Post Reply  Post Thread 
Pages (5): « First < Previous 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next > Last »

Bernie Sanders

Author Message
Blue Wizard
Istari
*


Posts: 2,591
Words count: 147,611
Group: Basic
Joined: Mar2012
Status: Offline
Reputation: 68
Experience: 7535
Glory Points: 4560
Medals: 94

Texas
Morocco
California
Post: #31
RE: Bernie Sanders

Fellow Players:

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are the only two presidential candidates worth listening to. They are the only two not beholden to the campaign contribution class. Sanders's campaign engages in grass-roots fundraising, and Trump is self-financing his campaign. All of the other candidates in both major parties are owned by the banks and the corporations that donate to their campaigns.

Cheers,

-Jay


“Courage will now be your best defence against the storm that is at hand-—that and such hope as I bring.” Gandalf the Grey
19.10.2015 20:31
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Alexander
Comrade
*


Posts: 1,585
Words count: 238,210
Group: Basic
Joined: Feb2009
Status: Offline
Reputation: 61
Experience: 616
Glory Points: 146
Medals: 4

Post: #32
RE: Bernie Sanders

Helsworth Wrote:
LoL. Who said anything about forcing people to believe this or that. Reason is enough to convince people, the unreasonable ones will still listen to their local religious charlatans. It's easy to tear down such rhetoric by simply showing Japan as an example. Over 220% of GDP, no mass bankruptcy, no hyperinflation, no thing. Furthermore, if financing tanks, weapons, and missiles isn't inflationary, and doesn't bankrupt the country (and people like Greenspan, Krugman, and Summers all testify to that), then why would social/civilian spending?
How come FDR managed to deficit spend on his promises in his day and age, but Sanders cannot in a free floating nonconvertible fucking fiat regime? You're assuming people will find gov budget = household budget more convincing than MMT view that they're nothing alike on NOTHING. People are raised to be 1 of two things, either doves or hawks when it comes to fiscal policy. If a popular figure tells them, you're wrong, deficits should be run even in good times & if they take the time (5 minutes) to explain fucking double entry bookkeeping (minus with plus ALWAYS balance to zero) to the audience, then the audience will be left not with empty rhetoric, but with their curiosity aflame. And the more they;ll think about it & the explanations given, then more they're realize that it's true. That the Federal Government is NOTHING like a household or firm. And that it's insane to "pay off the national debt", when the very dollar bills they have in their wallets and in their pension funds come from (represent) the national debt.
But no, it's too risky to tell people a simple truth, that dollar bills in their pocket is government debt. That might inflame the mob and make it vote with Trump. If you have such little faith in people that they can't handle the truth, no wonder we're moving backwards towards feudalism.
All it takes is for popular figures to tell the truth (do the revolutionary act), and then others will come out of the woodwork as well and defend that particular claim. There are so many closet heterodox economists & financial analysts, you have no idea - and they remain closeted simply because they fear losing their positions of power. They're afraid the financial owners won't pay them to actually write out of the neolib/neocon theology.
The big money interests in the Democratic party have nothing to fear from an MMT advocate candidate. MMT itself is NOT an ideology, it simply describes the modern monetary & banking system. As for deficit doves, from my experience, it comes easier to them to embrace the owl position compared to the hawks, though, I did have success with hawks too.

MMT is most certainly one of the economic ideologies because it promotes specific approach to the economy. Economy, sociology and history are always ideological disciplines.

Japanese economy is not collapsing, but it is stagnating, so its example will not convince anyone that it is good way to develop the economy. Nowadays many people are ready to accept that maintaining some level of government debt is acceptable, and they are ready to support increasing the debt today if someone will convince them that this spending will help the economy to outgrow the debt tomorrow, but no one will agree that it is acceptable to allow the debt to constantly increase.

And I can assure you that only the curiosity of the open-minded economy professors, their students and "closet heterodox economists & financial analysts" can be flared by something that is called “double entry bookkeeping”. Everyone else will automatically take the side of traditional economists because they are more numerous and because their ideas already were tried out in practice.

This post was last modified: 19.10.2015 20:43 by Lord Alexander.

19.10.2015 20:42
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #33
RE: Bernie Sanders

LoL, Lord Alexander. I think now you're just arguing for the sake of it. Happy MMT doesn't advocate a "particular" approach to the economy. Anyone who understands Chartalism can use various means to achieve various ends. I blocked a republican on twitter after I successfully informed him about MMT, because he was a gun nut. So how's that for ideology. LoL. He didn't want fiscal deficits with more gov spending, but with less taxation.
And no, history is not an ideological discipline. Facts exist no matter your set of beliefs/value system. Opinion comes in the way you interpret the facts. Facts are not opinion, however. And historical facts are NOT ideology.
Japan has stagnated for so many years precisely because the government DIDN'T deficit spend enough proactively. It simply dropped interest rates to near zero, hoping that will aid shrinking domestic borrowing, which it didn't, because in order for the private sector to pay off its stock of debt, the government had to increase its stock of debt. And China shrank their export market too. So I don't know why you're trying to find excuses to this, when the myth was "high gov debt = > hyperinflation a la Zimbabwe or Greece-like situation."
Japan didn't do New Deal programs, like Sanders is proposing.
Sanders could easily state, look, this country has a GDP output gap of over 1,1 trillion dollars. I propose we cover that gap in part by increased gov spending on this and this and reduced taxes on this and this. And the mainstream economists won't have any arguments (outside ideology, which they;ll have to spin like "What Bernie Sanders says is technically true, but our side's proposals are better...). But again, we can't do that, because people fear that stepping out of the zombie economic theological narrative will bring the other side into power.
We can't use facts like these in politics because (enter bs excuse here)





And the best bit is this. The answer to why nobody else talks about the other half of the balance sheet. Because they think you're too stupid to understand. That's what you tell to the crowd at the end of your campaign speech, and I guarantee you that people's curiosity will be stirred and roused.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 19.10.2015 22:15 by Helsworth.

19.10.2015 22:02
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #34
RE: Bernie Sanders

Blue Wizard Wrote:
Fellow Players:

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are the only two presidential candidates worth listening to. They are the only two not beholden to the campaign contribution class. Sanders's campaign engages in grass-roots fundraising, and Trump is self-financing his campaign. All of the other candidates in both major parties are owned by the banks and the corporations that donate to their campaigns.

Cheers,

-Jay

What about Ben Carson

19.10.2015 23:43
Quote this message in a reply
Roger Mexico
Member
*


Posts: 191
Words count: 63,341
Group: Basic
Joined: Mar2013
Status: Offline
Reputation: 12
Experience: 319
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #35
RE: Bernie Sanders

Trump is a circus clown, and I suspect this whole thing is basically a marketing gimmick for future books and TV shows.

I'm not the first to wonder what excuse he's going to come up with if he doesn't start losing and has to actually quit.

Personally I find Sanders more entertaining, mostly just for those little moments when a reporter asks him a really stupid question and he just gives them that... look that silently communicates "that's a really stupid fucking question" but then actually follows it up with some version of "do you actually expect me to answer that?"

20.10.2015 08:10
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #36
RE: Bernie Sanders

Roger Mexico Wrote:
Trump is a circus clown, and I suspect this whole thing is basically a marketing gimmick for future books and TV shows.

I'm not the first to wonder what excuse he's going to come up with if he doesn't start losing and has to actually quit.

Personally I find Sanders more entertaining, mostly just for those little moments when a reporter asks him a really stupid question and he just gives them that... look that silently communicates "that's a really stupid fucking question" but then actually follows it up with some version of "do you actually expect me to answer that?"

It's the opposite with me. I find Trump entertaining, and I find Sanders to be really uncharismatic.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
20.10.2015 10:55
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Edvard Kardelj
General Secretary
*


Posts: 274
Words count: 44,838
Group: Basic
Joined: Aug2015
Status: Offline
Reputation: 6
Experience: 61
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #37
RE: Bernie Sanders

Blue Wizard Wrote:
Fellow Players:

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are the only two presidential candidates worth listening to. They are the only two not beholden to the campaign contribution class. Sanders's campaign engages in grass-roots fundraising, and Trump is self-financing his campaign. All of the other candidates in both major parties are owned by the banks and the corporations that donate to their campaigns.

Cheers,

-Jay


I couldn't agree more. These are two men who cannot be bought or controlled. I favor Sanders, for reasons both ideological and stylistic. Trump, having made more of his career as an entertainer, understands how to win a GOP nomination - through his characteristic bombast and trolling. I don't think he can govern that way, however. It strikes me as unlikely that he will get very far negotiating treaties with foreign leaders after he insults them personally, or describes their countries' in an unflattering light. However, it is difficult to win the GOP nomination these days without behaving in a cavalier manner. I wonder, if he does win the nod, will he continue in this wild campaign style during the general election? He certainly is entertaining to watch. Then again, so is a train wreck, so long as you never see the bodies.

Sanders is striking a refreshing chord. I don't think any Democrat has ever run on a socialist platform. Jim Webb described this as an extremist position, however he is incorrect. Extreme liberalism in no way resembles socialism, mild or otherwise. It would be closer to the truth to describe Clinton as an extremist liberal, since liberalism is the position that government should place no restraints on liberty, whether that be in the personal or business sphere. Sanders very much wants to reign in the banksters, something no extremist liberal would propose. It would be better to describe him as a centrist to moderate socialist. Those who want to see what an extreme socialist position looks like can have a look at Kshama Sawant.

20.10.2015 18:47
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Roger Mexico
Member
*


Posts: 191
Words count: 63,341
Group: Basic
Joined: Mar2013
Status: Offline
Reputation: 12
Experience: 319
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #38
RE: Bernie Sanders

Helsworth Wrote:

Roger Mexico Wrote:
Trump is a circus clown, and I suspect this whole thing is basically a marketing gimmick for future books and TV shows.

I'm not the first to wonder what excuse he's going to come up with if he doesn't start losing and has to actually quit.

Personally I find Sanders more entertaining, mostly just for those little moments when a reporter asks him a really stupid question and he just gives them that... look that silently communicates "that's a really stupid fucking question" but then actually follows it up with some version of "do you actually expect me to answer that?"

It's the opposite with me. I find Trump entertaining, and I find Sanders to be really uncharismatic.


I felt that way at first, but Trump's act stopped being funny when he went full retard on the whole immigration thing.

Personally I follow international politics more than most Americans seem to, and the thing about Trump's latest schtick is that now he's just basically trying to be an American version of that Le Pen guy in France.

There's nothing novel about that kind of mentality. It's not hard at all to find paranoid racists in the US (we've got plenty of them), and all he's doing now is cribbing from a list of their favorite bullshit talking points. Personally, I've heard all of this crap plenty of times before, and I'd imagine pretty much anybody here who doesn't live in a big coastal metropolis has as well.

So he's stopped being the guy who keeps everybody guessing about what sort of random batshit thing he's going to say next, and become just an asshole who constantly says depressingly predictable batshit things we've all heard before.

Or, in internet terms, he's basically stopped being an effective troll and instead decided to "feed" all the other trolls.

Basically the one good thing I have to say about the US electoral system is that it tends to keep the worst of our political fringe crazies pretty quiet. If you go looking for them, there's a huge underground community of people with a frighteningly fanatical and militant devotion to really nutso versions of right-wing ideology. (We have a few comparably extreme left-wingers here and there, but not nearly as many.) But neither of the big parties has been willing to publicly associate themselves with the worst of this sort for a long time.

The whole apocalyptic Christian fundamentalist movement was bad enough, but they're honestly fading into irrelevance now. I would be happy about that, but then here comes Trump as the first real political contender to openly embrace the outright racists since the 1960's.

For comparison, when it came out during the last election that Ron Paul had received some donations from neo-Nazi organizations, he was quick to distance himself from them publicly and disavow any interest in their support. Trump is basically acting like he'll gladly accept their support and publicly position himself as their candidate of choice.

That's not a positive development--he's bringing these people out of the woodwork and offering them a public platform and a cloak of mainstream political legitimacy that they haven't had in several decades.

And people have actually gotten hurt--there was an incident a few weeks back where some skinhead types randomly assaulted a Mexican guy and then told the police that they did it because "Trump is Right"--and when that happened the whole joke stopped being funny to me.


I didn't think much of Sanders at first, but after the debates and watching some press conferences I think I can see his appeal. He appeals to a completely different audience than Trump does, but he's got this whole "grumpy old Jewish guy from New York who doesn't have time for bullshit" thing going on.

If John Stewart were 60 years and running for president, he'd probably sound a lot like Bernie Sanders.

22.10.2015 02:32
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
debauchery
Senior Member
*


Posts: 318
Words count: 21,901
Group: Basic
Joined: Dec2014
Status: Offline
Reputation: 2
Experience: 0
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #39
RE: Bernie Sanders

Roger Mexico Wrote:
Basically the one good thing I have to say about the US electoral system is that it tends to keep the worst of our political fringe crazies pretty quiet.

The fuck do you consider Dick Cheney? And Hilliary Clinton and John Kerry may not be extremist but they are fucking loony.

22.10.2015 04:52
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #40
RE: Bernie Sanders

There are plenty of reactionaries in the EU as well. And all the polls show overwhelming opposition to helping the refugees & migrants. The retarded counters are: "Ungrateful scum, go back to your country and fight for it." I won't even attempt to demonstrate how utterly pathetic this reasoning is, as I believe it's fairly self-evident.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
22.10.2015 10:25
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Trump vs. Bernie in the First Ever @midnight Presidential Debate Helsworth 0 1,375 31.03.2016 12:59
Last Post: Helsworth
  Bernie Sanders wins Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii Helsworth 1 1,499 28.03.2016 23:20
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Asher Edelman, aka Gordon Gekko, supports Bernie Sanders & explains why Helsworth 7 1,825 18.03.2016 14:55
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Cornel West on Bernie Sanders, Michael Eric Dyson, Trans Rights, and B.B. King Helsworth 0 1,768 05.08.2015 12:25
Last Post: Helsworth

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: