Politics Can Sanders beat Trump? (1 Viewer)

[ABM]

If Sanders becomes President, not only would I lose my all-important bet with Lanny, but I truly would consider moving to The Azores.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

You argument seems to be that he is basically a communist, or close enough to a communist or a purple green guy. I think the point most the rest of us are making is that purple and green are not the same colors

My argument is that a.) some of his ideologies DO actually come close to communism. Here's my qoute: Karl Marx advocated class wars, worker control, and taking away the power of the ruling class. It seems to me that many of his followers at least do want to engage in a class war with the ultra-rich, are working for worker-control and unionization, and b.) His supporters have to shun that label or anything that comes close to it because of western stigma's towards the word, "Communism", they seem to struggle even saying well he's closer to that then someone else.

 

[Minstrel]

So if one side can get away with the argument that capitalism is a gateway to corporatist movements, then the reverse argument can be implied. The argument is made too, that all the right is basically corporatist movements beholden to big business and all that. So sure by the very definition of a "communist" no Bernie isn't one, but if the argument is good for one side it's good for the other too.

Socialism can be a gateway to communism, it's just that no one is actually advocating that.

No one really believes that the mainstream right is advocating real corporatism (i.e. actually putting big business or other private entities in charge of the state), just that they are much more beholden to business interests. If all you've been trying to say is that Sanders believes in more socialism than any other current Presidential candidate, well, yeah, that's obvious. You said what he believes in is "borderline communism," though, and that seems way off.

 

[Minstrel]

Here's my qoute: Karl Marx advocated class wars, worker control, and taking away the power of the ruling class. It seems to me that many of his followers at least do want to engage in a class war with the ultra-rich

The term "class war" is kind of meaningless, though, because it mostly just means "any policy that isn't ideal for either poor people, middle class people or rich people." It's just as fair to say that conservative policies cutting away the social safety net to give big tax breaks to the rich, or corporate subsidies, is class warfare against the working class and poor. So are Republicans "communists" for engaging in class warfare? It's such a subjective, poorly-defined term that it can be used by either side, so it's not a good hinge point for an argument, IMO.

 

[Minstrel]

If Sanders becomes President, not only would I lose my all-important bet with Lanny, but I truly would consider moving to The Azores.

Do you speak Portuguese?

 

[ABM]

Do you speak Portuguese?

No, but my family does.

 

[andalusian]

Do you speak Portuguese?

Reading some of his responses here - I am questioning at times if he speaks English.. I kid, I kid.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Socialism can be a gateway to communism, it's just that no one is actually advocating that.

No one really believes that the mainstream right is advocating real corporatism (i.e. actually putting big business or other private entities in charge of the state), just that they are much more beholden to business interests. If all you've been trying to say is that Sanders believes in more socialism than any other current Presidential candidate, well, yeah, that's obvious. You said what he believes in is "borderline communism," though, and that seems way off.

I disagree, I think people are advocating for extreme socialist agenda’s they just know that they must move slowly to get there and Bernie’s version is a nice start in that direction. Now we could agree to disagree on that.
I am saying that he’s more socialist yes, and that more socialist is much closer to communism than less socialist, and his beliefs do come across to me as borderline communism at least in some aspects not in all.

 

[Minstrel]

well there were two other things in there, and often times points are listed together because one aspect isn't sufficient.

Sure, but class warfare seemed to be kind of the big thing there. We can go into the other two things, too.

"Worker control" -- This is a weird one, because it's often misunderstood, as though there are two (or more groups) and Marx advocated giving control to one, the workers. The whole point of communism is that the society is "flat"--everyone is a worker and therefore everyone has control. In what way is Sanders advocating that? Giving more power to unions is not the Marxian "worker control" ideal, even if unions have something to do with workers. Giving more power to unions might be a "leftist" thing but it isn't anything to do with socialism, it's a form of collective bargaining, which is perfectly acceptable within a capitalist structure and it's simply a way for employees to organize in a way that gives them a similar type of leverage that companies have when it comes to negotiation. Negotiation is a core part of capitalism.

