• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bernie's Cuba comments

Rickeroo

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
4,767
Reaction score
1,478
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.

That being said, when you transfer more private enterprise to the government, those aspects become government-controlled and you are forced to comply with them under penalty of law. By definition, this becomes more authoritarian, which Bernie claims to aschew.
 
I think Bernie should continue to be honest with himself and continue to look fondly towards communist countries while pointing out what is wrong with America. He will crush Trump if he continues to be honest like this.
 
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.

That being said, when you transfer more private enterprise to the government, those aspects become government-controlled and you are forced to comply with them under penalty of law. By definition, this becomes more authoritarian, which Bernie claims to aschew.

That's the trouble with Socialism/Communism and why it eventually fails.[or kills it's detractors]
 
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.

That being said, when you transfer more private enterprise to the government, those aspects become government-controlled and you are forced to comply with them under penalty of law. By definition, this becomes more authoritarian, which Bernie claims to aschew.

Agreed. You need to be careful with sweeping assertions such as about things like 'everything the government controls'. If you visit a national park, do rangers force you to go to re-education camp and sing of songs of praise for the government?

It's those sort of false generalizations that lead to irrational and false views. It's why when Reagan opposed Medicare, his argument was the same scare tactic that it will bring "socialism" that will make Americans no longer "free" people. That's *Medicare*, but it's the same argument they always use. He said:

"Government has invaded the free precincts of private citizens,"; the U.S. government owns "1/5 of the total industrial capacity of the United States." "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

He then argued that the fact that Republicans defeated Truman's efforts at national healthcare proved the American people did not want it. Interesting logic that their corruption to the industry reflected the public wishes.

"behind it will come other government programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country until one day as Norman Thomas said we will wake to find that we have socialism." Under this scenario, Reagan says, "We are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

In other words, no one wants corrupt authoritarianism; Republicans use that fear to push their corrupt policies, with fear of 'communist totalitarianism' and promises of 'private sector inefficiency', despite evidence that again and again, the private sector does worse, less efficiently, in the industries where they compete, e.g. private prisons. That we have this perverse system where anyone who can make a buck if the government lets them, can afford to donate some of those profits to politicians; while citizens who oppose the wrong things tend not to give money to push for their position, and so the corrupt, profit-making policy wins over and over and over. That's the picture of the corruption of our system.

Note, Reagan's cries for the freedom of the American people were simply propaganda from a literal corporate spokesperson hired by the AMA to defend the industry profits by attacking Medicare. He'd rather see the elderly die without care and families bankrupted to provide it, than to let a paycheck pass him by.

His past should have caught up to him when he ran for president, over a decade later when all his predictions were proven false and Medicare was the other most popular program in the country, with Social Security, and he had to lie about what he'd done. As Wikipedia notes:

"In 1980 President Jimmy Carter, campaigning for re-election against Reagan, told crowds that: "As a traveling salesman for the American Medical Association campaign against Medicare, [Reagan] sowed the fear that Medicare would mean socialism and that it would lead to the destruction of our freedom." When the subject arose in a televised debate in late October, Reagan responded: "When I opposed Medicare, there was another piece of legislation meeting the same problem before Congress. I happened to favor the other piece of legislation and thought it would be better for the senior citizens. ... I was not opposing the principle of providing care for them..." Carter's campaign accused Reagan of "rewriting history", saying that there was no such alternative legislation."
 
A candidate for irony of the year is how Republicans claim to oppose 'tyranny' of government, but the real issue is whether there is a healthy democracy so the government serves the voters instead of powerful interests who control it; that the real threat of tyranny in those communist societies is the lack of that democracy, allowing dictators and politburos to serve themselves over the people, while Republicans do the same thing, fighting against democracy, for powerful interests to run government for their own benefit against the voters. Republicans are the advocates for tyranny, claiming they're the ones against it.

So, for example, Republicans will support a healthcare system that costs twice as much as anywhere else in the world, and leaves tens of millions without healthcare, killing tens of thousands of Americans every year all for the profit of a few and their donations, while claiming that lowering those costs and covering everyone, improving efficiency by lowering the overhead - thousands of different paperwork systems, sales forces, advertising, executives, profits - will reduce 'freedom' for the American people. Ya, just like the VA is such a disaster - with the highest ratings of any healthcare system.

That's all Republicans are - corrupt people who sell out the country for an office and some money, serving the powerful interests over the voters, all the while saying anything it takes to get elected, usually calling Democrats 'socialists' and saying how they'll take away 'freedom'. Evil lies. But boy, do the suckers who fall for the lies passionately support the liars.
 
Jeffrey Dahmer had some killer recipes.........:shock:
 
Agreed. You need to be careful with sweeping assertions such as about things like 'everything the government controls'. If you visit a national park, do rangers force you to go to re-education camp and sing of songs of praise for the government?

It's those sort of false generalizations that lead to irrational and false views. It's why when Reagan opposed Medicare, his argument was the same scare tactic that it will bring "socialism" that will make Americans no longer "free" people. That's *Medicare*, but it's the same argument they always use. He said:

"Government has invaded the free precincts of private citizens,"; the U.S. government owns "1/5 of the total industrial capacity of the United States." "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

He then argued that the fact that Republicans defeated Truman's efforts at national healthcare proved the American people did not want it. Interesting logic that their corruption to the industry reflected the public wishes.

"behind it will come other government programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country until one day as Norman Thomas said we will wake to find that we have socialism." Under this scenario, Reagan says, "We are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

In other words, no one wants corrupt authoritarianism; Republicans use that fear to push their corrupt policies, with fear of 'communist totalitarianism' and promises of 'private sector inefficiency', despite evidence that again and again, the private sector does worse, less efficiently, in the industries where they compete, e.g. private prisons. That we have this perverse system where anyone who can make a buck if the government lets them, can afford to donate some of those profits to politicians; while citizens who oppose the wrong things tend not to give money to push for their position, and so the corrupt, profit-making policy wins over and over and over. That's the picture of the corruption of our system.

Note, Reagan's cries for the freedom of the American people were simply propaganda from a literal corporate spokesperson hired by the AMA to defend the industry profits by attacking Medicare. He'd rather see the elderly die without care and families bankrupted to provide it, than to let a paycheck pass him by.

His past should have caught up to him when he ran for president, over a decade later when all his predictions were proven false and Medicare was the other most popular program in the country, with Social Security, and he had to lie about what he'd done. As Wikipedia notes:

"In 1980 President Jimmy Carter, campaigning for re-election against Reagan, told crowds that: "As a traveling salesman for the American Medical Association campaign against Medicare, [Reagan] sowed the fear that Medicare would mean socialism and that it would lead to the destruction of our freedom." When the subject arose in a televised debate in late October, Reagan responded: "When I opposed Medicare, there was another piece of legislation meeting the same problem before Congress. I happened to favor the other piece of legislation and thought it would be better for the senior citizens. ... I was not opposing the principle of providing care for them..." Carter's campaign accused Reagan of "rewriting history", saying that there was no such alternative legislation."

Let's assume that your (bolded above) assertion about federal government corruption is correct. Why would any sane person wish to give that corrupt government ever more power, control and money?
 
A candidate for irony of the year is how Republicans claim to oppose 'tyranny' of government, but the real issue is whether there is a healthy democracy so the government serves the voters instead of powerful interests who control it; that the real threat of tyranny in those communist societies is the lack of that democracy, allowing dictators and politburos to serve themselves over the people, while Republicans do the same thing, fighting against democracy, for powerful interests to run government for their own benefit against the voters. Republicans are the advocates for tyranny, claiming they're the ones against it.

So, for example, Republicans will support a healthcare system that costs twice as much as anywhere else in the world, and leaves tens of millions without healthcare, killing tens of thousands of Americans every year all for the profit of a few and their donations, while claiming that lowering those costs and covering everyone, improving efficiency by lowering the overhead - thousands of different paperwork systems, sales forces, advertising, executives, profits - will reduce 'freedom' for the American people. Ya, just like the VA is such a disaster - with the highest ratings of any healthcare system.

That's all Republicans are - corrupt people who sell out the country for an office and some money, serving the powerful interests over the voters, all the while saying anything it takes to get elected, usually calling Democrats 'socialists' and saying how they'll take away 'freedom'. Evil lies. But boy, do the suckers who fall for the lies passionately support the liars.

Umm the VA has a terrible record as does walter reed.
attempting to use them as examples is the best reason why government
should be no where near our healthcare.
 
Let's assume that your (bolded above) assertion about federal government corruption is correct. Why would any sane person wish to give that corrupt government ever more power, control and money?

It is the one reason that i try not to pay anything to the federal government.
I never get anything in return.
 
Agreed. You need to be careful with sweeping assertions such as about things like 'everything the government controls'. If you visit a national park, do rangers force you to go to re-education camp and sing of songs of praise for the government?

It's those sort of false generalizations that lead to irrational and false views. It's why when Reagan opposed Medicare, his argument was the same scare tactic that it will bring "socialism" that will make Americans no longer "free" people. That's *Medicare*, but it's the same argument they always use. He said:

"Government has invaded the free precincts of private citizens,"; the U.S. government owns "1/5 of the total industrial capacity of the United States." "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

He then argued that the fact that Republicans defeated Truman's efforts at national healthcare proved the American people did not want it. Interesting logic that their corruption to the industry reflected the public wishes.

"behind it will come other government programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country until one day as Norman Thomas said we will wake to find that we have socialism." Under this scenario, Reagan says, "We are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

In other words, no one wants corrupt authoritarianism; Republicans use that fear to push their corrupt policies, with fear of 'communist totalitarianism' and promises of 'private sector inefficiency', despite evidence that again and again, the private sector does worse, less efficiently, in the industries where they compete, e.g. private prisons. That we have this perverse system where anyone who can make a buck if the government lets them, can afford to donate some of those profits to politicians; while citizens who oppose the wrong things tend not to give money to push for their position, and so the corrupt, profit-making policy wins over and over and over. That's the picture of the corruption of our system.

Note, Reagan's cries for the freedom of the American people were simply propaganda from a literal corporate spokesperson hired by the AMA to defend the industry profits by attacking Medicare. He'd rather see the elderly die without care and families bankrupted to provide it, than to let a paycheck pass him by.

His past should have caught up to him when he ran for president, over a decade later when all his predictions were proven false and Medicare was the other most popular program in the country, with Social Security, and he had to lie about what he'd done. As Wikipedia notes:

"In 1980 President Jimmy Carter, campaigning for re-election against Reagan, told crowds that: "As a traveling salesman for the American Medical Association campaign against Medicare, [Reagan] sowed the fear that Medicare would mean socialism and that it would lead to the destruction of our freedom." When the subject arose in a televised debate in late October, Reagan responded: "When I opposed Medicare, there was another piece of legislation meeting the same problem before Congress. I happened to favor the other piece of legislation and thought it would be better for the senior citizens. ... I was not opposing the principle of providing care for them..." Carter's campaign accused Reagan of "rewriting history", saying that there was no such alternative legislation."

I'm not totally against socialized medicine, but countries that have it tax their middle class to high heaven. Denmark doesn't take money from their billionaires, they take the money from their regular working folk, and they take it in spades.

The issue I have with Bernie is that a significant thrust of his sales pitch comes from his assertion that the rich people will pay, and this isn't the case. His billionaire tax puts $1400 a year into everyone's pocket, which is a trifle.
 
I'm not totally against socialized medicine, but countries that have it tax their middle class to high heaven. Denmark doesn't take money from their billionaires, they take the money from their regular working folk, and they take it in spades.

The issue I have with Bernie is that a significant thrust of his sales pitch comes from his assertion that the rich people will pay, and this isn't the case. His billionaire tax puts $1400 a year into everyone's pocket, which is a trifle.

Well, in Denmark, the top 10% pay more than double the tax rate on that higher income.

More importantly, Bernie will SAVE people money, so his tax will be offset by more in savings than the tax. Take $5,000, give $10,000, not a bad deal. Billionaires can't pay for healthcare for everyone. Their taxes will go up, though, if Bernie can pass it.
 
Well, in Denmark, the top 10% pay more than double the tax rate on that higher income.

More importantly, Bernie will SAVE people money, so his tax will be offset by more in savings than the tax. Take $5,000, give $10,000, not a bad deal. Billionaires can't pay for healthcare for everyone. Their taxes will go up, though, if Bernie can pass it.

I was disappointed in the debate in SC - it came up to 'talk numbers' and in the mess it was unclear how stuff would get paid for. In other words, there was nothing about exactly how much health care costs would be reduced by, then we would only have to come up with X amount of revenue to pay fully for it, and of that X amount, Y amount is already being paid for with existing taxes and Z amount would be handled by new 'rich only' taxes, or the $29,000 thing. All I heard was more garbage about the rich and billionaires, which to a 16 year old might seem convincing.
 
I was disappointed in the debate in SC - it came up to 'talk numbers' and in the mess it was unclear how stuff would get paid for. In other words, there was nothing about exactly how much health care costs would be reduced by, then we would only have to come up with X amount of revenue to pay fully for it, and of that X amount, Y amount is already being paid for with existing taxes and Z amount would be handled by new 'rich only' taxes, or the $29,000 thing. All I heard was more garbage about the rich and billionaires, which to a 16 year old might seem convincing.

Well, you're right the debate did not address the topic - people have notes, that Every Single Debate seems to have the same question, 'Berniehowillyoupayforit', and the same answers. Vox did an article reporting but also questioning the Yale study about single payer. Bernie did release some more info, below. The 'rich and billionaires' stuff is the most important issue facing our country: plutocracy, threatening democracy.

How Does Bernie Pay for His Major Plans?
 
I think Bernie should continue to be honest with himself and continue to look fondly towards communist countries while pointing out what is wrong with America. He will crush Trump if he continues to be honest like this.

Agreed. Comrade BS ought to be encouraged by the left, because they believe they are the smartest people in the room.
 
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.

That being said, when you transfer more private enterprise to the government, those aspects become government-controlled and you are forced to comply with them under penalty of law. By definition, this becomes more authoritarian, which Bernie claims to aschew.

Honest and truthful statements such as Bernie's regarding Cuba are anathema to the US political system. The Russophobia present in the American political mindset is the natural result of generations worth of indoctrination. Congratulations, you are a good subject.
 
Honest and truthful statements such as Bernie's regarding Cuba are anathema to the US political system. The Russophobia present in the American political mindset is the natural result of generations worth of indoctrination. Congratulations, you are a good subject.

I didn't see Russophobia in his comment; he agreed with Bernie about Cuba. The error I saw in his comment was his generalization that government programs = authoritarian, missing that our problem is more about private, with too much wealth and power in too few hands corrupting our government, being authoritarian.
 
I didn't see Russophobia in his comment; he agreed with Bernie about Cuba. The error I saw in his comment was his generalization that government programs = authoritarian, missing that our problem is more about private, with too much wealth and power in too few hands corrupting our government, being authoritarian.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I did not say Russophobia drove Bernie's comments. I said the Russophobia is in the American political mindset. I did not mean that to include Bernie's mindset. How you came to that conclusion makes me wary.
 
That's the trouble with Socialism/Communism and why it eventually fails.[or kills it's detractors]

And socialists can't understand this. They think the central government is "the people," because we elect it. But once it has enough control, the central government can control the elections. In the USSR there was only one party on the ballot.
 
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.
And distortions are distortions.

In the 1985 interview, Sanders wasn't praising Castro. What he said was:

"Way back in—what was it?—1961, they invaded Cuba, and everybody was totally convinced that Castro was the worst guy in the world and all of the Cuban people were going to rise up in rebellion against Fidel Castro. They forgot that he educated their kids, gave their kids health care, totally transformed the society. Not that Fidel Castro and Cuba are perfect. They certainly are not. But just because Ronald Reagan dislikes these people doesn't mean that people in their own nations feel the same way."

I.e. he wasn't "praising Castro while criticizing the US." He was pointing out that US conservatives were mistakenly projecting their own opinions onto ordinary Cubans.

When asked about it on 60 Minutes last weekend, he still wasn't praising Castro:

Bernie Sanders: We're very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba but you know, it's unfair to simply say everything is bad. You know? When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it?

Anderson Cooper: A lot of p-- dissidents imprisoned in-- in Cuba.

Bernie Sanders: That's right. And we condemn that. Unlike Donald Trump, let's be clear, you want to-- I do not think that Kim Jong Un is a good friend. I don't trade love letters with a murdering dictator. Vladimir Putin, not a great friend of mine.
 
Perhaps you misunderstood me. I did not say Russophobia drove Bernie's comments. I said the Russophobia is in the American political mindset. I did not mean that to include Bernie's mindset. How you came to that conclusion makes me wary.

I didn't misunderstand. I read your comment as accusing Rickeroo of Russophobia, not Bernie; you misunderstood my comment.
 
Agreed. Comrade BS ought to be encouraged by the left, because they believe they are the smartest people in the room.
Hes pushing 90T debt...lefties think not at all about that. Biden says half the population has been taken out by guns...lefties didn't even blink. They literally have no conception of numbers and what they mean. Like I have always said, they think with pure emotion and no logic at all.
 
I'm no Bernie fan, and I'll be voting Trump. However, I think it was unfair of the other candidates to load up on Bernie because of his positive comments on certain aspects of Cuba. Hitler energized the German economy, which had been in shambles. This was, in and of itself, a good thing. Facts are facts.

That being said, when you transfer more private enterprise to the government, those aspects become government-controlled and you are forced to comply with them under penalty of law. By definition, this becomes more authoritarian, which Bernie claims to aschew.

It's what politicians do. They search and search to find things they can use against their opponents, even if they have to take them out of context or twist the facts. It happens to Trump all the time. I agree with you though. I would be for a change in advertisement laws where politicians can't say anything about their opponents at all, only about themselves. Not much you can do though in non-advertisement situations such as debates, interviews, etc.
 
Well, you're right the debate did not address the topic - people have notes, that Every Single Debate seems to have the same question, 'Berniehowillyoupayforit', and the same answers. Vox did an article reporting but also questioning the Yale study about single payer. Bernie did release some more info, below. The 'rich and billionaires' stuff is the most important issue facing our country: plutocracy, threatening democracy.

How Does Bernie Pay for His Major Plans?

Thanks for the link. He mentions a lot of free stuff, I'll touch on Social Security a bit here:

Bernie’s bill to expand Social Security will increase benefits for low-income senior citizens and people with disabilities by more than $1,300 a year. It is fully paid for by making the wealthiest 1.8 percent of Americans – those with incomes over $250,000 a year – pay the same rate into Social Security as working families.

The above is a bit underwhelming. He's supposedly tapping into "the rich", and in doing that he's able to give the poor slobs another $25 a week. The current average payout is $350 a week. Not exactly a windfall for the dependent slovenly masses.

Back to health care. I thought I heard Bernie say that Medicare for all was going to cost $30T/$32T over 10 years, but this link does help:

are projected to total approximately $52 trillion if we keep our current dysfunctional system

Medicare for All will save approximately $5 trillion over that same time period.

$52 trillion - $5 trillion = $47 trillion total

Current federal, state and local government spending over the next ten years is projected to total about $30 trillion


So Bernie's very efficient Medicare for All plan will cost $47T, and he only needs to come up with $17T, which does add up as he mentions various sources.

We've all heard how inefficient our current system is - how profit-taking from greedy "big pharma" and hospitals rake in the cash at the expense of poor slobs. In comes Bernie. He eliminates all that nasty profit. He stands up for the little guy. The power of socialism cures all.

His plan costs 90.4% of business as usual. What a savings, what a savoir. Much like boosting social security from $350 a week to "take from the rich" $375 a week, I was expecting at least a 50% cost cut, given the nature of our private 'for profit' medical system.
 
Bernie has a good heart, and his quest for hc and a greener environment come from a good place. Of course some ideas are a bit lofty. He knows it, we know it, and we also know that candidates go full out during the campaign.
When I heard him talk about Cuba though, one question came to mind. What does Bernie think about Cuba's migration policies? If anyone disagrees with what is happening here, lets compare to policies in Cuba, side by side.
 
Back
Top Bottom