that the left hold up all the time. Their income tax is nearly 60% and they have a VAT of 26%. The add in what their tax on a gallon of gas is!!!! The is "dramatically less" I dont think so.

Click to expand...

No, you are totally wrong. Recent Yale study says Bernie's plan will SAVE $450 billion annually. That's not what matters, not Sweden's tax rate.

Deuce said:

First off, don't make numbers up. Government "siphoning off 75% for itself?" And doing what with it? Rolling around in a Scrooge McDuck pile of coins? Come on.

You don't think working people want to go to college? You didn't mention them. For some reason, it doesn't occur to you that Steve now has an equal chance to Cheryl to go get that six figure income. That's what you right wingers hate. You hate equal opportunity.

Click to expand...

What an absurd message. Why should Steve pay for Cheryl to get a six figure income? Maybe Steve doesn't want to go to college. Maybe Steve doesn't have the time to go to college. Maybe Steve doesn't have the intellect to go to college. Nor would it help out Cheryl if there were 10 times as many lawyers on the market.

This is what you progressives hate - personal responsibility. That each person pulls their own weight - not that progressives are SO into academic arrogance that they demand that working people pay for the advancement of who will become the top income earners in the country.

Your position? If Steve doesn't go to college and become a lawyer for whatever reason, then Steve should be PUNISHED and FINED via taxes to pay for Cheryl's education. Sander's WELFARE FOR THE RICH agenda.

Plus what about the total hypocrisy? To claim a college degree will cause a person to have a MUCH higher income, while claiming working people have to pay for other people to get college educations - because college educations are so worthless then can't even pay of the college loan.

Sanders demands that the people stocking the shelves at Home Depot have to pay for the manager's college loans. Of course, your and Sander's response is they should have ALL gone to college, so then all of them would be managers and no one would stock shelves - and those who do not go to college MUST BE PUNISHED by being forced to pay for their bosses debts. That is the reality.

Or is it that you want everyone working at McDonalds and WalMart to have MBAs? In fact, many people with college degrees have no job because they came to believe the college degree means actual work is too far below their dignity? Will millions of people with college degrees unable to find for related to their degree, the Progressive solution is to increase this to 10s of millions with useless college degrees - all paid for by working people for which work isn't below their dignity and self declared great worth.

It also is a non-existence crisis. Over 90% of people do pay their college loans. It is more of a crisis if a working family can't pay their mortgage than if a lawyer has to buy used Mercedes until they pay off their college debts. It is 100% arrogance on behalf of academia and the wealthy.

Do you hate Steve because he doesn't have a college education - so want him punished to benefit Cheryl? What does Cheryl do for society that justified giving her $1? There is no shortage of lawyers. Lawyers from 2nd rate schools often can only find a clerk job in a law office. I see NO benefit to us by Cheryl getting a law degree.

Logical1 said:

I was amazed last night the Bernie was asked where he was going to get all the money, 100 TRILLION DOLLARS he needs to pay for all the free shi-----stuff he is promising everyone. He always says they dont have the hours and hours for him to explain where it will come from.

The press should then say----------------ok issue a condensed white paper ASAP to explain where all that much money will come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

We are already going to be paying more than that under the current system...

Craig234 said:

No, you are totally wrong. Recent Yale study says Bernie's plan will SAVE $450 billion annually. That's not what matters, not Sweden's tax rate.

Click to expand...

It is an absurd study because it just asserts if insurance companies don't get their profit, that equals the savings. It makes NO allowance for the cost of administration nor any other factors. Nor does it address that many - if not most - doctors, clinics and hospitals won't take Medicare. If you have Medicare, go stand in a long line 4 weeks from now. If ObamaCare? Here that means you get an appointment in a city 1 1/2 hours away in 6 weeks - and then all you'll get is a prescription and told to come back in a month or 2.

VanceMack said:

As soon as people start saying "we can take the savings...." from creating a socialized health care plan, what they are saying without saying it is "we are going to tax the **** out of you".

How much.

Well...you know...I mean...people already pay a lot for health care.....

How much.

Why do people ask "how much?" they never seem to care when it is them paying for their own insurance plans, premiums and deductibles that we caused to go through the roof...so...I mean...why should they care if we tax them more....

How much.

Look...if we had to actuall add up all the programs we are offering plus the green new deal and promising to give everyone a living 'wage' even if they arent working and providing housing and food and water and clothing all as a 'right...sure...its going to cost a lot of money...and that means everyone will have to pay more taxes....

How much.

How much...how much...do you ask how much when we talk about fighting wars or natural disasters? I mean...the cost of things like free education...free college...paying off student loan debt...that all costs money too...

How much...

Maybe...I dont know....roughly...across the board...for everyone...I mean...who knows...but...maybe...70....80%...BUT...you will have FREE health care...and FREE college (even if you dont go to college it will be free for those you are paying for) and your tax dollars will be giving unemployed people a livable wage so they dont have to work and its all FREE....so really...thats a bargain at 70-80%...maybe, It could be more. Or it could totally bankrupt everything. BUT STILL...its all FREE.

