Grassroots for Bernie Sanders 2016

Will you vote for him

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
Banker's run their business like this

From Forbes
"The Special Inspector General for TARP summary of the bailout says that the total commitment of government is $16.8 trillion dollars with the $4.6 trillion already paid out."

And unfortunately they run the US government like that too as you can see from the quote above.
 
You're so confused man. You do sound like Rush. What do you hope to gain from these posts?
Levi, the truth only has two goals:
1. Shine the light (convince those in darkness to follow the light of truth)
2. Make them responsible, if they choose to reject it. In other words, if you were never told the truth, you would never be responsible for what you do with it. But with knowledge comes responsibility.
 
Willing to commit fraud to get rich and know you'll get away with it may not be lazy but kinda dickish...don't you think? These are the banks I think Mac is referring to. Ahh... morals.
I believe the fundamental wrongdoing is on the part of the Fed. The banks operate in the framework the government sets for them. Most of the cursing that goes on today against big banks stems from the bailouts they received. I never agreed with that policy; most fiscally responsible people don't. But it's important to remember why they were put underwater. The government mandated that they make loans to undeserving, and unqualified applicants. Everyone was supposed to be afforded "the American Dream". When those bad risks defaulted on the loans, the banks were left holding the bag. The government then made the decision that they were too big to fail.

But additionally, I make a distinction between commercial bankers and the Federal Reserve. We need to cut taxes and go back to the gold standard. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/28/ted-cruz-calls-for-the-gold-standard.html
 
Welfare began long before your much despised current president. It was the response to what was an utter collapse of the American economy. Yes, America began on the much vaunted free market but in the end it wasn't free. All the chickens began to come to roost but, who was there to pick up the tab from the decades of unfettered capitalism? Piece after piece has been left for the government to clean up. Why? Simple, they have no choice. When a corporation exhausts the resources of a community they up and leave. What's left behind? All those chasing the American dream whose businesses relied on the incomes of the employees of those corporations. The ruined environment polluted by years of dumping toxins into the air, water and soils. The ex-employees who gave all they had to help build these businesses only to be left behind as so much unwanted chattel.

Don't talk about free markets, they have never been free. The theory is good the execution deplorable. Why? What those "great" American industrialists and capitalist did was recreate the ruling class here but instead of being landed they were provided with an even greater wealth that wasn't shackled to the land and those that dwelt upon it.

American corporations have relied on government intervention in all its operations. The idiocy is that so many believe it's the individual that is to blame for the woes not the corporations and their leaders.

Having worked in training programs for welfare recipients I found them motivated to rise up out of their dependence not the lazy, leaches that they are portrayed to be. But, when those that control the vast majority of a societies wealth withdraw from it they leave many who in the short term struggle to survive.

Therein lies governments role. Aiding at those times of need, because they have no choice.
You are a benevolent person. Like most everybody else. Think of the good that you could do in your community and around the world, if the government didn't take your money away from you to "help the needy," while frittering most of it away.

Let me paint a picture for you:

A patient (represents those in need) is laying on the hospital bed dying. He needs a blood transfusion. The doctor (government) pulls in a gurney carrying a healthy family-member (taxpayer) as a donor for the blood. The doctor extracts the blood from the donor, but spills most of it on the floor before he can get it into the patient. The patient dies anyway because he didn't get enough. Unfortunately, the doctor wasn't mindful of what he was doing and took too much blood from the donor--the donor dies also. Who's left? That's right, the government.

The point is not only the inefficiency--it's the fact that the government never has it's own "blood". The government has never produced a dime. Think about what small business goes through to turn $1 into $1.25. Government has never experienced any of that. They have never taken any risks, never had their truck windows broken, and saws stolen, certainly never delivered any customer service. The only money they ever can give out, is that money they have already taken from someone else. The national debt increased $8 trillion under Barack Hussein Obama. That means that on top of all the money they've taken from the American taxpayer in the last 7 years, they blew through an additional $8 trillion. That's mind boggling! With that kind of money there shouldn't be a single homeless, hungry person on US soil. Do you honestly think that Bernie is that much different than Barry? Wanna talk about controlling wealth? The Federal Government owns 25% of the land mass that is North America. You see them giving any to these "unwanted chattel"? Nope--in fact--they're seizing more and more.

