jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
when were u when ess died?
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on This post was submitted on
61 points (90% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

Enough_Sanders_Spam

subscribeunsubscribe3,563 CTR shills humoristsreaders
~91 shills logged on to the botnet users here now
© 2017 Correct The Record.
Paid For By Correct The Record.
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Rules

  • No brigading. (Use No Participation links.)
  • No false/fake posts.
  • Keep it focused on Sanders/his loony supporters. (Technically, Assange and Putin are two of his loony supporters.)
  • No anti-Hillary spam.
  • No Bernouts allowed.
  • No Trumpsters allowed.
  • No Tulsi Garbagemen allowed.
  • Русские не разрешены.
  • No trolling.
  • Be civil to your fellow E_S_S subscribers.
  • Do not take more than two packets of Honey-Mustard dipping sauce for your chicken tendies.

Visit our friends!

/r/EnoughTrumpSpam (Beware of Bernouts)
created by JPetermanRealityTourTendiesa community for
message the moderators

MODERATORS

all 78 comments
[–]Zeno84 30 points31 points32 points  (49 children)
What else would we be
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-38 points-37 points-36 points  (48 children)
people who offer policies voters want so we can win elections
[–]Zeno84 29 points30 points31 points  (46 children)
Not mutually exclusive
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-40 points-39 points-38 points  (45 children)
1034 lost seats says otherwise.
Recommit to the most basic New Deal era safety nets or keep losing. Pelosi and this sub would rather keep losing.
[–]Zeno84 46 points47 points48 points  (27 children)
You have no idea what you're talking about.
How is capitalism antagonistic to The New Deal?
What does the loss of seats during the Obama administration have to do with capitalism? We literally lost those seats to people who promised to rev up capitalism.
You're making up connections that simply don't exist.
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-29 points-28 points-27 points  (26 children)
You lost those seats because rather than move left and provide a basic social safety net, you went hard on austerity. And the people rebelled by going to the other party out of rage. Better to smash the system killing them than double down on it.
And when asked the quite reasonable question of moving left on economics as they have on social issues, pointing to the fact that the principles of justice are linking the two, we got this crap from the "leadership" that led us to this disaster.
[–]JinxtronixInterna$hillnal 40 points41 points42 points  (9 children)
Fuck's sake, we got a live one here. Hey stupid, could you fucking go and read about what austerity actually is than coming in here and jerkin off over buzzwords? Austerity is not the opposite of a social welfare net, idiot. God damn.
If "austerity" was what the government wanted so badly they wouldn't have fought tooth and nail against the Republicans holding up the budget for political gain time and time again. The Republicans who actually wanted fucking austerity, to slash budgets across the board in the name of "economic growth".
Typical acting like a victim trying to coopt austerity to justify yours and Lakehouse Socialist Jesus' economic illiteracy. There are very real victims of austerity in Europe. There are very real documents and studies on the impact of austerity on long term growth in those countries, and how US was able to recover much better than they did.
Being a white dudebro who doesn't understand economics unfortunately isn't you suffering from austerity. Perhaps your body has an austerity policy when it comes to supplying oxygen to your brain. You all are like economic hypochondriacs: you think you know the problem, but you don't trust doctors. So you come up with the wrong diagnoses and solutions and then you don't get why the doctors disagree.
Economists aren't trying to get in the way of your dumb utopia, buddy. The fact that you guys act like anti-vaxxers in response to economists telling you all that you're wrong (by claiming economics is establishment) says volumes about you people. Volumes.
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-10 points-9 points-8 points  (8 children)
ah the ignorant shrieking of having pure ideology challenged with reality.
You obviously don't know this, but what economics actually says about these policies is very different from what you think it says. Shockingly there is more to the topic than what gets covered in a community college 101 course.
Enjoy the fascist hellscape you have created by putting the Trump-Ryan agenda in the drivers seat rather that tailoring your agenda to win.
[–]JinxtronixInterna$hillnal 22 points23 points24 points  (7 children)
Don't embarrass yourself further, cupcake. But then, I suppose Bernie supporters are not exactly people who understand when they've lost.
Actually I graduated from one of the most rigorous economics programs on the planet and have a cushy policy job. :) Or were you talking about Christina Romer and Austan Goolsbee, did they both graduate from community college to get on Obama's Council of Economic Advisers? No, they didn't and both of them (among volumes of other top economists) have repeatedly spoken out against Bernie's economic illiteracy.
Actually, speaking of Goolsbee, you should fucking thank him because he did more than anyone to ensure austerity didn't happen and fuck people up.
Meanwhile, you're not worth anyone's time. Your mom probably wants to sue you for the time she spent giving birth to you.
No you enjoy the Trump-Ryan hellscape you created because you just couldn't unwrap your mouth from Bernie's shrivelled dick and could not stop being a puppet for Putin. Fuck off, buddy. You're fucking pathetic. If I didn't enjoy watching how pathetic you are, I'd completely ignore you.
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (6 children)
Actually I graduated from one of the most rigorous economics programs on the planet and have a cushy policy job.
yeah clearly you are a really knowledgeable and important person hard at work, which is why you are throwing turds online in the middle of the work day.
[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points  (7 children)
Trump supporters were more driven by racial resentment and fear of change due to immigration rather than economic anxiety. The idea that moving to the left will recapture those rural communities is false.
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (6 children)
You keep repeating that and you keep losing seats.
Polling showed #1 issue was economics. But y'all would rather do anything else but organize and enact policies that boost the material well being of these communities.
Give people nice things that are simple to use. Not that hard.
[–]Zeeker12Private First Class: Lefty Circular Firing Squad 20 points21 points22 points  (0 children)
Clinton won something like 57 percent of people who listed the economy as their main issue.
You're trying to fit your one idea into every hole. But it doesn't work.
[–]blacksparkleDOWN WITH THE CORPORATIONS --sent from my iPhone 17 points18 points19 points  (0 children)
A majority (52 percent) of voters said the economy was the most important issue facing the country. (Voters were given a choice of four issues; “terrorism” was the second most commonly named “important” issue, with 18 percent choosing it.) Among those economy voters, Clinton beat Trump by 10 points.
Oh but hey, look at this:
The late October announcement that the average premium for people in the federal insurance exchange of the Affordable Care Act would rise by an average of 25 percent landed like a lead balloon on a not-insignificant portion of the electorate. Almost half of the electorate (47 percent) said they thought Obamacare “went too far.” Trump beat Clinton 83 percent to 13 percent among that group.
Looks like the field was actually a bit more complicated than you're making out to be when it comes to the presidential election.
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points  (2 children)
Show me the polls. After the election Trump voters named immigration their number 1 issue. According to academic research done by Hamilton college on Trump supporers, the most common predictor of Trump support was racial resentment.
Also are you seriously so far into the "both parties are the same narrative" that you dont think that Democrats want to improve peoples well being?
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (1 child)
that you dont think that Democrats want to improve peoples well being?
I think Clinton, Kaine, Pelosi, Booker, Rahm, Bayh, Schumer and the rest of the leadership have made it absolutely clear that they are opposed to improving people's material well being, yes.
Oh they are happy to toss out some cultural signifiers. Go dab with Beyonce on Ellen or whatever. And for marginalized groups, that's not nothing. Symbols do matter, if they didn't folks wouldn't create them in the first place. Seeing that you are part of the group matters, and often matters a great deal.
But remember what they bragged the #1 priority for the Democrats was had they won? A corporate tax holiday. Notice Kaine voting to back every Trump nominee? Remember Clinton's team saying that support for raising wages was moral support and there would be no legislative action? Did you catch Booker voting to keep drug prices higher (plus his support for water privatization, charters, and all the rest)? See Rahm shuttering poor schools to shower money on the rich? Recall Bayh sitting on the board of 5/3rd and them then engaging in deliberate racial discrimination? Remember wielding identity politics as a weapon instead of noting how it was complimentary, with "if we shut the big banks, would that end racism"? Have you been watching how none of the ACA fixes address rising premiums, massive deductibles, and insufficient subsidies but instead are focused on cutting taxes? Remember them all passing around that Markos “Kos” Moulitsas column delighting in coal-miners dying of black lung because they didn't vote dem? Remember Clinton using the fact that millennials are living at home as a fucking laugh line in the GS speech recording that got released?
I have no doubt that they have managed to tell them that this is all good and cool, and that these policies will help. Cognitive dissonance is an impressive thing after all.
But no, the present Democratic leadership does not want to improve people's material well being. We see it in every vote, every op-ed, every unscripted event.
They would rather lose than move one inch to the left and help people in a material way.
[–]preserved_fish 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
The Dems gained seats in both houses this year. All the Berniecrats lost their races though.
[–]Zeno84 24 points25 points26 points  (6 children)
There was no austerity movement in America on the left. Only the tea party pushed austerity.
Your insistence that we need to move left on economic issues--which is devoid of specifics except that we shouldn't embrace capitalism, the only functioning economic system in the world--is belied by the mood of the country.
You're just conflating anti-establishment sentiment with anti-capitalist sentiment. It's not a logically coherent move.
[–]Mister_DK -2 points-1 points0 points  (5 children)
There was no austerity movement in America on the left. Only the tea party pushed austerity.
Go look back at Obama's deficit pivot in 2010. Go look at the push for a "Grand Bargain". Go look at campaigning on "fewer government workers than ever" Go look at the policy created Foreclosure Crisis.
The Dems pushed austerity here.
And they were rightly punished for it.
we shouldn't embrace capitalism, the only functioning economic system in the world--
Go crack a history book so you understand why that is. The bullshit you and Nancy are calling "capitalism" wouldn't have been recognized as such 50 years ago.
is belied by the mood of the country.
The mood of the county that, weeks ago, turned out the second largest protest in history organized by the movement that articulates the position Trevor called for here?
The mood of the country that, 3 months ago, put into office someone who promised to move left on economics and undue destructive trade deals and protect what remains of the safety net?
The mood of the country that, 1 year ago today, surged for a democratic socialist in the Iowa Caucus?
The mood of the country that, for decades, has continually polled as supporting wider redistribution and a strong social safety net and robust public programs?
Scoreboard ok? You keep fucking losing because you refuse to address the material conditions and very real pain that much of the country is in.
[–]Zeno84 22 points23 points24 points  (3 children)
Democrats were punished for the affordable care act. You know. The opposite of what you think.
Trump promised to move left and right. Left on trade deals (which FDR himself would have opposed). And right on the environment and regulations.
Bernie Sanders lost the Iowa caucus iirc, and it's a vastly white state. Should have won it, but it turns out democrats aren't socialists. Not even white ones.
You should know (but maybe you don't) that policy questions get vastly different results depending on how they are worded.
The reason democrats keep losing has nothing to do with what you're saying, but there are many structural difficulties. But also moving to far left on social issues has alienated many white voters.
[–]Mister_DK -4 points-3 points-2 points  (2 children)
Democrats were punished for the affordable care act. You know. The opposite of what you think.
Really? Is that what we were punished for in 2004? In 2002? In 2000? In 1996? In 1994? In 1992?
Congrats, we made some federal gains in 2006 and 2008, only took the destruction of an American city and a disastrous war to do it. Course we still didn't do very well at state legislative and governor level. Same as us sliding down for all those years before.
Wow it is almost like going to the right on economics and crippling our local organizing capability from the unions had an impact.
Hey where have our gains been these past few years? Nevada and Colorado? The same Nevada where the Culinary Workers Union won a series of benefits for workers and then turned them out to vote Dem? And Colorado where they rallied people behind social democratic policies of expanded education and boosted funding for social programs and organized them, to the point where single payer was on the ballot last year and Clinton had to send in people to kill it?
Nah, ignore that, it is all about the racism. So apparently the democrats need to get more racist.
Or something. Go ahead and change anything except our hard right commitment on economics. Gotta send more money to the 1%!
Bernie Sanders lost the Iowa caucus iirc, and it's a vastly white state. Should have won it, but it turns out democrats aren't socialists. Not even white ones.
Well that and you had to rig the thing to stop him. Hey, how did that work out, is the slay queen khalessi done pretending to be Bigfoot yet?
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
Define capitalism and socialism for us because I honestly don't think you know what they are. You are heavily implying/claiming that welfare=socialism, which is just false.
[–]HRCfanficwriter 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Democrats supporting austerity? I think you got mixed up somewhere...
[–]HisHighnessStannisHisJakesnessJake 19 points20 points21 points  (1 child)
1034 lost seats...to the more conservative, lower tax, no social welfare party, but yeah clearly the voters want full communism.
are you stupid or what?
[–]DJFINKS 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
They all believe there is a vast population of voters who would vote if Socialism was on the menu, but otherwise stay home. As someone who has talked to many non voters over the years, I can tell you they are not secret Socialist majority, they just don't care about voting.
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points  (2 children)
You do realize that the vast majority of welfare programs came from LBJ's great society, right?
If we went back to the new deal era policies we wouldnt have food stamps, medicare, and federal aid to public education would be greatly diminished.
On a side note, FDR wanted to save capitalism not destroy it. Capitalism as an economc system isn't inherently hostile to welfare. Even Bernie's precious nordic countries are all capitalistic
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-7 points-6 points-5 points  (1 child)
You do realize that the vast majority of welfare programs came from LBJ's great society, right?
You realize that is because he built on the New Deal social contract that gave him the majorities, right? Go read the Four Freedoms speech and tell me how Great Society doesn't draw on the New Deal ideals
If we went back to the new deal era policies we wouldnt have food stamps, medicare, and federal aid to public education would be greatly diminished.
Ah the pedantic whining of someone who can't address the point. The New Deal and Great Society shared the same basis of the social contract, and mobilized people around them. That is the core, not the specifics of the individual policies. No shit, the great society isn't the same as the new deal; hell what you think of today as the new deal wasn't even the new deal because a lot of it got sent through the blender in the 40s by the courts.
The core idea of "Give people nice things to address their material conditions that are simple to use"? That's the same
On a side note, FDR wanted to save capitalism not destroy it. Capitalism as an economc system isn't inherently hostile to welfare. Even Bernie's precious nordic countries are all capitalistic
On a side note, Trevor didn't ask for her to smash capitalism. He asked for the Dems to move left on economics like they did on social issues, to achieve a better sense of economic justice. And even the hint of that was anathema to her.
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
You literally said "recommit to new deal social safety nets." Apologies for taking you literally. I should have read your mind.
If Trevor Hill meant by go left economically that he wanted a social safety net then I'm sure Pelosi (you know a fuckin democrat) would have no problem with that. She probablyl interpreted as move towards socialism. Probably an honest mistake on her part.
[–]jamespak 9 points10 points11 points  (9 children)
New deal era was possible due to the Great Depression and it was under a special circumstance. Progressive democratic presidential candidates were crushed in following elections until the Clinton era who won by appealing to the moderates. You are picking just one time in history and using that as evidence, but New Deal isn't the norm.
[–]Mister_DK comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (8 children)
New deal era was possible due to the Great Depression and it was under a special circumstance.
Mmmh, so the 60 years of labor organizing that went into it before the Great Depression hit had nothing to do with it, huh?
And of course, you are pretending that the presidency is the only office (and ignoring that JFK and Carter both ran on progressive platforms and won). Dems won for decades by campaigning on "We gave you X and your life is better". Hell, Carter won the white working class, years after the civil rights movement. Took until Volcker came around with the explicit goal of smashing unions and deliberately triggering economic calamity to do so for the Dems to start slipping.
[–]jamespak 12 points13 points14 points  (7 children)
Holy shit you commingle and look at just a small set of data to make your case. Labor organization wasn't just a leftist thing, plenty of center left had also helped.
Likewise, we also lost badly with progressive presidential candidates. Carter was out with just one term.
Dems won by promising X to make your life better, including fighting police brutality, , voting rights, and LGBT rights. It's not just for white working class anymore.
You take liberals success and somehow claim it just for the progressive, honestly, I think you are quite confused on what position goes with which evidence.
[–]preserved_fish 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Just want to point out that Carter was not particularly progressive, just an outsider. He was, in fact, a deregulator. The Dems started the ABC movement against him in the 76 primary because he was deemed too conservative and too religious.
McGovern, on the other hand, there was a disastrous progressive candidate. Fritz Mondale too.
[–]Mister_DK -2 points-1 points0 points  (5 children)
Labor organization wasn't just a leftist thing, plenty of center left had also helped.
Motherfucker, crack a history book. The organization of labor at the turn of the last century was explicitly a leftist movement, not a center left one. The idea of the "center left" didn't even exist until long after the postwar consensus came about.
police brutality, , voting rights, and LGBT rights.
Clinton was shouting down BLM and the rest of the liberals (eg Rahm, Nixon, Cuomo) have been boosting police brutality. Voting rights they notably didn't lift a damn finger on and it cost them - the only big push on that came from Rev Barber, and coincidentally the left boosted turnout enough to get over the finish line on the governorship there.
LBGT rights don't make me laugh, marriage is as close as the libs come to supporting that, and there it wasn't until as late as 2014, after the courts had already delivered on it. Remember Clinton talking about how Nancy Reagan, who let a fucking plague decimate the LBGT community and laughed about it, was a gay rights leader?
You take liberals success and somehow claim it just for the progressive, honestly, I think you are quite confused on what position goes with which evidence.
No, I just recognize that those success came about in spite of liberals, not because of them.
[–]jamespak 9 points10 points11 points  (4 children)
If you think that labor movement was explicitly leftish movement, then then you are reading a wrong history books. The labor movement by definition, requires participation by labor which were many people who weren't necessarily liberal. Do you serious think that center left people didn't exist until the term was invented?
You are just picking and choosing what information to look at for your confirmation bias. You know, if you actually went outside of your echo chamber and actually read something said on the other side, you would actually learn that the they may have an argument that's worth hearing. But I doubt you are that kind. It's sad really, but that's your life. Enjoy the feeling of purity while the rest of the majority centrist world moves on without you and actually make a difference.
[–]Mister_DK -2 points-1 points0 points  (3 children)
If you think that labor movement was explicitly leftish movement
[Movement literally started by Karl Marx as a vanguard towards communism]
Shitlibs: No see, it was actually a centrist position, what are you talking about with this idea of a political left not existing before the actual birth of leftism...
Enjoy the feeling of purity while the rest of the majority centrist world moves on without you and actually make a difference
Mmmh, that would be why centrists won in America, and the Brexit, and in Poland, and the Ukraine, and are ahead in France, right?
Keep repeating uninformed tautologies though. If authoritarianism coupled to ethnic cleansing and torture is centrism, I'll go to my grave proud of resisting it.
[–]jamespak 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
DAE remember when dems were supermajority in the senate with that war hawk, neo-liberal Obama? How did the GOP manage to get their seats back?
Political sentiment shift over time and often reacts negatively to the incumbents. You are likely to see this repeat in the upcoming elections and expect that you ask the same to the GOP.
[–]B-RAD_IS_NOT_RAD 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Do us a favor and stop skipping 70 years of U.S history before acting like an expert in U.S politics.
[–]jamespak 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
Trump voters issues were immigration and terrorism. Rhodes who said it was economics, ended up voting for Hillary
[–]mondodawg 29 points30 points31 points  (2 children)
Capitalism = money, money = greed, greed = evil. Alt-left logic right there
[–]BuddyDogeDogemarxist leninist maoist - death to all imperialists 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
they're fuckn centre-left socdems oh my god
[–]formlex7 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Also apparently the logic of 51% of my generation :/
Worth noting a lot of people my age internalized the idea that center-left policies were socialism because republicans repeatedly called Obama a socialist for 8 years.
[–]JinxtronixInterna$hillnal 23 points24 points25 points  (1 child)
Not according to Sanders, the only guy who could have won
Sure, but neither Sanders nor you understand how the economy works, sweetie. Give me Evil Nancy laying down the truth than lying Grandpa who is too stupid to want to admit the truth, because it would mean rethinking his policies.
[–]WhiteSaviorBernie can still win with #alternativefacts 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Mommy won't let me have dessert before dinner so if she won't let grandpa give me candy I'll flip the dinner table
[–]jigielnik 21 points22 points23 points  (0 children)
Free trade stops wars.
[–]simply_there 19 points20 points21 points  (5 children)
Please, the alt-left is socialist as long as the "millionaires and billionaires" are paying for it. They get pretty capitalistic once they realize their taxes also would need to increase to pay for everything they want.
[–]JinxtronixInterna$hillnal 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
Oh but judging for their support for Bernie's policies they're okay with hardworking middle class people paying more taxes for it too. Or maybe they don't know Bernie was planning that because they're uninformed and culty.
[–]Ingenium21 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
I have a couple of proud "socialist party" socialists on my facebook wall.
Looking back on them, they don't care about paying more taxes because they're pretty broke to begin with. Both of them never went to college. The older one had kids as a high school student, and the younger one is working as a barista and doesn't plan to go to college.
[–]a_blanqui_slate 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
They get pretty capitalistic once they realize their taxes also would need to increase to pay for everything they want.
I don't think your conception of what socialism is corresponds very closely to what socialists actually want.
[–]simply_there 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
I don't think your conception of what socialism is corresponds very closely to what socialists actually want.
I can't pretend to know what every socialist wants, but single-payer health insurance, free college, and a larger welfare state come up a lot. Those aren't cheap, and not everyone wants to pay for it.
[–]LyndonLaDouchePut the Undertale people in the camps! 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
I could afford to pay a bit more in taxes. Not a ton more, but you know, a bit. I'd certainly like to see the salary cap on FICA get lifted.
[–]Koelkastmagneet 15 points16 points17 points  (3 children)
I love the hysteria about the 'death of the democratic party' some of these internet communist are spouting. Wow, the Democratic Party didn't turn into fucking Bolsheviks after a single defeat (wherein they won the popular vote by nearly three million!) that really means they're absolutely done for.
Also when will some of these people understand what capitalism actually is? Some of the response tweets were loudly proclaiming that democratic socialist societies are the most prosperous, safe, healthy, happy etc. which I'm guessing is supposed to refer to northern and western Europe? There's a big fucking difference between social democracy and democratic socialism.
Having a decent welfare state supported by taxing and regulating a largely free market economy isn't actually socialist. What's more, much of the Democratic Party supports an expanded welfare state. That's undermined however by the repeated false equivalency narrative of Republicans and Democrats supposedly being the same that leads to pathetic turnouts (particularly in midterms) and helps Republicans be massively overrepresented. Also, guess what? Actually voting for Hillary Clinton would've gotten you halfway there to your fucking semi-Scandinavian heimat.
Edit: neat
[–]Zeno84 4 points5 points6 points  (2 children)
They're always conflating socialism and welfare capitalism. Truth is, Anglo-style and Nordic-style capitalism is far more successful, and a much better model than continental democratic socialism (ala France, Spain, Italy)
[–]Koelkastmagneet 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
They're not actually wildly different types of societies, nor are those last countries really socialist. Spain and Italy for instance spend well below most Nordic countries in terms of percentage of GDP. France spends only a couple of percentage points above them. Fundamentally they're all free market societies with a robust welfare state, which is quite far from socialism both in practice, theory, and purpose. France, Spain, and Italy have their share of problems but most of them aren't directly connected to any particular kind of 'socialism'.
There's also plenty of other western and central European countries like the Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, Austria etc. that all do fairly well on a similar level as the Nordic countries.
[–]blacksparkleDOWN WITH THE CORPORATIONS --sent from my iPhone 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
UHHHH BUT YOU ARE FORGETTING THAT EUROPE IS SUCH AN ADVANCED SOCIETY COMPARED TO THE US AND HAS TOTALLY BEEN FETISHIZED BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN THERE AND CHOOSE TO IGNORE THE VICIOUS XENOPHOBIA THAT IS RAMPANT IN THESE CULTURES (no offense to any Europeans here - I'm painting with a broad stroke. I know not all Europeans are racist).
[–]Zeeker12Private First Class: Lefty Circular Firing Squad 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
This is a realization that strikes pretty much every left-winger at some point as they're becoming an adult.
You can take it from there.
[–]blacksparkleDOWN WITH THE CORPORATIONS --sent from my iPhone 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
You know, she brings up a really good point about the so-called "father of Capitalism" Adam Smith. Because even in Wealth of Nations - very early on, in fact - he emphasizes the importance of supporting and providing for your workforce. He explicitly talks about the inherent value in providing this support, not only in terms of a systemic benefit to the Capitalist system, but also in terms of the social good it does for everyone.
And also - is it really a shock that 18-29 year olds, the people who came of age in the wake of the Recession, are pissy about Capitalism? Unregulated and predatory processes are gonna hurt us, obviously. That doesn't mean we throw out the entire system, though. That's the language of alarmists who are losing the forest for the trees.
We need responsibly managed systems in addition to a safety net, PLUS we need to be responsible consumers. Not that I blame those high-risk individuals who jumped at the opportunity to have that American dream of a house, but we need a public that can spot a dangerous situation when it is presented to them as well. Which opens up a whole litany of issues - none of which are resolved by simply trashing our economic model because there are inherent dangers. That's a lazy, shitty way out.
[–]NovaNardis 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
That's not me asking you to make a radical statement about capitalism.
No. That's exactly what it is.
[–]Libertinus0569 8 points9 points10 points  (2 children)
How, with the makeup of the US electorate, are you going to overturn capitalism -- unless you do it via some kind of military dictatorship?
I wish we could put the alt-left and the alt-right in a stadium and let them fight it out. Both want to overthrow the government.
[–]puttputt_in_thebutt 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
The alt-left would show up with signs, drum circles, and weed. The alt-right would show up with guns and trucks redesigned to function as tanks... itd just be a massacre
[–]Libertinus0569 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
I can't disagree.
[–]qpzmwxomWhere are Bernie's Taxes? 6 points7 points8 points  (1 child)
i don't understand how people can hate an economic system that has brought unprecedented wealth to the western world, i mean even the poorest people in the west are still incredibly wealthier than 90% of the world's population.
[–]UmmahSultan 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Low-end college students believe that if the government provides any services whatsoever to the people, that's socialism. They think that if Pelosi says she's a capitalist, that means the same exact thing as being an anarcho-capitalist.
[–]redbrick 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
A good question from the audience, but an unrealistic one if you're expecting a real answer. Nearly every person in public office is going to denounce communism. Despite what young demographics think, it's still a toxic concept to the majority of America.
[–]JouleS88 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
Also LMAO at this dude trying to pass Socialism off as the Word of God, a concept that EVERYBODY would like if only they had ears to hear it! Complete and utter delusion. Sad!
[–]AustinRivers_MVPBERNIE LOST BY 3.7 MILLION VOTES 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
I fucking loved this moment. Almost started cackling. At least she let him down easily
[–]pseud_o_nymVote Blue no matter who 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Wait till they have responsibilities.
Wait till they have a job, and their co-worker gets a bigger raise.
[–]criticalcontextPutn Cant Stop Us! 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Fuck yah we are! - My response when a friend of mine shared this.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2017 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 3990 on app-408 at 2017-02-01 20:43:09.656322+00:00 running f946b0e country code: NL.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%