Click to expand...

Sander's model is the Venezuelan model. Spending tens of trillions of non-existent dollars reduces the value of money, stocks and bonds to nothing. This wipes out everyone - including all the rich who don't first flee. As the economy collapses, panic grows.

Ultimately, the government and military will look after its own - so the government and military seize and hoard the last of resources, controlling the growing rebellion and social dystopia with an iron fist. The government and military now control everything of what little is left - as people starve and try to flee.

That is how a socialist revolution is created. Step One: Totally destroy the economy to erase all wealth. The more people suffer, the more they have to beg the government and less capable are they to fight tyranny and oppression.

^ That is the revolution Sanders wants. He wants the exact same "democratic socialism" that Venezuelan socialist promised - and it would lead to the same result as Venezuela.

joko104 said:

What an absurd message. Why should Steve pay for Cheryl to get a six figure income? Maybe Steve doesn't want to go to college. Maybe Steve doesn't have the time to go to college. Maybe Steve doesn't have the intellect to go to college. Nor would it help out Cheryl if there were 10 times as many lawyers on the market.

Click to expand...

Then Steve can do something else. But Bill wants to go to college and can't afford it. Now he's got the same opportunity as Cheryl.
Too many lawyers will drive down the price of good legal representation, which also helps working class Americans. It's called supply and demand. Let the market settle it, not an artificially-inflated cost of entry.

This is what you progressives hate - personal responsibility. That each person pulls their own weight - not that progressives are SO into academic arrogance that they demand that working people pay for the advancement of who will become the top income earners in the country.

Click to expand...

It's fun that you've decided "socialism" is now literally the opposite of socialism. Instead of us terrible progressives stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, you're saying it's the other way around? :lamo

Your position? If Steve doesn't go to college and become a lawyer for whatever reason, then Steve should be PUNISHED and FINED via taxes to pay for Cheryl's education. Sander's WELFARE FOR THE RICH agenda.

Click to expand...

WELFARE FOR THE RICH! :lamo

No, Steve will have the freedom to choose what he wants for his career. If that involves college, great. If not, that's fine too. You would demand the cost decide for him.

Plus what about the total hypocrisy? To claim a college degree will cause a person to have a MUCH higher income, while claiming working people have to pay for other people to get college educations - because college educations are so worthless then can't even pay of the college loan.

Click to expand...

This was your claim, genius! Did you forget about Cheryl already!? :lamo

Or is it that you want everyone working at McDonalds and WalMart to have MBAs? In fact, many people with college degrees have no job because they came to believe the college degree means actual work is too far below their dignity? Will millions of people with college degrees unable to find for related to their degree, the Progressive solution is to increase this to 10s of millions with useless college degrees - all paid for by working people for which work isn't below their dignity and self declared great worth.

Click to expand...

No, I want them all paid a living wage.

The rest is just repeating the same garbage over and over, so I dumped it.

Logical1 said:

But that is totally wrong. Look at Sweden that the left hold up all the time. Their income tax is nearly 60% and they have a VAT of 26%. The add in what their tax on a gallon of gas is!!!! The is "dramatically less" I dont think so.

Click to expand...

Taxes are itemized (grouped by use) and the comparison is healthcare spending per capita. ALL costs considered we pay dramatically more per capita than every other country in the world, without exception. No, Sweden does not pay more than we do, not even close.

VanceMack said:

As soon as people start saying "we can take the savings...." from creating a socialized health care plan, what they are saying without saying it is "we are going to tax the **** out of you".

How much.

Well...you know...I mean...people already pay a lot for health care.....

How much.

Why do people ask "how much?" they never seem to care when it is them paying for their own insurance plans, premiums and deductibles that we caused to go through the roof...so...I mean...why should they care if we tax them more....

How much.

Look...if we had to actuall add up all the programs we are offering plus the green new deal and promising to give everyone a living 'wage' even if they arent working and providing housing and food and water and clothing all as a 'right...sure...its going to cost a lot of money...and that means everyone will have to pay more taxes....

How much.

How much...how much...do you ask how much when we talk about fighting wars or natural disasters? I mean...the cost of things like free education...free college...paying off student loan debt...that all costs money too...

How much...

Maybe...I dont know....roughly...across the board...for everyone...I mean...who knows...but...maybe...70....80%...BUT...you will have FREE health care...and FREE college (even if you dont go to college it will be free for those you are paying for) and your tax dollars will be giving unemployed people a livable wage so they dont have to work and its all FREE....so really...thats a bargain at 70-80%...maybe, It could be more. Or it could totally bankrupt everything. BUT STILL...its all FREE.

Click to expand...

Your premise is intentionally dishonest because you can't point to one single country in the world that pays more per capita than we do. You can't even find one that's close.