You say you haven't seen any "lazy leaches"? I believe that. Most people want to make it on their own. But Barry and Bernie give them the evil banker or big business as the boogeyman, and all of a sudden they are victims. All of a sudden, they're voting for Bernie, because he "feels their pain". But, to keep getting the votes, the liberals have to keep that man down. They have to keep telling him he's a victim regardless of how good it gets for him. We see that today in the black community. The left is still telling blacks that they are being oppressed. Supreme Court Justice, POTUS, Secretary of State, CEOs, etc. But they have to keep that smokescreen up--"You're still a victim." Know what?, you tell that to people long enough, they get a complex. I see it all the time. Then it becomes generational. It's disgusting!

I don't know Treehumper; I'm just certain that it is more empowering to tell someone, "You can do it," than it is to tell someone, "You've been taken advantage of--now you need to get on WIK, section 8 housing, food stamps, Obamacare, etc." It's a slap in the face to the integrity of humanity, and most people can sense that. In some regards, it is an arrogant way of looking down on someone and saying, "You're not good enough."

But I know Canada handles things differently than we do. But there it is.
 
Who do we owe? How would we pay? A freightliner full of $100 bills? It's a joke, really. And furthermore who would have the balls to collect? The "national debt" is yet another fabrication designed to distract us.
I forgot to get back to you on that one...this one is from 2013...I don't think it has changed much.



We pay the same way you pay your bills. You pay your bills don't you Levi?

As far as who would have the "balls to collect." Should we be a country that tries to dodge payment? I don't do that, do you?

Frankly, if we did, there are several countries that "have the balls." One example is Putin--he makes a mockery of Obama almost daily. China is another key player on the world scene. Then you would get the countries that would just come along to help wipe out the US. Iran, for example, chants death to America almost every day. They treat this administration like the proverbial stepchild.

So, these are the people we owe, and, as any normal lender, they have the right to expect payment.
 
They aren't telling them to go on these programs. The programs are there for them to access. The world is an exceedingly more complex place than these simple analogies. They all sound good but it's from reality. Are there inefficiencies? Absolutely! Are businesses the paragons of efficiency? Nope. The luxury they have is they can pick up and leave without much concern for what they leave behind. Government is left to deal with the mess. Government isn't in business and if it does charge for it's services there is howling about how it's the people's government why do we have to pay let alone pay enough that they realize a profit.

Each politician that votes against a cut back does so as a representative of their voters and supporters. So what are you willing to do without that your government provides? Oh and remember the entitlement programs represent a very small percentage of the budget so even if you were to outright eliminate them it wouldn't make that big a difference to the budget. It would on the other hand make a huge difference to society. Would private business step in and pay sufficient wages to enable employees to survive and access all the free market services? Consider that it is said that wage increases drive automation and thus loss of gainful employment.
 
They aren't telling them to go on these programs. The programs are there for them to access.
That's not accurate. They recruit. Several years ago I was a 3rd Class with a wife and new baby. They tried to talk my wife into receiving WIC. After she thought about it, and decided not to, they were hostile toward her.
 
They aren't telling them to go on these programs. The programs are there for them to access. The world is an exceedingly more complex place than these simple analogies. They all sound good but it's from reality. Are there inefficiencies? Absolutely! Are businesses the paragons of efficiency? Nope. The luxury they have is they can pick up and leave without much concern for what they leave behind. Government is left to deal with the mess. Government isn't in business and if it does charge for it's services there is howling about how it's the people's government why do we have to pay let alone pay enough that they realize a profit.

Each politician that votes against a cut back does so as a representative of their voters and supporters. So what are you willing to do without that your government provides? Oh and remember the entitlement programs represent a very small percentage of the budget so even if you were to outright eliminate them it wouldn't make that big a difference to the budget. It would on the other hand make a huge difference to society. Would private business step in and pay sufficient wages to enable employees to survive and access all the free market services? Consider that it is said that wage increases drive automation and thus loss of gainful employment.
There are currently 21,995,000 government employees. Let me ask you a question? How many more do you think it will take? For a little perspective; there are 12,329,000 employees in the manufacturing sector.

