No matter what he calls himself, he's a capitalist..
Even Communists who plan on controlling a nation via Communism like wealth and the power it yields. Power is why a Communist is a Communist in the first place. With Communism he would wield much more power than his $2.5 million in current worth can afford him.
I'm gonna vote for the capitalist Bernie Sanders..
In prior debates you said you were ineligable to vote due to a criminal record.
What? You don't think he's a capitalist??
I think he's practicing Capitalism inside of a Capitalist system. I also think he's been praising murderous dictators for decades.
Bernie praising mass murdering, failed regimes.-
Dude! He MAKES his living selling books in the free market.. He OWNS waterfront property.. And, he FLIES around the country on private jets..
That would simply make him a liar and a hypocrite concerning climate and wealth. Possibly even a full blown political fraud who is somewhat telling the truth and will fiscally destroy the country or a full blown fraud who has no intention of delivering on the promises he has claimed.
Looks like a capitalist to me..
Looks like a guy who can swap political positions as needed just like most politicians.
Bernie sounding like Trump before Trump-
And if you want a Capitalist, Bloomberg and Trump would surely be your choice.
As I've said, this is MY plan. Not, surprisingly, lots of people contradict me, including "left wing media".
I asked what things you would move around in "your plan". You didn't respond, so I can't fully know what "your plan" is.
What I can know, is what the Democrats' plan is, and even they claim it will add substantial debt to a deficit that is so far in the red that it's about to go purple.
Ironically, these same Democrats who acknowledge the costs of their plans, condemn the current deficit spending which is less than the spending they propose.
The fallacy of your line of thought, is you IGNORE that Bush BROKE the economy
Left wing media contradict your claim in part. And by your logic, it wasn't Bush's economy. He was riding the coat tails of the last administration.
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,187735118773501877322,00.html
https://www.google.com/amp/s/
I say again, this is OBAMA'S economy and Trump is just a passenger
Economic spikes that shift away from a long, steady result, are proof that this is obviously untrue.
Obama stating it was impossible to get the current results is also proof that this is untrue.
The fallacy of your line of thought, is you IGNORE that Bush BROKE the economy.. He busted it into little bitty pieces, and left Obama to clean up his mess..
This doesn't help your argument that this is Obama's economy. It only argues that Obama started off in a worse starting position.
True - it DID take a while for the unemployment numbers to turn around - but turn around they did.
They slowly, and steadily dropped during his second term. It plummeted in Trump's first term. Obama simply got it back to normal, and many argue it was pretty much back to normal when Obama actually became President. Trump pushed it out of the realms of normal.
In terms of electibility, Obama is not on this years' ticket. Trump and a slew of people who aren't Obama are.
Nahh. Fact is, we already spend enough to pay for my plan.
Whatever "your plan" is, it isn't what the Democrats are proposing. Their "plan" gives us trillions of dollars added on top of the current deficit spending per year. We're already in the red.
https://www.city-journal.org/
https://berniesanders.com/issues/
Lemme ask you this.. If a foreigner is NOW in the US, do you think he goes WITHOUT healthcare?? You KNOW he gets treatment in the ER, which we ALREADY pay for..
First, that proves we are spending money on illegal aliens that could be divided amongst those in poverty who are here legally.
Second, once they know they can get in line and get prescriptions, the system would be overrun.
Again, you misunderstand me. I'm a capitalist.. I like making money.. And, if the medical profession didn't RIP us OFF in their quest for riches, I'd NEVER complain.. But, they do, and it's at the EXPENSE of Mr and Mrs America..
Having no doctors would be a much bigger expense, and if your doctor is junk, you can look elsewhere. Socialized healthcare systems do not allow you choice of doctor. You'd be stuck if your doctor was incompetant.
It didn't used to be that way.. But, it's that way now.
Trump passed legislation for price transparency. Democrats could have done it for decades. They didn't.
https://www.statnews.com/2019/02/12/cory-booker-presidential-run-pharmaceutical-industry-ties/
I see you're LOSING this debate, cause you're making up what I said
In reality you've ignored most of my points and not addressed them.
Examples:
Taxes having to be raised constantly to pay for more and more foreigners' medical care.
Negating wealth leaves less jobs, less companies, less wealth, and less to tax.
Millionaires mass migrating away from countries with a wealth tax.
Doctor shortages that are getting worse.
Wealth redistribution to minorities happening through celebrity and sports being stripped away due to inability to pay them.
Lemme be clear.. Under MY medicare for all plan, doctors will still be VERY prosperous - just not OBSCENELY prosperous..
Which will enhance the mass migration from the profession. There will be no one qualified left to treat all of the people with "medicare for all".
Also, the left glorifies celebrities and actors who make way more than doctors. Celebrity and sports has made many minorities obscenely wealthy. Your strategy would strip them of much of their wealth because their bosses couldn't afford to pay them in this manner.
just not OBSCENELY FILTHY rich..
How many products that make life better today would have never been created if not for the ability to create massive wealth to fund the research and draw the best creative minds in the world behind them?
If billionaires were suddenly stripped of obscene wealth tomorrow, there would still be 350 million Americans, less jobs, less ability to pay wages, product invention would halt, and no one outside of that billionaire would get any richer. They'd be unemployed or their wages would be cut. Your strategy would make everyone poorer.
If the general quality of the individual's life is good, another person's wealth doesn't matter. Their wealth vanishing won't make them richer. It will simply strip them of their decent quality life they have now.
Creating large quantities of jobs makes a person mind blowingly rich. It also creates more wealth to tax, and more people with jobs to tax. There is a maximum curve as to what you can do to a massively rich person before they have no incentive to invent products, stay, create jobs, or hire people. If you tax them out of prosperity, only bad things follow for your community or country.
Your logic attempts to replace millions of wealthy people constrained by the law, law enforcement and the military, with one entity that can choose to not be constrained by laws, law enforcement, and/or the military.
