Bernie Sanders: An Agenda for 2019

https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/54217-focus-an-agenda-for-2019

Bernie can comment but lord, I hope he won't run for president again...

zsomething wrote:Bernie can comment but lord, I hope he won't run for president again...

I believe he's the frontrunner. And the only reason I think he shouldn't run is his age.

Just ain't a Bernie fan, at all. I don't think the guy has an even basic understanding of economics or foreign policy. He's a big bullshitter... he talks about a lot of big ideas but whenever you try to nail down exactly how they'll work he sounds like an eight-year-old explaining his idea for a rocketship. He hits me as fake as a cardboard cut-out. I mean, I'd vote for him over Trump, but I'd far happier never to see the sonofabitch again.

Floridatexan wrote:

zsomething wrote:Bernie can comment but lord, I hope he won't run for president again...

I believe he's the frontrunner.  And the only reason I think he shouldn't run is his age.  

Nope, Joe Biden is the frontrunner:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-2020-biden/joe-biden-leads-potential-2020-democratic-field-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1NC0P1

and I'll be voting for him if he decides to run. He's getting on up there in age too, but I've always liked him and respected him as a Senator. I just think he's a decent and good man and deserves a chance at the job he's always wanted. Plagiarizing a college paper really doesn't seem like much compared to the POTUS we have now, does it? 

Elizabeth Warren is just too something  for me that I can't describe without saying it's that she's desperately sincere about everything. I wouldn't want to wait on her in a restaurant and not have something on the menu that she wanted. I'm afraid she would cry and explain how VERY VITAL it was that she have that food right now or some tragedy might happen. She is not Hillary Clinton, I'm afraid Trump would roll right over her in 2020.

zsomething wrote: I don't think the guy has an even basic understanding of economics or foreign policy.  

He understands Economics well enough to appoint a leading proponent of Modern Monetary Theory, Stephanie Kelton, as his chief economic adviser--which means he realizes that Keynesian and Neo-Keynesian Economics are about as representative of Economic reality as Geocentrism was of Astronomical reality.

Bernie knows that, in a monetarily sovereign nation, deficits are meaningless and balanced budgets are harmful, that Federal deficits are, in reality, private savings.

Here, read this: https://www.vox.com/2015/1/10/7521819/sanders-mmt-kelton

bigdog wrote:I'm afraid Trump would roll right over her in 2020.

Agreed 100%.

RealLindaL wrote:

bigdog wrote:I'm afraid Trump would roll right over her in 2020.

Agreed 100%.

Assuming he gets the nomination, of course... or is even still in office by then.

I think that's why Romney is making his move--he probably knows something the general public doesn't. Yet.

bigdog wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

zsomething wrote:Bernie can comment but lord, I hope he won't run for president again...

I believe he's the frontrunner.  And the only reason I think he shouldn't run is his age.  

Nope, Joe Biden is the frontrunner:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-2020-biden/joe-biden-leads-potential-2020-democratic-field-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1NC0P1

and I'll be voting for him if he decides to run. He's getting on up there in age too, but I've always liked him and respected him as a Senator. I just think he's a decent and good man and deserves a chance at the job he's always wanted. Plagiarizing a college paper really doesn't seem like much compared to the POTUS we have now, does it? 

Elizabeth Warren is just too something  for me that I can't describe without saying it's that she's desperately sincere about everything. I wouldn't want to wait on her in a restaurant and not have something on the menu that she wanted. I'm afraid she would cry and explain how VERY VITAL it was that she have that food right now or some tragedy might happen. She is not Hillary Clinton, I'm afraid Trump would roll right over her in 2020.

Don’t Underestimate Elizabeth Warren and Her Populist Message

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/dont-underestimate-elizabeth-warren-and-her-populist-message?mbid=nl_Daily%20010319&CNDID=14244234&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20010319&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20010319&hasha=003b223a2f944c5ae2f41b9b0936a70e&hashb=e8ef8b715ef722fd34d715795b2133060844801b&spMailingID=14895789&spUserID=MTMzMTc5NTk4NDA0S0&spJobID=1560222097&spReportId=MTU2MDIyMjA5NwS2

I'm not afraid of Drumpf in 2020. I'm surprised he's lasted this long. I had hoped that Warren would run with Sanders in 2016, because there is a lot of overlap in their messages...and they're accurate on the economic disparity that is hurting the majority of people.

Deus X wrote:

zsomething wrote: I don't think the guy has an even basic understanding of economics or foreign policy.  

He understands Economics well enough to appoint a leading proponent of Modern Monetary Theory, Stephanie Kelton, as his chief economic adviser--which means he realizes that Keynesian and Neo-Keynesian Economics are about as representative of Economic reality as Geocentrism was of Astronomical reality.

Bernie knows that, in a monetarily sovereign nation, deficits are meaningless and balanced budgets are harmful, that Federal deficits are, in reality, private savings.

Here, read this:  https://www.vox.com/2015/1/10/7521819/sanders-mmt-kelton

Will you stop pushing this pie-in-the-sky MMT theory? Look at the reality on the ground (come back to Earth). What happened after the crash of 2008? Average citizens lost a substantial part of their pensions, couldn't get approved for loans, some lost their homes and businesses. If they wanted to start a new small business...good luck with that unless they could get the money from family. That could happen all over again, not only because of Drumpf's horrendous trade policies, but because of the GOP tax cuts.

Is Bernie still paying his interns $12 an hour?

Floridatexan wrote:
Will you stop pushing this pie-in-the-sky MMT theory?  Look at the reality on the ground (come back to Earth).  What happened after the crash of 2008?  Average citizens lost a substantial part of their pensions, couldn't get approved for loans, some lost their homes and businesses.  If they wanted to start a new small business...good luck with that unless they could get the money from family.  That could happen all over again, not only because of Drumpf's horrendous trade policies, but because of the GOP tax cuts.

Read the theory and point out the hole in it. You fuckin' idiots are like the Cardinals in the Vatican shouting "We're sorry, Mr. Copernicus, but it's still the Sun going around the Earth."

The reality on the ground is that a monetarily sovereign nation does not depend on revenue to fund spending and Federal Deficits are Private Savings. Go ahead prove me wrong, I DARE you to try!

And while we're on the subject of the 2008 Catastrophe, you can lay that squarely in Bill Clinton's lap with his repeal of Glass-Steagall and the Commodities Futures Act of 2000--which he signed even after Brooksley Borne told him the failure to regulate derivatives would lead to big problems.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/interviews/born.html

And before you start your "The Republicans made Clinton sign it!" whimpering, read this:

https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/bill_clinton_the_republicans_m.php

All those pensions and houses and businesses you're bleating about? Thank Bill Clinton for that. His embrace of financial deregulation did incalculable damage to this country.

PkrBum wrote:Is Bernie still paying his interns $12 an hour?

Probably not even that if they were female sexual harassment targets.

Sexism Claims From Bernie Sanders’s 2016 Run: Paid Less, Treated Worse
As Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont considers another run for president, former staffers said he had failed to address the harassment and sexism they faced while working on his 2016 campaign.
Credit
Sarah Silbiger/The New York Times


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexism.html

none of the people in this thread mentioned will be the nominee. It will be a young person......this could be an exciting time where the country bonds around youth and optimism. The evil will take years to unwind, but what bothers me the most is listening to my granddaughters talk about President Trump.....He is a joke to them. How far have we fallen. Ike and Mimi were like my grandparents who I loved and respected. It was a kinder world lead by a man who had millions of deaths on his conscious. He was a real tough guy.....not a metrosexual wussy sixth grader.....

2seaoat wrote:none of the people in this thread mentioned will be the nominee.  It will be a young person......this could be an exciting time where the country bonds around youth and optimism.   The evil will take years to unwind, but what bothers me the most is listening to my granddaughters talk about President Trump.....He is a joke to them.  How far have we fallen.  Ike and Mimi were like my grandparents who I loved and respected.  It was a kinder world lead by a man who had millions of deaths on his conscious.   He was a real tough guy.....not a metrosexual wussy sixth grader.....

All the while grandparents wonder why empty boxes of rat poison keep turning up and grand kids smile knowingly. Don't ask for whom the rat poison pours, it pours for thee.

Deus X wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
Will you stop pushing this pie-in-the-sky MMT theory?  Look at the reality on the ground (come back to Earth).  What happened after the crash of 2008?  Average citizens lost a substantial part of their pensions, couldn't get approved for loans, some lost their homes and businesses.  If they wanted to start a new small business...good luck with that unless they could get the money from family.  That could happen all over again, not only because of Drumpf's horrendous trade policies, but because of the GOP tax cuts.

Read the theory and point out the hole in it. You fuckin' idiots are like the Cardinals in the Vatican shouting "We're sorry, Mr. Copernicus, but it's still the Sun going around the Earth."

The reality on the ground is that a monetarily sovereign nation does not depend on revenue to fund spending and Federal Deficits are Private Savings. Go ahead prove me wrong, I DARE you to try!

And while we're on the subject of the 2008 Catastrophe, you can lay that squarely in Bill Clinton's lap with his repeal of Glass-Steagall and the Commodities Futures Act of 2000--which he signed even after Brooksley Borne told him the failure to regulate derivatives would lead to big problems.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/interviews/born.html

And before you start your "The Republicans made Clinton sign it!" whimpering, read this:

https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/bill_clinton_the_republicans_m.php

All those pensions and houses and businesses you're bleating about? Thank Bill Clinton for that. His embrace of financial deregulation did incalculable damage to this country.

You can stuff it, lunatic dim bulb. The only thing tha's going to fix our economy is a more equal distribution of income and assets. Please buy a damn clue.

Floridatexan wrote:You can stuff it, lunatic dim bulb.  The only thing tha's going to fix our economy is a more equal distribution of income and assets.  Please buy a damn clue.  

I repeat,  go to:    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/modern-monetary-theory-primer.html
and spend and hour or two familiarizing yourself with the basic tenets of the theory--it might take you a little longer since you don't strike me as a particularly fast reader--then explain where this simple macroeconomic theory is wrong.

Just because you spent thirty years as a bank teller or a bookkeeper doesn't mean you know fuck-all about macroeconomics.

There's NOTHING in MMT that suggests or even hints that it's a "fix" for a broken economy. It merely uses sectoral analysis to describe money flows in a monetarily sovereign national government.

Your idiotic suggestion that MMT is some kind of proposed action plan is like saying a blueprint for a house is an instruction manual for a residential construction project. DUH!

You use a lot of posts to tell everyone else what they should read--what with you being so much smarter than the rest of us and all--so maybe it's time for you to do a little reading yourself. Your simplistic notion that there's "only" one needful thing to fix our economy is particularly worrisome. A "more equal distribution of income and assets" is a goal not a plan. DUH!

If the site I suggested is too perplexing or confounding for you, I'm sure you can find a Little Golden Book that'll break it down for you with small words and neat little pictures and suchlike.

I'm just amazed that every time we have a period of economic prosperity, like under Clinton and pretty much under Obama's last few years, a Republican president comes along later and screws it all up.
Then the Republicans always blame it on Whatever democrat came before them, no matter what the reality was. Whatever Bill Clinton did during his presidency could have been corrected under George W Bush's 8 years, couldn't it have, Deus? Instead he hid money for his wars outside the budget and ripped up the surplus Clinton left him.
The truth is, the economy does not do better under Republican presidents.  That's a historical fact.

We owe our nation to the Chinese right now. If you think deficits don't matter, try and explain that to your banker when you've bought something and can't afford to pay for it.  Then you borrow the money from a loan shark "the Chinese" and see how much damage they can do to your face  when you can't repay it.  Government deficits aren't private savings, they are public debts.
I didn't bother reading your article either because if it starts out with an inane argument like that one, it's not worth my time or anyone elses.

Two thoughts can live in one brain Deus: Deficit spending is bad and extreme income inequality is also bad. Both are dangerous. One can lead to selling your country out to another nation and the other can lead to a revolution from within. 
I don't want Bernie Sanders to run either, btw. HIllary would be POTUS if he hadn't run last time and she'd be a damn good one.

bigdog wrote: If you think deficits don't matter, try and explain that to your banker when you've bought something and can't afford to pay for it. 

No, The United States Will Not Go Into A Debt Crisis, Not Now, Not Ever

If there's one article of faith in Washington (and elsewhere), it's the idea that the United States might get into a debt crisis if it doesn't get its fiscal house in order.

This is not true.

The reason why it's not true is because we live in a fiat currency system, where the United States government can create an infinite number of dollars at no cost to meet its obligations. A Treasury bill is a promise that the government will give you US dollars--something that the United States government can produce infinitely and at no cost.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascalemmanuelgobry/2012/10/19/no-the-united-states-will-not-go-into-a-debt-crisis-not-now-not-ever/#44dd4cdb2a86

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

bigdog wrote:I'm just amazed that every time we have a period of economic prosperity, like under Clinton and pretty much under Obama's last few years, a Republican president comes along later and screws it all up.
Then the Republicans always blame it on Whatever democrat came before them, no matter what the reality was. Whatever Bill Clinton did during his presidency could have been corrected under George W Bush's 8 years, couldn't it have, Deus? Instead he hid money for his wars outside the budget and ripped up the surplus Clinton left him.
The truth is, the economy does not do better under Republican presidents.  That's a historical fact.

We owe our nation to the Chinese right now. If you think deficits don't matter, try and explain that to your banker when you've bought something and can't afford to pay for it.  Then you borrow the money from a loan shark "the Chinese" and see how much damage they can do to your face  when you can't repay it.  Government deficits aren't private savings, they are public debts.
I didn't bother reading your article either because if it starts out with an inane argument like that one, it's not worth my time or anyone elses.

Two thoughts can live in one brain Deus: Deficit spending is bad and extreme income inequality is also bad. Both are dangerous. One can lead to selling your country out to another nation and the other can lead to a revolution from within. 
I don't want Bernie Sanders to run either, btw. HIllary would be POTUS if he hadn't run last time and she'd be a damn good one.

Guess how much money and then interest we'd owe if not for the private federal reserve creation under Wilson?

And under Obama there was 40B "digitalized" and injected into the system a month... for years. There's certainly going to be an accounting for that... the market is overvalued. I'd guess the Dow's real value closer to 20k or under... maybe 18 or 19. A much better solution (from a progressive point of view... which is the only Keynesian game in town) would've been to run the "free air dollars" against the underwater mortgages. The banks get the money but lose the inflated values that were artificially set by lax lending policies. Instead the little guy still got stuck and the banks were made whole. Further... we still don't know what real value is. We'd have been much better off knowing real value rather than some bs encouraging manipulated "numbers" that gave a pretence of normalcy or even a recovery. The entire monetary policy was botched for political expediency. There's still a price to be paid.

Deus X wrote:

bigdog wrote: If you think deficits don't matter, try and explain that to your banker when you've bought something and can't afford to pay for it. 

No, The United States Will Not Go Into A Debt Crisis, Not Now, Not Ever

If there's one article of faith in Washington (and elsewhere), it's the idea that the United States might get into a debt crisis if it doesn't get its fiscal house in order.

This is not true.

The reason why it's not true is because we live in a fiat currency system, where the United States government can create an infinite number of dollars at no cost to meet its obligations. A Treasury bill is a promise that the government will give you US dollars--something that the United States government can produce infinitely and at no cost.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascalemmanuelgobry/2012/10/19/no-the-united-states-will-not-go-into-a-debt-crisis-not-now-not-ever/#44dd4cdb2a86

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Oh yeah, just print some more money, that will solve the problem.
I'd say anyone who just made that argument knows nothing at all about the global economy we live in. You prove yourself a bigger fool every time you sit down and type on your keyboard. Your link only proves that economists can be damned fools too.

bigdog wrote:
Oh yeah, just print some more money, that will solve the problem.

You dumb shit!

That's EXACTLY what happened with the three rounds of Quantitative Easing the Fed injected into the banking system after the Clinton Financial Catastrophe in 2008. HUNDREDS of Billions of dollars created with just keystrokes at the Fed. No corresponding Treasury securities, just a few keystrokes and BINGO!, the money was in the Reserve accounts of the big banks held by the Fed.

They just magicked it up out of thin air! I think eventually it amounted to almost $2 trillion!

AND IT WORKED! There was no 1930s style major depression.

Listen, no offense, but you're too bone ignorant about our financial and monetary systems to have any kind of intelligent dialogue. Whatever cheesy, low-rent, short-bus college it was you went to, write 'em a letter and see if you can get your money back--ya got screwed, honey.

And you still don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

2seaoat wrote:It was a kinder world lead [LED] by a man who had millions of deaths on his conscious [CONSCIENCE].  

Just a little good-humored reminder that I was the one recently accused by this person of making frequent word usage errors.  Oh, and these particular two words have been used incorrectly by this same person for many years; thus, while morphine may work for pain, it won't work as an excuse here (just in case such had been contemplated).   

Telstar wrote:All the while grandparents wonder why empty boxes of rat poison keep turning up and grand kids smile knowingly. Don't ask for whom the rat poison pours, it pours for thee.

HUH???

RealLindaL wrote:

Telstar wrote:All the while grandparents wonder why empty boxes of rat poison keep turning up and grand kids smile knowingly. Don't ask for whom the rat poison pours, it pours for thee.

HUH???

Don't worry you are not a 45 supporter. The torture and agony soon to sweep over the country will quietly pass over you.