"Taking away the power of the ruling class" -- What is the ruling class? Do you define that as the government or industry? Sanders certainly isn't advocating taking away the power of government. He clearly believes in giving workers the right to organize in a way that they can gain parity with big business...is that taking away the power of the ruling class to you?

 

[andalusian]

I think that universal health care is actually a fantastic capitalist tool for the US - where health-care costs are usually a big burden on small to mid-size business owners - a lot of these small businesses that are hard to create in this country in the 20-500 people range will be much easier to create.

I absolutely do not think that this is anywhere that would take us on the road to communism, it would actually be a great help for capitalism and innovation in this country.

The other big policy Bernie talks about is the "Green new deal" - which is basically a government support for innovation in the way that energy production is changing. The alternative is Trump's support for bed-ridden industries like coal - which continues to lose jobs despite Trump's government funded support.

How is helping an industry to transform to the modern world and creating up to 20 million new jobs communism is beyond me.

Finally, College for all - is another way to help industry - people are the most important resource the modern economy needs - but it's costs has gone up way out of control (I have a kid that goes to college next year, I have an idea...) - since 1985, we had compounded inflation of 249%, college costs has gone up 500% in that time, average salary is at around 239% compounded (all quick, back of the envelope calculations).

Lack of skilled workers is one of the worst things that can happen to modern industry.

I would say, Bernie is a lot more modern capitalist than you are willing to give him credit for.

 

[ABM]

I am saying that he’s more socialist yes, and that more socialist is much closer to communism than less socialist, and his beliefs do come across to me as borderline communism at least in some aspects not in all.

Some might contend he's "all all-out Marxist:....

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...a-democratic-socialist-hes-an-all-out-marxist

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

The term "class war" is kind of meaningless, though, because it mostly just means "any policy that isn't ideal for either poor people, middle class people or rich people." It's just as fair to say that conservative policies cutting away the social safety net to give big tax breaks to the rich, or corporate subsidies, is class warfare against the working class and poor. So are Republicans "communists" for engaging in class warfare? It's such a subjective, poorly-defined term that it can be used by either side, so it's not a good hinge point for an argument, IMO.

There were two other things I listed and I did point who the class war was targeted at, the ruling class (ultra-wealthy) - which like it or not is part of Communism. It wasn't one point in a vacuum. My argument didnt hinge on that one point alone, if it did I would have only listed that one point.

Yes Republicans just like DNC / Socialists / Social Democrats / Communists whatever were going for desire to push their crap on other people and engage in a class war on those who dont fit, never said otherwise.

 

[Minstrel]

There were two other things I listed and I did point who the class war was targeted at, the ruling class (ultra-wealthy) - which like it or not is part of Communism. It wasn't one point in a vacuum. My argument didnt hinge on that one point alone, if it did I would have only listed that one point.

You deleted your previous post saying that while I was replying to it, so my response is above.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Sure, but class warfare seemed to be kind of the big thing there. We can go into the other two things, too.

"Worker control" -- This is a weird one, because it's often misunderstood, as though there are two (or more groups) and Marx advocated giving control to one, the workers. The whole point of communism is that the society is "flat"--everyone is a worker and therefore everyone has control. In what way is Sanders advocating that? Giving more power to unions is not the Marxian "worker control" ideal, even if unions have something to do with workers. Giving more power to unions might be a "leftist" thing but it isn't anything to do with socialism, it's a form of collective bargaining, which is perfectly acceptable within a capitalist structure and it's simply a way for employees to organize in a way that gives them a similar type of leverage that companies have when it comes to negotiation. Negotiation is a core part of capitalism.

"Taking away the power of the ruling class" -- What is the ruling class? Do you define that as the government or industry? Sanders certainly isn't advocating taking away the power of government. He clearly believes in giving workers the right to organize in a way that they can gain parity with big business...is that taking away the power of the ruling class to you?

Currently Id say the “ruling-class” is considered to be the ultra wealthy. That seems to be the target of Bernie fans too. Also of course he’s not advocating making the government smaller he’s going for making it bigger...

Unionization is definitely not the communist ideal, but it is socialist in nature, and he is all about power to the workers.

The thing is im not saying if those are good or bad things, even if I dont personally agree with Bernie or the “left” on certain things I understand the appeal, and merits of them. Im just calling it for how I see it.
I think his ideology is somewhat communist, and yes I understand there are differences. I think he tends to attract the more extreme of that side of the political spectrum too. I dont agree with the “right” on a lot of stuff as well. I just believe there is a lot of playing with words and language, and a lot of politics with Bernie (and all of them I guess), but heck I never said communism was the boogeyman the resistance to it isnt because of its right or wrong to view him that way its the stigma about that world view in the west. If Communism was highly thought of politically he and his followers would be all about call me a communist!


But either way we can call him a socialist democrat if that makes ya’ll feel better, I will still view him no matter what labels we give him as further in that direction then I personally want to go, not entirely because of him, but because I think most of his followers want to use his platform to take it much further, and honestly as I posted somewhere else about fears and what drives us. I have a lot of concerns about going towards socialism.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Actually its too early Im not old enough.

I bet you look older than Buttigieg

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Finally, College for all - is another way to help industry - people are the most important resource the modern economy needs - but it's costs has gone up way out of control (I have a kid that goes to college next year, I have an idea...) - since 1985, we had compounded inflation of 249%, college costs has gone up 500% in that time, average salary is at around 239% compounded (all quick, back of the envelope calculations).

Trust me - it's not because college professors are paid any more. It's because administrators have tried to run it like a business, which turns out to mean: hire a fuckton more useless administrators and give THEM all huge raises. That and the fact that states have slashed their contributions to state colleges.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I bet you look older than Buttigieg

Ok...?

 

[barfo]

Have you no sense of humor, man?

None whatsoever.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I think that universal health care is actually a fantastic capitalist tool for the US - where health-care costs are usually a big burden on small to mid-size business owners - a lot of these small businesses that are hard to create in this country in the 20-500 people range will be much easier to create.

I absolutely do not think that this is anywhere that would take us on the road to communism, it would actually be a great help for capitalism and innovation in this country.

The other big policy Bernie talks about is the "Green new deal" - which is basically a government support for innovation in the way that energy production is changing. The alternative is Trump's support for bed-ridden industries like coal - which continues to lose jobs despite Trump's government funded support.

How is helping an industry to transform to the modern world and creating up to 20 million new jobs communism is beyond me.

Finally, College for all - is another way to help industry - people are the most important resource the modern economy needs - but it's costs has gone up way out of control (I have a kid that goes to college next year, I have an idea...) - since 1985, we had compounded inflation of 249%, college costs has gone up 500% in that time, average salary is at around 239% compounded (all quick, back of the envelope calculations).

Lack of skilled workers is one of the worst things that can happen to modern industry.

I would say, Bernie is a lot more modern capitalist than you are willing to give him credit for.

I dont think he’s a modern capitalist. What you’re saying is that his ideologies, “might”, end up being good for modern capitalists. Which I can buy some of what you’re saying, but like I said I never said that any of those ideas were “bad” things. I just said that some of his views are borderline communist, and that his followers in my opinion want to use his campaign to go towards extreme socialist agenda’s.

I dont believe college should be free, I dont believe colleges need to exist. I think the world is digital, learning is digital, that we should revolutionize education, it would drastically cut costs, could help children to individualize education earlier, keep them interested in learning. Sitting in a packed room, with a teacher who may or may not care is like 18th century education, and kids can get their “social” skills other ways outside of school. Yeah sure you will need doctors and a few other professions to really prove they know things before their doing surgery on you, but eventually robots will be doing the surgeries on us anyways. Poor or not if you want to educate yourself now for better jobs there are a ton of viable online options now to do so. Ive worked with some amazing engineers who quit HS didnt go to college and just figured it out, it can be done.

Universal Health care, I dont know sure it sounds good until you’re waiting forever to see a doctor. Im not neccessarily opposed to this, but mostly because the current system is a sham. Big Pharma and Insurances company’s are pretty terrible.

Im for studying climate change and research and all that but creating a ton of government jobs and basically owning the energy market is socialism. The green new deal sounds to me like, “let us tax you a lot for climate change,” and we’ll probably do something but maybe we wont, but honestly I havent spent a ton of time studying it.

All in all though, he is not a moderate capitalist. Some of his ideas might benefit capitalism, but that doesnt make him a capitalist. His ideas are all expensive, with very little plan to pay for it other than tax people (mostly rich), but the rich will run out of money to pay the other 320Million people’s bills in a hurry. Then it’ll be either go the nordic route of oh we do need businesses to succeed, or the more extreme versions of socialism.

And no Im not saying the republicans have any good ideas on this stuff either, they basically want to ignore the climate, and leave a bunch of bad systems in place for them to make money off of.

 

[ABM]

.....I dont believe college should be free, I dont believe colleges need to exist. I think the world is digital, learning is digital, that we should revolutionize education, it would drastically cut costs, could help children to individualize education earlier, keep them interested in learning. Sitting in a packed room, with a teacher who may or may not care is like 18th century education, and kids can get their “social” skills other ways outside of school.....

I just knew it! Bloomberg's your guy!

 

[ABM]

.....All in all though, he is not a moderate capitalist. Some of his ideas might benefit capitalism, but that doesnt make him a capitalist. His ideas are all expensive, with very little plan to pay for it other than tax people (mostly rich), but the rich will run out of money to pay the other 320Millions people’s bills in a hurry. Then it’ll be either go the nordic route of oh we do need businesses to succeed.....

BTW, I've always loved this flick....

 

[Hoopguru]

Some might contend he's "all all-out Marxist:....

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...a-democratic-socialist-hes-an-all-out-marxist

For years it’s been clear he embraces Marxism.
I hope Obama does stand against it.
He uses the Nordic way as his model but doesn’t tell the truth how it’s not working so well now and how they are as capitalistic as we are. No minimum wage, very low Corp tax, promote wealth, cannot cover cost of freebies for immigration.

 

[andalusian]

There are so many interesting subjects here - it almost feels a shame to try and have them all in a single thread because it is hard to follow, so, to keep things simple, let's tackle just this one:

Universal Health care, I dont know sure it sounds good until you’re waiting forever to see a doctor. Im not neccessarily opposed to this, but mostly because the current system is a sham. Big Pharma and Insurances company’s are pretty terrible.

Waiting forever to see a doctor is a question of implementation - it will happen if you have bad universal health providers or private providers - it is not really any different. FWIW, both Canada and the UK are rated higher than the US in their health-care but in each one the average price of healthcare per person is less than half of what Americans spend on their health. I for one believe in American ingenuity - and think that we can be at least as good as these countries if we just try it - so it is clear that there are very good examples of universal health working better than our system - so I am all for going for it properly - since the data shows that we spend a lot more for lesser health as it is right now.

I would also like to say that the idea that if a government run service that is created to care for the safety and health of it's citizens is communist, the US is already a communist country, because our military is a government run service that is there to care for the safety and health of it's citizens.

Basically, if the argument is that we should not get national-health-care, we should also argue for privatizing the military.

Just for fun - here is the prosperity index by the Legatum institute - just click on the health-care column to see where the US is ranked compared to countries with universal health care like Canada, UK, Japan on the Nordic countries:

https://www.prosperity.com/rankings

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

There are so many interesting subjects here - it almost feels a shame to try and have them all in a single thread because it is hard to follow, so, to keep things simple, let's tackle just this one:



Waiting forever to see a doctor is a question of implementation - it will happen if you have bad universal health providers or private providers - it is not really any different. FWIW, both Canada and the UK are rated higher than the US in their health-care but in each one the average price of healthcare per person is less than half of what Americans spend on their health. I for one believe in American ingenuity - and think that we can be at least as good as these countries if we just try it - so it is clear that there are very good examples of universal health working better than our system - so I am all for going for it properly - since the data shows that we spend a lot more for lesser health as it is right now.

I would also like to say that the idea that if a government run service that is created to care for the safety and health of it's citizens is communist, the US is already a communist country, because our military is a government run service that is there to care for the safety and health of it's citizens.

Basically, if the argument is that we should not get national-health-care, we should also argue for privatizing the military.

Just for fun - here is the prosperity index by the Legatum institute - just click on the health-care column to see where the US is ranked compared to countries with universal health care like Canada, UK, Japan on the Nordic countries:

https://www.prosperity.com/rankings

I May not respond much until tonight or tomorrow, got a bunch of git merge conflicts to straighten out this afternoon.

I will say this, I lived in CA (Canada not California) for about a little less then a year and thats my only “real” experience with socialized medicine, and one of the guys I was living with had really severe back issues and when I got there he had already waited 6 months to see a doctor, he waited another 6 months after me being there, so a year to get into the specialist, and his surgery was scheduled for 2-3 months after I left. That was quite a while ago now, Im not sure whats changed, or if that was just a bad experience. Im not sure how I feel about the idea of well lets just believe in American ingenuity, because I think we can get wrapped in this pride where we think were going to implement everyone else’s stuff, but better because, “USA”.

I think in terms of health care the system now where insurance companies and big pharma use our bodies as big cash cows certainly doesnt work.

Our military is a very socialist entity, but that doesnt make us communists. Just like socialized medicine doesnt either, but at some point the more and more you go with socialist things, you do become a socialist country, which might be ok, it might not.

Also, healthcare isnt the only factor in prosperity. However like I said Im not really opposed to universal healthcare, Id be willing to try it or see what people’s plans are for it.

 

[andalusian]

Also, healthcare isnt the only factor in prosperity. However like I said Im not really opposed to universal healthcare, Id be willing to try it or see what people’s plans are for it.

I know, that's why I asked you to sort by healthcare - because they do break their ratings by category - so what they have there is the specifics of health-care ranking.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I know, that's why I asked you to sort by healthcare - because they do break their ratings by category - so what they have there is the specifics of health-care ranking.

I did, but just like with any stats like these it doesn't do much good IMO if the formulae aren't exposed (and I didn't see that anywhere). It's just numbers that someone somewhere is adding subjective weights to different factors to dole out "points" for. I'm not saying other countries don't have it better or worse than the US but say in the US our score is 74.96 according to this site, the high is 86.63 that puts the "difference between 58th and 1st just under 12 points, what are the tangible realities of those 12 points, what does going up 3 points do for us. Other than making us higher on someone's chart on the internet.
I'm not even trying to undermine this type of, "science" because it definitely has value, but my mind has a really annoying habit where It's hard for me to take these types of numbers without really questioning how they got there.

 

[andalusian]

I did, but just like with any stats like these it doesn't do much good IMO if the formulae aren't exposed (and I didn't see that anywhere). It's just numbers that someone somewhere is adding subjective weights to different factors to dole out "points" for. I'm not saying other countries don't have it better or worse than the US but say in the US our score is 74.96 according to this site, the high is 86.63 that puts the "difference between 58th and 1st just under 12 points, what are the tangible realities of those 12 points, what does going up 3 points do for us. Other than making us higher on someone's chart on the internet.
I'm not even trying to undermine this type of, "science" because it definitely has value, but my mind has a really annoying habit where It's hard for me to take these types of numbers without really questioning how they got there.

My understanding is that it is based (the health portion) on the WHO report, you can read it here with all of the methodology you wish to devote time to here:

https://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

Enjoy.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

There are so many interesting subjects here - it almost feels a shame to try and have them all in a single thread because it is hard to follow, so, to keep things simple, let's tackle just this one:



Waiting forever to see a doctor is a question of implementation - it will happen if you have bad universal health providers or private providers - it is not really any different. FWIW, both Canada and the UK are rated higher than the US in their health-care but in each one the average price of healthcare per person is less than half of what Americans spend on their health. I for one believe in American ingenuity - and think that we can be at least as good as these countries if we just try it - so it is clear that there are very good examples of universal health working better than our system - so I am all for going for it properly - since the data shows that we spend a lot more for lesser health as it is right now.

I would also like to say that the idea that if a government run service that is created to care for the safety and health of it's citizens is communist, the US is already a communist country, because our military is a government run service that is there to care for the safety and health of it's citizens.

Basically, if the argument is that we should not get national-health-care, we should also argue for privatizing the military.

Just for fun - here is the prosperity index by the Legatum institute - just click on the health-care column to see where the US is ranked compared to countries with universal health care like Canada, UK, Japan on the Nordic countries:

https://www.prosperity.com/rankings

Just to address the central point, the military is socialist. That doesn't make us a socialist country. Just like Trump being a Republican doesn't make us a republican country. A country especially one this large usually has aspects of many world-views both political and otherwise strewn about. However, the government ran services are generally thought of as socialist ideals and the more you have of one set of ideologies running things the closer you are to actually be that thing on the whole. I don't really agree with you that saying well there is already a socialist (or communist if we want to use that verbiage) entity that exists here so we're already communists! Just as I wouldn't say that JUST creating Universal Health care would make us a communist country, but I would say it brings us closer to socialism. - I know were honing in on this one thing, but also free-college, new green deal, and universal healthcare, etc are all sort of socialist ideals and taking all of them does make us closer to a full-scale socialist country then we are today. - Again not really passing judgment on if that's good or bad as that isn't the topic -

I'm not totally opposed to government-controlled healthcare depending on the plans to implement it and such, but I see Insurance and UHC as very similar let me explain. Universal Health Care and Insurance, in my opinion, are really just risk management. The risk is managed by spreading the risk, the larger the provider the more it can be shared. The idea of government ran health care is the risk is spread to the maximum it can be and if done properly can be effective, and like I said I'm not totally opposed to the idea of universal healthcare. The thing with privatized health services is that they have to turn a profit, and I'm not sure people's health should be something that we try to profit off of, as a society I definitely see issues with that, especially look at what we have now with insurance companies and big pharmaceuticals ripping us off, keeping people from the care they desire. However, even after saying all that I can admit that those are socialist ideals, and yes I read you said they might help capitalists and they might, but it's not being done because of the help it could bring to modern industries.

 

[andalusian]

However, even after saying all that I can admit that those are socialist ideals, and yes I read you said they might help capitalists and they might, but it's not being done because of the help it could bring to modern industries.

I honestly think that the US declaration of independence mentioned health ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness") as a right before capitalism, even if you equate "pursuit of happiness" as capitalism as some do.

So the fact that this is not why it is suggested means nothing - but there is tons of data out there showing that it works elsewhere much better than our current system even if you measure it only in capitalist method of cost vs. value - and I have no reason to believe that it will not here.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I honestly think that the US declaration of independence mentioned health ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness") as a right before capitalism, even if you equate "pursuit of happiness" as capitalism as some do.

So the fact that this is not why it is suggested means nothing - but there is tons of data out there showing that it works elsewhere much better than our current system even if you measure it only in capitalist method of cost vs. value - and I have no reason to believe that it will not here.

How do you feel about what came before that, that they are endowed by their Creator? lol ok, let's not follow that one - I'm just messing around there.

Well, Healthcare is something that I said that I'd be willing to go along with depending on its implementation so I actually thought picking that one to hone in on was interesting since I don't think we really disagree on the subject. Though I think while you tend to be like the US can do it better, I kind of think most of us (including myself) have an incredible knack for doing stupid stuff...