Bloomberg's Role

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No moreso than the fact that people are evil, cold, and heartless. But "people" are also good, generous, and helpful. Capitalism is simply economics operating in a free setting.

Socialism, however, is a system in which the people are controlled by elites who say that their decisions are for the good of the masses...even though those elites always live better than the masses, since they have this power that does not exist in a Capitalistic system.
I am not for a purely socialist system any more than a purely capitalist system. I like the use of capital being freely available to anyone who can get a loan (I have worked for banks and brokerages). I think our rapid movement of capital to anyone who has a good idea is one of our great advantages over centralized control. However, I think capitalist society needs to have some socialist policies -- minimum wage, certain laws that protect the rights of workers, child labor laws, these kinds of laws prevent capitalism becoming the greedy monster that we saw 120 years ago and which was depicted in books like "The Jungle". I also think certain public services should be socialist in nature. Right now we have a police department, a fire department and a public school that serves everyone without charge. That is very important, not just to the poor but also to the rich. I also think we should have a certain amount of communism. Parks should be "common" to all. Beaches should be common to all. The air should be common to all.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Income disparity is NOT the problem. As long as people have what THEY need, the fact that there are the very rich is irrelevant.

How many people do you think are near, at, or below the poverty line and have everything they need? Do you really think everyone is able to get a iiving wage job? Reality check: Many people can't work at all for medical reasons while countless others are only able to get part-time low-wage jobs. There will always be an income disparity and people who can't get everything they need until everyone is paid a living wage or earned one before retiring.
The issue is that the economy is indeed doing great, and the middle class is not participating. The gains are going almost entirely to the 1%, while social benefits are taken away from the middle class.

You are wrong again. Everyone who pays taxes is participating in the economy. We can't have good retail businesses without buying their products, of course. Same goes to homeowners and real estate agencies; travelers who buy airline tickets; movie rental companies; and a lot more. The middle class is helping the economy in this way, not just giving away money to rich people.
If social spending were increased by 20%, including guaranteed affordable health care, folks wouldn't care that there are rich folks like Gates, Bezos and Bloomberg. In the US, middle class folks want TO BE rich. They want to be able to provide for their families. Taking from the rich is the Sanders/Warren solution.

Health care will never be affordable to everyone as long as private companies exist. That is why I support socialized medicine. Privatized health care works for the healthiest people. Rich people do not need health insurance for anything except the most expensive medical bills. For everyone else private health care can be life-threatening.
We may get to see just how unpopular this position is in a general election.

In the Democratic primary, which is all I am concerned about now, the question is who has the best plan. I will put off answering it until I do more research and fact-check the Charleston debate.
 
Upvote 0

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Income disparity is NOT the problem. As long as people have what THEY need, the fact that there are the very rich is irrelevant.
Tell that to Marie Antoinette. Try reading "The Good Earth" about what happens the minute the poor don't have what they need.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
If income disparity was not a problem, there would be nobody in poverty or near the poverty line. Do you really think that income class does not exist? Reality check: I am one of those people.

So, the key to getting rid of poverty is to make everyone poor? We would then have no income inequality. ????

The key is prosperity is for the poor to have more. Maybe this can be done with less income inequality, maybe with more. The Sanders-Warren solution is to directly take from the rich and give to the poor, decrease inequality. There are much, much, much better solutions.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
IMO, nothing you have suggested is called "socialism" or "communisM" except by those of the far right.
The policies you mention are those of democratic societies. They are not restricted to socialist countries; that is countries where the government owns the means of production and there is no free market of goods, labor and services.

In the US, we strongly believe in regulated capitalism, with a safety net of social programs. We do indeed debate with regard to the level of regulation and with regard to level of support of social programs. With regard to healthcare, even AOC would be very happy to see Obamacare restored with the addition of a public option with more subsidies than before. Thew cost of $750B over 10 years is quite reasonable. The thought/hope is that folks would voluntarily move off their private insurance over time. This is much different than abolish insurance companies next year or in the next five, and creating an immense bureaucracy. Perhaps, you remember the debates when Clinton proposed a single payer system.

We have had those who (e.g. Libertarians) who argue with some of the basic premises of our society. 2020 is the first time in decades that the idea of moving our society to being a socialist society, with the rich as the targets.

I am not for a purely socialist system any more than a purely capitalist system. I like the use of capital being freely available to anyone who can get a loan (I have worked for banks and brokerages). I think our rapid movement of capital to anyone who has a good idea is one of our great advantages over centralized control. However, I think capitalist society needs to have some socialist policies -- minimum wage, certain laws that protect the rights of workers, child labor laws, these kinds of laws prevent capitalism becoming the greedy monster that we saw 120 years ago and which was depicted in books like "The Jungle". I also think certain public services should be socialist in nature. Right now we have a police department, a fire department and a public school that serves everyone without charge. That is very important, not just to the poor but also to the rich. I also think we should have a certain amount of communism. Parks should be "common" to all. Beaches should be common to all. The air should be common to all.
 
Upvote 0

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
IMO, nothing you have suggested is called "socialism" or "communisM" except by those of the far right.
The policies you mention are those of democratic societies. They are not restricted to socialist countries; that is countries where the government owns the means of production and there is no free market of goods, labor and services.
I'm sorry, me and Rip Van Winkle must have been sleeping for the last 5 years, I missed where Sanders has said he wants the US government to own the means of production in the US and that he wants to do away with a free market of goods, labor and services. Can you please refer me to the CNN interview, or Reuters news release where this is so I can read up and educate myself. Thanks
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
We have had those who (e.g. Libertarians) who argue with some of the basic premises of our society. 2020 is the first time in decades that the idea of moving our society to being a socialist society, with the rich as the targets.
When you negotiate you take an extreme position, the senate takes the other extreme and then you negotiate and compromise somewhere in the middle. It is very clear that Sanders is asking for Medicare for all but will compromise with Obamacare 2.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
So, the key to getting rid of poverty is to make everyone poor? We would then have no income inequality?

I have no idea how it is remotely possible for anyone to think this was what I meant.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm sorry, me and Rip Van Winkle must have been sleeping for the last 5 years, I missed where Sanders has said he wants the US government to own the means of production in the US and that he wants to do away with a free market of goods, labor and services. Can you please refer me to the CNN interview, or Reuters news release where this is so I can read up and educate myself. Thanks


???

I have never said that Bernie is a socialist. It is he who calls himself a democratic socialist, even though he doesn't support some of their policies. I was commenting on a series of policies that were called socialist programs. I disagreed with the characterization, and indicated that the policies were NOT solicit in nature.

Bernie Sander has chose to lead a political revolution which he calls democratic socialism. That is his choice. He will of course be attacked for such a characterization. Again, that is his choice.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I have no idea how it is remotely possible for anyone to think this was what I meant.
Of course not. It simply shows that income inequality is NOT the issue. One can reduce the level of income inequality in two ways: increase the wealth of the poor, decrease the death of the rich or both.

My position is that the issue is that of the wealth of the poor is not high enough. The poor don't have enough. I support increases in social services, and in tax breaks, and even support Yang's proposals.
However, NOTE that this is not about income inequality. Reducing income inequality is a false goal. That goal can be accomplished by simply taking money from the rich and wasting it or spending it on programs that don't benefit the poor. Such taxes would indeed reduce income inequality.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
When you negotiate you take an extreme position, the senate takes the other extreme and then you negotiate and compromise somewhere in the middle. It is very clear that Sanders is asking for Medicare for all but will compromise with Obamacare 2.

You have a strange understanding of McConnell. He will simply not consider any proposal from Sanders on healthcare. I wouldn't. BTW, I don't believe that Sanders has any interest in expanding Obamacare.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Of course not. It simply shows that income inequality is NOT the issue. One can reduce the level of income inequality in two ways: increase the wealth of the poor, decrease the death of the rich or both.
If you provide free college this would be a very big benefit to the poor, since college debt is a very major line item in their overall net worth. However, it would benefit the rich since by definition poor people spend all the money they make, but with a college degree they would presumably make more (on average). That would also increase tax revenue without increasing taxes to the rich, another benefit to the rich.
Second, health care for all would also be a big benefit to the poor. It is not difficult to get hit with a $20,000 bill for a hospital stay, a minor inconvenience to the rich (especially since they most likely have health insurance) but catastrophic to the poor. However, the rich benefit as well because as a business owner you are not required to provide health care, and you also don't need to worry about your servants, as well as people you might bump into in the store or at work.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
When you negotiate you take an extreme position, the senate takes the other extreme and then you negotiate and compromise somewhere in the middle. It is very clear that Sanders is asking for Medicare for all but will compromise with Obamacare 2.

What you seem to be saying is that Sanders should simply lie to everyone when he campaigns. Surely, we should all understand that he means what he says. Sanders is a true believer, a leader of the Revolution. Do you think that his youthful voters would vote for him if they thought that he wouldn't follow through and insist on a one payer system? The policy that you proposed was that of Obama. he too wanted a one payer system; at very least a public option in Obamacare. That is not the style or character of Sanders.
 
Upvote 0

ZNP

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2020
4,311
1,382
Atlanta
✟54,279.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You have a strange understanding of McConnell. He will simply not consider any proposal from Sanders on healthcare. I would. BTW, I don't believe that Sanders has any interest in expanding Obamacare.
In my experience what the candidate wants to do and what the elected official is willing to do are two different things.
 
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,815.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It is not necessary to abolish insurance companies and end choice for hundreds of millions. Sanders is doing all this so that the poor can have affordable access to healthcare. Rubbish. That goal can be achieved by restoring the Obamacare, adding a public option, and by increasing subsidies. Sanders wants to tear down the system. He wants to end profits for the insurance companies, for the fossil fuel industry, and for every billionaire he can think of.

Sanders understands what he is saying and what he is proposing. He understands the difference between reforming and improving on one hand, and political revolution on the other. Sanders CHOOSES political revolution. Republicans will be wrong when they say that Sanders chooses state socialism or state communism. However, he does propose revolution. Also, he wants a huge transfer of wealth. That's who he. That is what has gotten him as far as he has gotten.

If Sanders were simply trying to improve the current system, we would be asking why would expect him to negotiate better with the Senate than Biden or Klobuchar or Waren or even Mayor Pete. the answer, of course, is that he is NOT a negotiator.

If you provide free college this would be a very big benefit to the poor, since college debt is a very major line item in their overall net worth. However, it would benefit the rich since by definition poor people spend all the money they make, but with a college degree they would presumably make more (on average). That would also increase tax revenue without increasing taxes to the rich, another benefit to the rich.
Second, health care for all would also be a big benefit to the poor. It is not difficult to get hit with a $20,000 bill for a hospital stay, a minor inconvenience to the rich (especially since they most likely have health insurance) but catastrophic to the poor. However, the rich benefit as well because as a business owner you are not required to provide health care, and you also don't need to worry about your servants, as well as people you might bump into in the store or at work.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Mark, I have some very good news for you.

Mitch McConnell was rated the worst U.S. Senator in 2019. Kentucky's Republican governor was replaced by his challenger, so now the state is purple. McConnell is up for re-election. He probably will lose his job.

Also worth noting: Some Republican Senators are retiring or represent Democratic states. Only four seats need to flip for Democrats to take back the majority (three if Donald Trump loses) so even if McConnell is re-elected, he will not be the Majority Leader anymore.
 
Upvote 0