Vote for Bernie today

[♪alt13]

I wasn't referring to the poor who work. I was talking about those who don't do **** other than suck off the gov't teet. And my point was a very fair one. Dala has his angry little fist pumping in the air for the poor, I guess because, according to him, rich people have tax loopholes and in turn, get all the breaks? I'm not sure exactly if his beef is personal or corporate but that's neither here nor there. My retort was that much of the poor gets **** for free. So why the inequitable response?

Also, fwiw, from what I can find, 68B was given from 2000-2015 in federal grants and tax credits to companies. In 2014 alone, we spent an estimated 212B on what we think of typically as welfare. A January 12, 2014 Washinton Post article stated, "As Michael Linden of Center for American Progress told me, there are five big programs in the Cato list that are most analogous to what people think of as “welfare”: The refundable part of the Earned Income Tax Credit ($55 billion), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ($21 billion), Supplemental Security Income ($43.7 billion), food stamps ($75 billion), and housing vouchers ($18 billion) and the Child Tax Credit. All together, that’s around $212 billion dollars."

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem having our country assist those who need it. Those who do everything in their power to work hard and provide and so forth. But let's call a spade a spade. We give a **** ton of free stuff to those who in theory, didn't earn it.

I'm not saying the corporations did. That's a whole 'nother discussion. But to sit here and pretend that poor people don't get a **** ton of free **** is being disengenuous.

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

BY Arloc Sherman, Robert Greenstein, and Kathy Ruffing

"...the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes."

https://www.cbpp.org/research/contrary-to-entitlement-society-rhetoric-over-nine-tenths-of-entitlement-benefits-go-to

 

[Eminence]

And I'd be more open to their financial and tax arguments if I felt there was decent fiscal responsibility and transparency. There is not. So I have no faith, none, that me giving them more of my money will accomplish any of the things they say they will.

I feel ya, responsibility is not something I'd praise our government for at all.

Whoever is elected I'm hoping for improvements there.

Campaign finance/lobbyist reform is one of the areas I believe could help the most, so that's my personal reason for supporting Sanders. I feel best about him getting the ball rolling there out of the available candidates.

 

[Stoked]

But bernie has not ever been president before has he?

So it's impossible to know if he could make things work or not.

At least he seems to care and to want to try to make things better

He has said or done nothing to give me hope he is concerned with getting the fiscal house in order before he demands more money.

Also it's not just his show. He still has this congress. So the fault isn't "his" but he's the one asking for more money.

 

[fishonjazz]

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

BY Arloc Sherman, Robert Greenstein, and Kathy Ruffing

"...the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes."

https://www.cbpp.org/research/contrary-to-entitlement-society-rhetoric-over-nine-tenths-of-entitlement-benefits-go-to

Dropping knowledge

 

[Deleted member 848]

As a Mormon, I've always been surprised that more people in my faith don't have the same mindset that you do. The church does an excellent job in collecting from those who can contribute and distributing to those in need (through fast offerings, tithing, etc.). Yet, when the Government wants to perform a similar service, we all balk at the idea and complain about those few that abuse the system. Remarkable.

not to mention the fact that literally every other developed country (other than the US) has at least one of the policies instated that Bernie is talking about, and runs it with reasonable efficiency-- yet Americans keep their horse-blinders on. it's not hard to look around, folks!

 

[Deleted member 848]

He has said or done nothing to give me hope he is concerned with getting the fiscal house in order before he demands more money.

Also it's not just his show. He still has this congress. So the fault isn't "his" but he's the one asking for more money.

The notion that only those on the left-wing being ones who ask people for money doesn't really have much basis whatsoever.

Unfortunately, barring electing a contemporary libertarian, you're stuck with two choices: electing candidates who take your money to nurture corporate welfare and funding "regime-change" and "global fights on terrorism" (according to them, giving money to the rich trickles down into 'job-creation'); or electing candidates that'll make healthcare a right university affordable, and infrastructure improve.

Most developed countries are fine with emphasizing the latter, and their citizens are by and large rather happy with it.


Is Kasich "fiscally responsible" for pushing NAFTA? Is Clinton "fiscally responsible" for wanting to plunge America into even more foreign wars? Is Trump "fiscally responsible" for wanting to deport immigrants and build walls? Is Cruz "fiscally responsible" for wanting to implement flat-taxation, erase Palestine, and nuke the middle east?

 

[Deleted member 848]

Speaking of welfare and food stamps, some NFL player (Landon Collins) told one of his side chicks he wouldn't pay for his kids stuff, and to go on food stamps bc it's free stuff from the government. It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad. Little bit of smarts goes a long ways.

fish tells me the people want science-- I'll give y'all science (in response to Hanters' anecdote)

Summary Findings
NerdWallet estimates for 2013:

56M Americans under age 65 will have trouble paying medical bills
– Over 35M American adults (ages 19-64) will be contacted by collections agencies for unpaid medical bills
– Nearly 17M American adults (ages 19-64) will receive a lower credit rating on account of their high medical bills
– Over 15M American adults (ages 19-64) will use up all their savings to pay medical bills
– Over 11M American adults (ages 19-64) will take on credit card debt to pay off their hospital bills
– Nearly 10M American adults (ages 19-64) will be unable to pay for basic necessities like rent, food, and heat due to their medical bills
Over 16M children live in households struggling with medical bills
Despite having year-round insurance coverage, 10M insured Americans ages 19-64 will face bills they are unable to pay
1.7M Americans live in households that will declare bankruptcy due to their inability to pay their medical bills
– Three states will account for over one-quarter of those living in medical-related bankruptcy: California (248,002), Illinois (113,524), and Florida (99,780)
To save costs, over 25M adults (ages 19-64) will not take their prescription drugs as indicated, including skipping doses, taking less medicine than prescribed or delaying a refill
“In 2013 over 20% of American adults are struggling to pay their medical bills, and three in five bankruptcies will be due to medical bills. While we are quick to blame debt on poor savings and bad spending habits, our study emphasizes the burden of health costs causing widespread indebtedness. Medical bills can completely overwhelm a family when illness strikes,” says Christina LaMontagne, VP of Health at NerdWallet. “Furthermore, 25 million people hesitate to take their medications in order to control their medical costs. Unfortunately this can lead to even worse financial outcomes as preventative treatments are not rendered and patients end up using expensive ambulance and ER care as their health worsens.”

Finally, many question whether President Obama’s universal health insurance mandate will protect Americans from problems with medical bills. “Insurance is no silver bullet,” says LaMontagne. “Even with insurance coverage, we expect 10 million Americans will face bills they are unable to pay.”

That's right. 60% of bankruptcies due to medical expenses. Pls tell me how it's fiscally responsible to perpetuate a multi-payer privatized healthcare system that costs more than any public healthcare system in the entire world.

 

[b_line]

not to mention the fact that literally every other developed country (other than the US) has at least one of the policies instated that Bernie is talking about, and runs it with reasonable efficiency-- yet Americans keep their horse-blinders on. it's not hard to look around, folks!

It ain't hard to look around, but it's hard to see anybody else when you're the only one at the top! Murrica bitches!






















































Jk lol.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

As a Mormon, I've always been surprised that more people in my faith don't have the same mindset that you do. The church does an excellent job in collecting from those who can contribute and distributing to those in need (through fast offerings, tithing, etc.). Yet, when the Government wants to perform a similar service, we all balk at the idea and complain about those few that abuse the system. Remarkable.

It's amazing to me that you are completely overlooking the differences between a voluntary charitable program and a mandatory government one. I am all for helping people, and I donate money to a variety of causes every year. I have no confidence that the government will do a good job with extra money if I'm forced to give it to them.

 

[NAOS]

It's amazing to me that you are completely overlooking the differences between a voluntary charitable program and a mandatory government one. I am all for helping people, and I donate money to a variety of causes every year. I have no confidence that the government will do a good job with extra money if I'm forced to give it to them.

It's amazing to me that you assume everybody else sees things from the perspective of the "Reagan/Thatcher Revolution"

 

[Deleted member 848]

It's amazing to me that you are completely overlooking the differences between a voluntary charitable program and a mandatory government one. I am all for helping people, and I donate money to a variety of causes every year. I have no confidence that the government will do a good job with extra money if I'm forced to give it to them.

many governments do good jobs in different areas worldwide. I got no qualms with my healthcare. 60% of bankruptcy-declarees in America wish they could say the same.

 

[Gameface]

many governments do good jobs in different areas worldwide. I got no qualms with my healthcare. 60% of bankruptcy-declarees in America wish they could say the same.

You continue to talk like bankruptcy is death.

 

[Stoked]

talk about going off the rails Dala. Your desire to defend Sanders at all costs has you arguing a fight that doesn't exist. Hack of a post.

 

[Safetydan]

And I'd be more open to their financial and tax arguments if I felt there was decent fiscal responsibility and transparency. There is not. So I have no faith, none, that me giving them more of my money will accomplish any of the things they say they will.

So you'd rather waste a vote on somebody that wouldn't even make the attempt to fix things as they are?

Let me know if I've misunderstood. I think Bernie is the only one with a fighting chance to start showing some fiscal responsibility and transparency

I'd prefer to have somebody in office that would hopefully recognize the bloat (wall street), where it exists, and where it can be eliminated, and then re-appropriate those funds into effectively solving poverty-issues, millennial debt-issues, Real global warming and clean energy initiatives to give future generations a fighting chance in this world(not just america, we need to think of ourselves as world citizens now). If an obstructionist congress, oppressive hierarchy, and what have you make this difficult, so be it. We need somebody to try. It needs to be addressed at a high level. Popular constituent support for these things will put pressure on congressman to make things happen, hopefully.

 

[Safetydan]

It's amazing to me that you are completely overlooking the differences between a voluntary charitable program and a mandatory government one. I am all for helping people, and I donate money to a variety of causes every year. I have no confidence that the government will do a good job with extra money if I'm forced to give it to them.

Let's take away all welfare and see how many people, who have the ability to do so, volunteer to take care of poverty-stricken Americans in the fashion that you see today. Pure capitalism baby.

Somebody needs to do it. How about we all share the burden equally, each according to their means. I think that sounds better.

 

[RandyForRubio]

fish tells me the people want science-- I'll give y'all science (in response to Hanters' anecdote)



That's right. 60% of bankruptcies due to medical expenses. Pls tell me how it's fiscally responsible to perpetuate a multi-payer privatized healthcare system that costs more than any public healthcare system in the entire world.

That's cool. My story wasn't meant as an anecdote tho, I just thought it was funny. Anyways, while I have you, I'm still waiting for a response. I'm sure you weren't intentionally ignoring it though.

 

[Keefe]

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

BY Arloc Sherman, Robert Greenstein, and Kathy Ruffing

"...the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes."

https://www.cbpp.org/research/contrary-to-entitlement-society-rhetoric-over-nine-tenths-of-entitlement-benefits-go-to

Let's say this is true. Far more is still spent on what we typically think of as welfare than on corporate subsidies. 10% of 212B is 21.2B. That's how much was spent on such in 2014. In the last 15 combined years, only 68B was spent on corporate subsidies.

 

[Keefe]

i love the personal attacks too Alt.

 

[fishonjazz]

So you'd rather waste a vote on somebody that wouldn't even make the attempt to fix things as they are?

Let me know if I've misunderstood. I think Bernie is the only one with a fighting chance to start showing some fiscal responsibility and transparency

I'd prefer to have somebody in office that would hopefully recognize the bloat (wall street), where it exists, and where it can be eliminated, and then re-appropriate those funds into effectively solving poverty-issues, millennial debt-issues, Real global warming and clean energy initiatives to give future generations a fighting chance in this world(not just america, we need to think of ourselves as world citizens now). If an obstructionist congress, oppressive hierarchy, and what have you make this difficult, so be it. We need somebody to try. It needs to be addressed at a high level. Popular constituent support for these things will put pressure on congressman to make things happen, hopefully.

This

 

[Keefe]

Also, freakazoid implying I listen to Rush Limbaugh. Lmfao. It's ****ing Wes here, bro.