![]() |
|
#171
|
|||
|
What matters is not Bernie Sanders internal moral compass regarding political corruption but what his policies will do to fix it. Checking his website, his only goal is to overturn 'Citizens United' with a constitutional amendment. I'm sure he'll have no trouble getting that past an army of Wall Street lobbyists. And even if he did, it will do nothing to fix SEC regulators leaving government for cush jobs at Goldman Sachs, or the Clintons handing out favors for companies that hire Bill to give a 1 hour speech for $1.5 million. Meanwhile his expansion of government will give them more power to 'adjust' things in their favor.
Your position on Fukushima is equally strange. You specifically claimed that 'government ... performs this role very well in most other advanced nations, where people are generally happy, healthy, and prosperous'. Yet the Fukushima disaster could easily have been prevented with simple logic: don't build nuclear plants on earthquake fault lines. Your more general position (the important thing is that everyone is a 80 hour a week wage slave!) is equally puzzling. TLDR: you need to stop pushing your value system on other people. Not everyone wants the same things. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#172
|
|||
|
Do we exist to serve the government or does the government exist to serve us!?....
Ron Paul 2032 | ||
|
|
|||
|
#173
|
|||||
|
Quote:
1. That Bernie could even win this election, or 2. That if he did, he could triumph over the establishment and implement his policies What's important is that his victory would be a source of advocacy, and he has admitted this. People need to realize that, as the electorate, the responsibility for these issues ultimately goes back to them, and the extent to which they are informed. Furthermore, do you have a better alternative? What are you going to do, elect Clinton, Bush, Trump, or a libertarian? How would that be better? Randian libertarian objectivism a la Alan Greenspan is a large part of what got us into this mess, and it's a philosophy that is still largely embodied by the fiscal right and libertarians. But then, I guess I can understand how you think libertarianism will solve our problems when you simply refuse to accept the fact that all our advanced peers are doing better than us in nearly every metric of prosperity except aggregate total wealth and military power. Even Alan Greenspan came out and admitted he was wrong for promoting objectivist fiscal policy. When the person championing a certain economic philosophy for several decades admits it was wrong, how do you still promote it? Quote:
| ||||
|
Last edited by Lune; 10-16-2015 at 03:57 PM..
|
|
||||
|
#174
|
||||
|
So, you agree that:
Calling Alan Greenspan a libertarian makes me throw up in my mouth. I don't care what the man thought about himself, when you cause two depressions by messing with monetary policy you are not representative of small government. Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#175
|
|||
|
prove it
__________________
Jack <Yael Graduates> - Server First Erudite
Bush <Toxic> Jeremy <TMO> - Patron Saint of Blue | ||
|
|
|||
|
#176
|
|||
|
im learning a lot in this thread bros. Keep it up!
__________________
![]() | ||
|
|
|||
|
#177
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
And please tell me you aren't so socially inept as to be unable to separate lighthearted casual internet political incorrectness from full blown sexism. I say something tantamount to "get back in the kitchen", and now I'm a woman-hater. Okay. I didn't know this was tumblr. Quote:
I also disagree that Bernie Sanders would not substantially decrease its level of corruption. Honestly I believe his advocacy has a good chance of being effective, and would at the very least start us on the road to change. Bush, Trump, Clinton, or a libertarian would only get us in deeper. | |||||
|
Last edited by Lune; 10-16-2015 at 05:05 PM..
|
|
|||||
|
#178
|
|||
|
End the Federal Reserve Corporation
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#179
|
||||
|
Quote:
The government must answer to the people, corporations must not if they want to make the most amount of money possible. If you think that the Government is corrupt, a system that has checks and balances in order for it to be transparent so that it cannot be corrupt, can still become corrupt.. however a corporation which is obliged to keep its activities secret would somehow be less corrupt.. well then it is you that is being naive. ITT there are two types of people, people that pledge allegiance to a system designed so that people can control the checks and balances of their environment.. and people who pledge allegiance to a system designed to remove them from the equation. The government you can believe in, if you believe in a corporation, you simply have been hoodwinked by television or commercials. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#180
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
![]() |
|
|