$3.3 trillion is the Federal Government's operating budget for fiscal 2016.... How much more money do you think they'll need? You talked about reality: " They all sound good but it's from reality." (Not really certain what that sentence was supposed to say) The reality is, we've got to get this financial house in order. If we don't, our kids will have nothing but bills.

Everyone wants lifelong parents. Because they want to live their lives as lifelong children. That's what this government is shaping up to be. It's dangerous to a society. It's dangerous to our liberty. And it's dangerous to our God-given independence and sense of self worth. It robs people of their dignity, potential, competence, and the pride of accomplishment.
 
"…far from reality."

As is the concept that this is somehow new to this administration and that it is somehow creating "children" of the American people. So what should be people do when the economy tanks and business takes a step back leaving huge numbers without. Let's look back into the past to see what happens, oh yeah, parks are turned into shantytowns of the displaced, etc…..

What is lacking here is the patriotism at the corporate level that is expressed by the small business person. Stop blaming the government and start putting the heat on corporations and businesses that are unwilling to provide living wages to their American compatriots, through sacrificing record profits and dividends to their shareholders and support Americans who will then in turn support American business…
 
That's not accurate. They recruit. Several years ago I was a 3rd Class with a wife and new baby. They tried to talk my wife into receiving WIC. After she thought about it, and decided not to, they were hostile toward her.
I guess we do it differently in Canada. When I had to turn to welfare for my family, they didn't call me or recruit me, I had to go to them. What a family was given is far from enough to even begin to support them. I was required to do a job search, which I was doing anyway. If anything was awry I would be kicked off the support. I utilized it for its purpose, a safety net that allowed me to get back on my feet.

Eventually, I worked on a job search program targeted at welfare recipients. They were referred by their caseworkers who saw this as a handy tool to clean house with. What we saw were people struggling to gain a footing in the job market while they dealt with all manor of issues that disqualified for most employers. You might recall many employers do not like to hire people that are unemployed (ironic as that may seem, there were and probably still are job ads stating just this) and are equally as discriminatory about addictions, psychological and physiological problems. Never mind the added elements of age, ethnicity, religion (think Hobby Lobby), etc… Don't think it's real? I know it is, I was immersed in the world of job seeking for 7+ yrs training people how to get around all manner of objections.

You preach your own version of utopia. The real world is far from either yours or Thomas More's version.
 
"As is the concept that this is somehow new to this administration..."

-----I never said that. But the fact remains that this administration has nearly doubled the deficit--$8 trillion which has been added on to the $10 trillion generated by all the previous administrations combined.

"...that it is somehow creating "children" of the American people."

-----Simple example is the snow storm that's moving up the east coast. The mayors and governors are telling people, "Stay home! Do not go out! Don't shovel snow, you could get a heart attack. It's cold out, wear plenty of clothing if you do have to go outdoors. Stock up on nonperishable foods! Etc, etc, etc." Even in my short lifetime, I cannot remember a time when governments talked to their citizens like a parent talks to their child. As though we don't have the good sense to protect ourselves. And the sad thing Treehumper, more and more, they're turning this country into a place where people can't think for themselves. They're starting to rely on the government for this sort of parenting--in every aspect of life. You see, America was founded, molded, and became great because of self-sufficiency. I know it's not seen or promoted anywhere else around the world, but that's what has set America apart and made it great. We're loosing that. As we become more socialistic, we can't have any individuality or self-reliance. We have to lean heavier and heavier on the "Nanny State."

"So what should be people do when the economy tanks and business takes a step back leaving huge numbers without. Let's look back into the past to see what happens, oh yeah, parks are turned into shantytowns of the displaced, etc….."

-----I'm assuming one of your examples is the Great Depression? My grandparents lived through the Great Depression. My dad and his 8 siblings were raised in it. Rather than look to the government for help, they helped each other. Rather than plead for socialistic coddling, they strove harder for the American Dream. Two of the boys were drafted for Korea, two volunteered. When their service was up, they went to the workforce as laborers. Rather than go into the details, let's suffice it to say that they all became sufficiently successful. Not because of a safety net, but because of hard work.

"What is lacking here is the patriotism at the corporate level that is expressed by the small business person."

-----What are the numbers on this? Or is this just more of the "corporations as the bogeyman" mantra?

"Stop blaming the government and start putting the heat on corporations and businesses that are unwilling to provide living wages to their American compatriots, through sacrificing record profits and dividends to their shareholders and support Americans who will then in turn support American business…"

-----Rather than turn this into a volume; let's examine oil alone. According to the Energy Information Administration, in February 2008 state and federal excise taxes accounted for 13% of the average price per gallon of regular gasoline sold in the U.S. while the oil company's earnings came to 8.3%

-----Think about the article that Tom posted over on the 'fair wealth distribution' thread. It stated that the 62 richest people have roughly $1.75 trillion. The article stated that "The number of people lifted out of absolute poverty over the past two decades has been encouraging, says the report, but had inequality not risen at the same time, as many as 200 million more people could have been lifted out of poverty over the same period. “That could have risen to 700 million had poor people benefited more than the rich from economic growth,” said the report."

What if the $8 trillion that is now on our deficit had not been squandered? How about the roughly $3 trillion last year that was brought in as revenue and spent on this social program and that? You tell me not to "blame the government." It's a little difficult for me to ignore the nose on my face.

Living Wage? It's just like the question, "What ratio of wealth distribution would be acceptable?" It's relative to who is asking, who's answering, and what their circumstances are. Nobody agrees. NO ONE can answer it, or NO ONE will. At the end of the day, a living wage is what I give my children. That same magic number is also what the government wants to take from the working taxpayers and give to the tax recipients, ie. their children.
 
I guess we do it differently in Canada. When I had to turn to welfare for my family, they didn't call me or recruit me, I had to go to them. What a family was given is far from enough to even begin to support them. I was required to do a job search, which I was doing anyway. If anything was awry I would be kicked off the support. I utilized it for its purpose, a safety net that allowed me to get back on my feet.

Eventually, I worked on a job search program targeted at welfare recipients. They were referred by their caseworkers who saw this as a handy tool to clean house with. What we saw were people struggling to gain a footing in the job market while they dealt with all manor of issues that disqualified for most employers. You might recall many employers do not like to hire people that are unemployed (ironic as that may seem, there were and probably still are job ads stating just this) and are equally as discriminatory about addictions, psychological and physiological problems. Never mind the added elements of age, ethnicity, religion (think Hobby Lobby), etc… Don't think it's real? I know it is, I was immersed in the world of job seeking for 7+ yrs training people how to get around all manner of objections.
I don't mean to sound insensitive. I'm sorry you've had some bad experiences. If you were in my area, and needed help, I'd probably give you a hand. I do give, and recently when some guys in my church were out of jobs, I gave them as much work as I could. So don't take offense, please.

It sounds as if in the first paragraph, you are a fan of the system that is in place. In the second paragraph, it appears that you find it woefully inadequate. Are you thinking out loud, or are your opinions torn? (Which is fine if they are, it's just a little difficult understand and respond to) You mention struggles, issues, discrimination, addictions, psy. problems, etc. What system do you think America should model itself after that will eliminate these common ailments to humanity? I do believe hardship is real. I've experienced some in my own life. Do I believe government is the answer? NO! I believe that lots of those problems it does not cause, it exacerbates. Furthermore, those who believe that a government can alleviate those problems, are grossly delusional. Or in many cases, lied to by the politicians who covet their vote.
 
I don't mean to sound insensitive. I'm sorry you've had some bad experiences. If you were in my area, and needed help, I'd probably give you a hand. I do give, and recently when some guys in my church were out of jobs, I gave them as much work as I could. So don't take offense, please.

