• 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!

Economic Bill of Rights-from the Sander camp.

Casper said:
But can we afford it? That has always been my issue with Sanders, the ideas sound great but where do we get the money. We are running huge deficits and we must deal with that, otherwise none if the rest can continue for long. Can we, if we learn to manage our money, get there, sure, but first things first.
Click to expand...

Have you never listened to Bernie Sanders talk about how he plans of afford it? Cuz, he covers that. It's pretty simple and straightforward.
 
Waddy said:
EVERYONE in this country games the system. Corporations have teams of lawyers working constantly on how to avoid the most taxes, get the biggest tax breaks, and even manipulate product warranties to their best advantage. Common people want all the tax breaks they can get, retirements and health care they don't have to pay for, and any other freebies they can get their hands on. We make a lifestyle feeding at the government trough. That's how we roll. And that's why Socialism is a bad idea in this country.

In a small homogeneous country like Sweden or Denmark it can work. They are pretty much one tribe. They feel a sense of responsibility toward their fellow citizens who are paying the bills. So they only take government handouts for as long as they have to. They do their best to act responsibly. Therefore, people don't mind paying such high taxes because it is not being abused. BTW; it is not corporations who pay these bills, it is the citizens. The money for social programs comes from the citizens themselves.

See the difference?
Click to expand...

I don't think you know anything about those other countries nor about the "socialism" that you're complaining about.
 
nekrodev said:
Have you never listened to Bernie Sanders talk about how he plans of afford it? Cuz, he covers that. It's pretty simple and straightforward.
Click to expand...

Yes. Money.
 
nekrodev said:
I don't think you know anything about those other countries nor about the "socialism" that you're complaining about.
Click to expand...

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Quite the academic response, too. But my post wasn't a complaint about socialism, it was a critique.
 
nekrodev said:
Have you never listened to Bernie Sanders talk about how he plans of afford it? Cuz, he covers that. It's pretty simple and straightforward.
Click to expand...

Not even his fellow Democrats believe his rhetoric. Look at his poll numbers.
 
Waddy said:
Not even his fellow Democrats believe his rhetoric. Look at his poll numbers.
Click to expand...

lol he has the highest approval of any politician in our country, and is 2nd place out of like 20 Dem candidates currently.

His "fellow democrats" are mostly rich scumbags who want to maintain the status quo - and only marginally better than most Republicans.
 
nekrodev said:
lol he has the highest approval of any politician in our country, and is 2nd place out of like 20 Dem candidates currently.

His "fellow democrats" are mostly rich scumbags who want to maintain the status quo - and only marginally better than most Republicans.
Click to expand...

The Bern has been sliding. His approval rating used to be much higher.
 
Waddy said:
The Bern has been sliding. His approval rating used to be much higher.
Click to expand...

You said that not even Dems believed his rhetoric, though, and cited his poll numbers - which are still the highest in the country on a Senator basis, and 2nd in the current Presidential running. As opposed to some, who are massively disliked and polling below 1% in the current race lol.

Like, maybe find a better criticism.
 
nekrodev said:
You said that not even Dems believed his rhetoric, though, and cited his poll numbers - which are still the highest in the country on a Senator basis, and 2nd in the current Presidential running. As opposed to some, who are massively disliked and polling below 1% in the current race lol.

Like, maybe find a better criticism.
Click to expand...

Bernie used to have outstanding numbers anong Democrats. Now he is basically on a par with the rest. His message no longer resonates. He won't be president.
 
Waddy said:
Bernie used to have outstanding numbers anong Democrats. Now he is basically on a par with the rest. His message no longer resonates. He won't be president.
Click to expand...

His approval rating from his constituents has been largely consistent - with one in 2015 being much higher than the rest, although I believe that poll was done by a different group, so I'm not sure about the differences in scale or methodology. But, 60-70% approval for his state is pretty damn good. We haven't had a President with approval like that in a hot minute.

I agree he probably won't be President, but not because he doesn't have the numbers, it'll be because of media bias and DNC meddling.
 
In my foreigner eyes Bernie is trying something similar to European countries where you have right to get decent healthcare - even when you're poor as rat.

US is NOT ready for radical changes and some people may think that current system is best the possible already (because US is seen as the best country in every way, most advanced society on earth, so on...) I can be wrong about this, but seems like if you can't afford your life in US it's your own fault, if you have hard time to pay rent, healthcare, education, etc.. you're lazy or just too dumb. So money is - in this system - sign of some kind of talent and rich people are worshiped. That's why there isn't enough fight against plutocracy and money in politics. American (US) way is like it is, people love it and hoping for better future - like some how current mechanism is going to lead into magical greatness.

Huge tax cut for the rich is just fine in US, but if someone even suggest something like that here in Finland - people will laugh at it and kick ass (as long as needed), because you can't improve any society by doing so. I can be wrong, but there's lack of thinking your country as whole, think what policies are needed to really make a difference (immigration isn't your #1 issue). Kick those damn plutocrats out of politics and bring some real democracy back in where it should be - restore trust in politics and take care of your countrymen.

I'm pretty sure Bernie will fail again, but by saying this I don't mean that his policies are harmful - it's not about that at all. Bernie's Democratic Socialism is hard to understand, because it's literally against current system and in so many ways. Another thing: you can't copy social systems like that, it's really long process and people need to know how things really works - what it takes, because whole society needs to see it as good and safe system. As long as there is some doubt about it, there's no point to make big changes.

I live in society where we have all those things (practically speaking), like if someone is working in low pay job (we don't have any minimum wage law here in Finland), you can get some benefits from government - so you get what's really needed for everyday life, but it's just minimum level of "wealth" (you're still relatively poor, but you have always home and enough food, good healthcare and education).

US need paradigm change first, because you can't get different priorities without it - and those new priorities will show you what ground rules are for real democratic socialism. It's long way to go, but you'll get there someday.

OR

Current plutocrats wake up and make things happen - if that's the way, it will come really fast. They have enough money to turn things around pretty quick.
 
Bernie's a con man.
 
FinnFox said:
In my foreigner eyes Bernie is trying something similar to European countries where you have right to get decent healthcare - even when you're poor as rat.

US is NOT ready for radical changes and some people may think that current system is best the possible already (because US is seen as the best country in every way, most advanced society on earth, so on...) I can be wrong about this, but seems like if you can't afford your life in US it's your own fault, if you have hard time to pay rent, healthcare, education, etc.. you're lazy or just too dumb. So money is - in this system - sign of some kind of talent and rich people are worshiped. That's why there isn't enough fight against plutocracy and money in politics. American (US) way is like it is, people love it and hoping for better future - like some how current mechanism is going to lead into magical greatness.

Huge tax cut for the rich is just fine in US, but if someone even suggest something like that here in Finland - people will laugh at it and kick ass (as long as needed), because you can't improve any society by doing so. I can be wrong, but there's lack of thinking your country as whole, think what policies are needed to really make a difference (immigration isn't your #1 issue). Kick those damn plutocrats out of politics and bring some real democracy back in where it should be - restore trust in politics and take care of your countrymen.

I'm pretty sure Bernie will fail again, but by saying this I don't mean that his policies are harmful - it's not about that at all. Bernie's Democratic Socialism is hard to understand, because it's literally against current system and in so many ways. Another thing: you can't copy social systems like that, it's really long process and people need to know how things really works - what it takes, because whole society needs to see it as good and safe system. As long as there is some doubt about it, there's no point to make big changes.

I live in society where we have all those things (practically speaking), like if someone is working in low pay job (we don't have any minimum wage law here in Finland), you can get some benefits from government - so you get what's really needed for everyday life, but it's just minimum level of "wealth" (you're still relatively poor, but you have always home and enough food, good healthcare and education).

US need paradigm change first, because you can't get different priorities without it - and those new priorities will show you what ground rules are for real democratic socialism. It's long way to go, but you'll get there someday.

OR

Current plutocrats wake up and make things happen - if that's the way, it will come really fast. They have enough money to turn things around pretty quick.
Click to expand...

Or maybe hes wrong. Americans value freedom above all. If your paradigm shift requires shifting priorities away from freedom, then this is wrong. Luckily we have a union of states, so people can oo prioritize social equality over freedom in their own state and leave the rest of us alone.
 
jonny5 said:
Or maybe hes wrong. Americans value freedom above all. If your paradigm shift requires shifting priorities away from freedom, then this is wrong. Luckily we have a union of states, so people can oo prioritize social equality over freedom in their own state and leave the rest of us alone.
Click to expand...

Do you think you're less free in Finland? (where we have those things)

Check this out.

It's still true that we don't have gun rights / laws what you have in US and if you count that as really needed thing for true freedom... then Finland is - in that area - far far less free.
 
FinnFox said:
Do you think you're less free in Finland? (where we have those things)

Check this out.

It's still true that we don't have gun rights / laws what you have in US and if you count that as really needed thing for true freedom... then Finland is - in that area - far far less free.
Click to expand...

YES, I am less free in Finland. There is no fundamental law to speech or self defense. The top marginal tax rate is over 50%! Money is freedom, and in Finland the govt takes most of it.

And that site is bull****. It says they US isnt as free because Trump didnt win the popular vote, and russia is accused of interfering and the Senate didnt confirm Obamas nominees. Straight liberal talking points there.
 
jonny5 said:
YES, I am less free in Finland. There is no fundamental law to speech or self defense. The top marginal tax rate is over 50%! Money is freedom, and in Finland the govt takes most of it.

And that site is bull****. It says they US isnt as free because Trump didnt win the popular vote, and russia is accused of interfering and the Senate didnt confirm Obamas nominees. Straight liberal talking points there.
Click to expand...

We have freedom of speech as part of our constitution. Anyway, good thing is that we both live where we are. Progressive taxes are need for funding schools, healthcare, student benefits (you get money by staying at school), housing benefits (can't afford rent? here's some..), etc.. + police, fire department, public libraries...
 
FinnFox said:
We have freedom of speech as part of our constitution. Anyway, good thing is that we both live where we are. Progressive taxes are need for funding schools, healthcare, student benefits (you get money by staying at school), housing benefits (can't afford rent? here's some..), etc.. + police, fire department, public libraries...
Click to expand...

Technically you have freedom of expression in your constitution, with the caveate that the legislature can detail how you can exercise it. They've done so by prohibiting certain expressions. Thats a lot different than ours which says "congress shall make NO law abridging the freedom of speech"

But you're proving my point. Finland unfairly taxes people to force them to have stuff. Much more than the US, which makes you less free. You do not get to directly decide what to do with your earnings, and if you earn more, you pay more for the same or less services. Standard socialism and the opposite of free.
 
jonny5 said:
Technically you have freedom of expression in your constitution, with the caveate that the legislature can detail how you can exercise it. They've done so by prohibiting certain expressions. Thats a lot different than ours which says "congress shall make NO law abridging the freedom of speech"

But you're proving my point. Finland unfairly taxes people to force them to have stuff. Much more than the US, which makes you less free. You do not get to directly decide what to do with your earnings, and if you earn more, you pay more for the same or less services. Standard socialism and the opposite of free.
Click to expand...

Poor me then, I didn't know how miserable this place is. What you think about this?
 
KLATTU said:
Josh Miller-Lewis
✔
@jmillerlewis
We need a 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights:

- The right to health care
- The right to education
- The right to a good job
- The right to affordable housing
- The right to a secure retirement
- The right to a clean environment#DemocraticSocialism


comments?
Click to expand...

None of them are rights. Rights do not require goods or services from others. Rights are inherent to the individual. No one has the right to demand health-care services, an education, a job, housing, retirement, or a clear environment. If you want those things you go out and earn it, you don't have a right to any of it.

What you are describing is closer to slavery than rights. You would enslave others to provide you a service you haven't earned and don't deserve. How stereotypically leftist.
 
KLATTU said:
Josh Miller-Lewis
✔
@jmillerlewis
We need a 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights:

- The right to health care
- The right to education
- The right to a good job
- The right to affordable housing
- The right to a secure retirement
- The right to a clean environment#DemocraticSocialism


comments?
Click to expand...

what a load of nonsense.
people in the US have access to healthcare and good healthcare at that.
everyone has access to an education and a college education.
You do not have a right to a job. you have the right to apply for a job and interview for a job.
you do not have the right to tell someone what they can or cannot charge for their property.
Your retirement is what you make of it. people do not owe you a retirement. if you don't like what the government promises then make your own
investments.
 
KLATTU said:
Josh Miller-Lewis
✔
@jmillerlewis
We need a 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights:

- The right to health care
- The right to education
- The right to a good job
- The right to affordable housing
- The right to a secure retirement
- The right to a clean environment#DemocraticSocialism

comments?
Click to expand...

Great bumper sticker thinking but none of those are "rights" in the Constitutional sense. All we are talking about are ambitions for the government to fund presumably by targeted taxation on other parties deemed responsible by whatever reasoning as to why the above list is not realized.

Ultimately it will be the downfall of the political and ideological position that is this rise in support for Democratic Socialism.

One complication we continually face is the difference between a right defined as protections provided by the government, against a slightly different definition as protections from the government. Just that slight shift is the difference between Democratic Socialism, or voting for more benefit from the government as some one's expense, and Constitutional Republic, or the idea of preventing the government from limiting the individual will be what we debate for years in terms of the above list.

The right to free speech for example is what we would define as a Constitutional protection for the individual, the right to healthcare is something the government provides (or at least ensures via force) for the individual.

Taking just the top example of the right to healthcare. All things considered we do not have a healthcare system really, we have a healthcare insurance system regulated to the hills and back on how it functions in the determination of care between the doctor providing to the patient. There is no real "system" that cookie cutters provided healthcare across the board to everyone, just various means to ensure some degree of care to some other degree of cost movement (i.e. what ends up the patient responsibility, what ends up the insurer's responsibility, and what the doctor contractually writes off as the difference between the listed charge and the negotiated charge with the insurer.)

This ends the debate on what healthcare is in this nation on two fronts. One, Before or after ACA and going back decades to be honest, there was another party in the room in the determination of care between the doctor providing to the patient. Two, the only way to make that a "right" in the Democratic Socialism sense is a complete take over of healthcare to the point that we totally replace the healthcare insurance system with government ran healthcare. Anything short leaves multiple parties in the room between the doctor and the patient.

And we have concluded for years that ACA was a designed stepping stone to doing just that, and the costs plus red tape aspect to all things government will be extraordinary for this "right."

Go down the list of all these "rights" and you will find there is not enough wealth to tax to ensure all this.
 
jonny5 said:
Thats because you dont know any better. I dont want to watch random videos though. Im interested in your thoughts, not theirs.
Click to expand...

Video was about Bernie, so it's kinda relevant xD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom