Random Politics & Religion #00

People are stupid. Fault of the people.

Banks are ***, and bank on people being stupid. Fault of the banks and the people.

Government creates lending practices for said banks. Banks continue to be *** banking on people being stupid. Fault of the Government, banks, and stupid people.

I believe the new term for this cycle becomes "Invisible Money", since it's "there", but no one can see where it comes from, where it goes, or who it benefits. Then it suddenly "disappears" and the bubble pops.

Example:

Candidate A wants to promote global warming. One of Candidate A's rhetoric speeches include arresting all executives from all oil companies in the world and throwing them in jail, and that his opponent, Candidate B, is a shill who's paid for by the oil companies to pollute the world.

Candidate A receives $25k in donations from Oil Company X for his campaign and another $75k in donations from the executives from Oil Company X.

Is Candidate A a hypocrite?

If people are stupid and banks are *** what does that make women ? Cause they aren't a people or a bank !

No, he's called a politician. Don't insult us hypocrites again!

*shakes stick*

Not only is Bernie a terrible candidate he is old and no one likes old people !

And anyone who's honest would admit such. The issue is one born of both ignorance of finance, which is so complex that even financiers can't really explain everything and predatory lending which has brought many Americans to their financial knees. Financial literacy in America is pathetic and in a capitalist nation we should be frankly ashamed of ourselves and aspire to more.

Does it not bother people that half of all Americans have ZERO savings? Does that not boggle the mind? In a country where money is God how many of our fellows are walking around with essentially zero influence? Now of course, many people set themselves up and consumerist culture prides itself on living beyond your means but thats a discussion for another adventure...

Bernie touches upon the larger issue in America and that's one of hopelessness that people feel within the construct. The youth feel that the future promised won't be fulfilled (and it can't, because the world has changed) and with America pivoting towards a more highly specialized workforce the notion of telling people to forego college essentially sets up a whole generation to become idle hands. Guess what idle hands become? Terorrist fodder. It's less about Bernie the man railing against Wall Street itself moreso people see Wall Street as an embodiment of with what's wrong with America.

It's a place where excess is king, a cultural elite who prey upon the poor and drive perpetual poverty while government bends it's knee to serve the elite at the expense of the populace at whole.

It's a threat to national stability, a threat to our way of life and ultimately a threat to democracy. A country where the populace is disengaged from politics (outside POTUS elections) is a recipe for disaster.

Realistic answer: Not necessarily. There are companies that are willing to back someone, because they advocate a new era of energy, which would increase that company's profits, and give them a better image. It's one thing to come from a company, than it is to come from an individual executive, or individual executive, due to industry lobbying, and personal bribery.

Which is why transparency is necessary.

All of that said though, I agree that it *does* matter if it's $0.01 or $55,000 dollars, and that it does matter the reason for accepting.

Also, getting 55k from donors in financial services is pretty much getting nothing at all. 55k is ***.

But your article says She left wall street she left, she doesn't work there any more.

If bernie gets a check from some dope that works in the mailroom for The Evil Bank of Evil that doesn't mean he is beholdened to that bank now...

it's obviously evidence bernie sold his soul to the wall street devil... And we would KNOW THE TRUTH if only kn would share his medication.

GIMME!

It does bother me, but what can I do about that? I mean, we cannot force a law saying that you have to have a savings accounts and save at least 10% of your earnings or gets a fine tax added on your tax bill at the end of the year.

His solutions will end up with more hopelessness. How can one solve the problem of hopelessness by instituting more hopelessness?


(This also addresses Shiroi's statement)
The hypocrisy stems from his attack against the other candidate for being in the pocketbook of the very "evil" he is against, while receiving money from the very "evil" he is against.

Bernie has attacked Clinton in debates about being paid for by Wall Street (yes, I do watch the democrat debates too), and yet, here he is receiving money by the very thing he attacked Clinton for.

See, above.

I'm of the opinion the American people are looking for someone with vision to guide them right now, regardless of political slant. We can debate what the ideal vision is but gov't doing nothing but throwing trillions at endless terrorists does not a vision make.

Sanders has a socialist vision, Clinton has ruthless pragmatism. Similarly, Jeb had a 'dont rock the boat' approach and Trump wants to blow up the boat and build a golf course.

It's why Hillary and the establishment are so deeply beleaguered right now. Status quo isn't trickling down to the average American. People are becoming jaded and tuned out of the American ideal. Do people not see how dangerous this is? The rise of sovereigns is one such consequence.

True, but also promising free stuff with little to no way of paying for it, especially in the long run, also does not a vision make.

Raising taxes will hurt the economy, which leads to less taxes collected which leads to less "free" stuff and it spirals all the way down the tubes.

well you're going have to do better than little miss wall street wash out turned robin hood and a couple of other people who may or may not have worked for a company that's listed on wall street... >.>

hillary cleared 300 MILLION DOLLARS from wall street

the bernster got /quick math .0000183333 of that from a couple of scrubs

Every politician promises 'free stuff', the devil is in the details of how the deck gets shuffled to make that stuff happen.

Last I was promised that Trump will wave his wand and fix our trade and taxes before finishing his bowl of Trump brand cereal.

We are not having the same conversation, are we?

Difference between Trump and Sanders is people believing in them.

Trump supporters (I hope) don't believe that he will get Mexico to spend money on a wall they don't have any say on the construction.

Sander supporters do believe that he will make everything free (it's one of the major promises of socialism). What they don't understand is that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Remember who the voting base is for these people.

Both Trump and Sanders have obnoxious true believers, cmon.

You don't think people are really convinced this guy Trump is going to build a wall 1,933 miles long? Cause I'm. not. so. sure.

Or that he's going to put a moratorium on Muslims?

Same for Sanders supporters who think the guy is going to wipe out inequality before his glass of Metamucil is finished? I'm. not. so. sure.

I would love to see a Trump brand cereal. Here's one that's seeking old man Sanders' endorsement.

The number of naive supporters differ though.

Look at the type of people who support Trump: Uneducated (as in no secondary education), but realistic. Working class, so to say.

Sanders: Young, naive and unrealistic. Those who haven't learned the difference between reality and fantasy. The same type of people who were generally burned by Obama and his campaign promises.

Yes, there are idiots who believe Trump's promises. But, in my honest opinion, are fewer than those who believe in Sanders's promises.

How are Trump supporters "realistic?" None of his ideas are feasible. You have seen his tax plan you know its never going to happen. So what are Trump supporters being realistic about?

A lot of things promised by Trump are unrealistic at best (lunatic could be used for some things).

That's not where he gets his popularity from.

Trump's popularity stems from Trump not being a politician. He promises changes to the governmental system, and his rhetoric states as such.

Sanders, however, is the same tired shill you would expect from a lifetime politician, promises a bunch of free stuff with no way of paying for it. Kindof the opposite end of the Iraq War liberals love to complain about.

His wife is hotter than Bernie's !

Case in point:

Bernie's wife looks just like him...

Now that's not very nice.

I guess if you are a socialist you don't care about what your wife looks like...

I looked up Bernie's wife in the dictionary it says "plain jane"