It sounds as if in the first paragraph, you are a fan of the system that is in place. In the second paragraph, it appears that you find it woefully inadequate. Are you thinking out loud, or are your opinions torn? (Which is fine if they are, it's just a little difficult understand and respond to) You mention struggles, issues, discrimination, addictions, psy. problems, etc. What system do you think America should model itself after that will eliminate these common ailments to humanity? I do believe hardship is real. I've experienced some in my own life. Do I believe government is the answer? NO! I believe that lots of those problems it does not cause, it exacerbates. Furthermore, those who believe that a government can alleviate those problems, are grossly delusional. Or in many cases, lied to by the politicians who covet their vote.
What I'm saying here is that I've been on both sides of the system and have intimate knowledge of how it works. It has it's pros and cons like any charitable system. Whether delivered by religious groups and other well meaning philanthropists they all tend to treat those that come to them as "children", passing judgement and punishment along with reward. They are all political creatures as they serve the agenda of those that provide it. Once private interests did deliver charity but they also picked who they would deliver it to leaving plenty to their own devices.

I've seen that happen where a couple who raised their family in a certain church, tithe faithfully and lead "good christian" lives were forgotten in their moment of need by that same church as their health was failing and they had no other family to turn to. Embarrassed, and with a large dose of shame, they sought welfare as a last resort. My grandparents, immigrants to Canada, survived the depression as well running their small barber shop out of the front room of their 2 bedroom home, took in 4 boarders along with their 9 kids. That your Grandparents survived, like mine, is in part also due to the fact that all those that didn't have similar means did have the government programs.

Government doesn't cause those problems but, the problems that arise within a society become their problem when all other means of support fail. Whether it's family and friends, church or philanthropists. That's why its referred to as a safety net.

As for the notion that "they" are telling you what to do, i.e., don't go out in the snow, etc.... is not being parents it's being painfully aware of the liabilities (most warnings are written by liability lawyers and insurance co's.) and the added burden that comes with people rolling the dice in bad weather. What they're telling you is that emergency services need to be available for real unavoidable crises. When I plow during storms like this, our initial push is with ambulance and fire truck access in mind and opening up driveways at doctor's homes. A recent post on FB pointed out, government is the people, thus all their actions are of the people. Because you don't think that way doesn't mean it isn't what the majority feel.
 
A recent post on FB pointed out, government is the people, thus all their actions are of the people. Because you don't think that way doesn't mean it isn't what the majority feel.
--....a poll by the AP found that only 42 percent of Americans support same sex marriage. (July 21, 2015)
--Poll: 85 Percent of Americans Support Requiring a Balanced Federal Budget (March 22, 2013)
--Gallup Poll: 55% of Americans Want All or Most Abortions Made Illegal (May 29, 2015)
--Rasmussen--59% of Likely U.S. Voters consider reducing the cost of health care more important than making sure everyone has health insurance which is the goal of Obamacare.
--Some 54% of total respondents said they oppose taking in refugees, according to a new poll from the Washington Post and ABC News
--Gallup polling about blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants more generally finds the public widely unsympathetic to this proposal, with only 6% supporting it.
 
The Washington, D.C. region is the nation’s Boomtown, and it is not even close.
According to new Census figures released on Thursday, the Washington, D.C. area has the highest median household income at around $90,000. The San Francisco region is next at around $80,000. The Boston area is third at around $72,000. As Breitbart News has extensively documented, eight of the 13 wealthiest counties in the nation are in the D.C. area.

There are really only two kinds of people. Those who think the Federal Government should get bigger, and those who think it is already too big, and needs to be smaller.

Bernie plans on spending $18 trillion (THAT'S NEW SPENDING) in the next decade. Would that increase the size of government? You bet it would! He's not a man of the people--he's a man of the government. (Possibly unwittingly)

So the question is: Would that be enough? Nope. In 7 years Barry has spent $8 trillion over revenue (and this spineless Congress has went along with him, I might add). Not even a drop in the bucket according to most liberals. This economy is in worse condition than when he took office with his socialist agenda 7 years ago. The media has been busy blaming China. Hello! Which economy drives China's? The US! Our lousy economic condition is dragging down the world economy.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom