Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Senator Bernie Sanders" channel.

  1. So if you allow people to take 12 weeks off then who is going to produce anything when they are gone?  Same with sick leave.  A small business with limited employees loses one who decides to take a sick leave day meaning that someone has to pick up the slack, typically it is the owner who already works a lot. When people take paid vacation it typically happens all around the same time, typically holidays.  So a family takes a vacation and goes to a gas station to get gas, but can't because all the workers there are on vacation. According to a gallup poll 50% of workers work 40 hours or less.  In 2009 according to the BLS around 5% work more than one job. The simple fact is that if someone takes off then someone has to pick up the slack.  Also unless people stay home and sleep on their vacation there has to be someone that provides services to those who want to travel on vacation.  Someone has to pick up the slack.  A reason why we are seeing a growing income inequality in this country is because we have a group of people who want to earn something for nothing. And we are not lagging behind every other country, what Sanders is saying is deceptive and in several ways is just wrong.  Him using emotions won't get him far when he has to actually debate and get into details about his plans that won't work.
    1
  2. Ryan Slingerland People in Wyoming are happy as well, a common thing is that they have a small population.  It is easy to develop a system that works with a small population.  
    1
  3. Define a living wage.  I bet you can't.
    1
  4. Justin-Michael Fowlkes Not many people are living off of min. wage to begin with. That aside, it isn't up to a business to worry about someone's personal finances.  Someone can be making the min. wage but still make a living.  My girlfriend works part time on min. wage and she is actually paying off her loan.  That is because she lives with me and I make a lot more than she does.  I make $20,000/yr.  I pay rent, own the car, pay internet, where she pays for energy, a lot of the food, and her loan, and soon mine.  We manage our money well.  The average household income for and individual making $9.50/hr or less is over $47,000/yr.  That is because low wage workers are supplemental income and not the main earner.  That is the problem with the term "living wage" in that it is subjective.  You are paid based on your work.  You either have to find a way to earn more or manage money better if you are having a hard time making a living. Another problem with the living wage is what is $12/hr, or $20/hr?  Money is essentially worthless until society gives it value.  The same is with cars, land, houses, etc.  The Waltons have so much wealth because they own half of walmart.  The property that walmart sits on and the buildings themselves are worth a lot.  It isn't that the Waltons have a lot of income or money to spare.  If the government starts setting prices, as in the price of labor, then money becomes worthless.  So people will be making more but the dollar will be weaker. This, and much more is why the term "living wage" can't be defined.
    1
  5. Justin-Michael Fowlkes Plus, it isn't common sense.  Nothing is common sense. 
    1
  6. Lightmane321 As a moderate that takes an non-bias approach on politics I can say that Bernie has no chance of winning. Winning in tiny Vermont is nothing compared to the US. He is too radical and on every single one of his policies they can easily be attacked and tore down.
    1
  7. vedant varma He is radical and the US citizens don't support his ideas.
    1
  8. vedant varma What's your point?
    1
  9. +Marcus Ryser Denmark has a population less than most of our states. It is not a comparison you can make with the US. Also Denmark has mandatory military services where the US doesn't. That produces a completely different society all together.
    1
  10. +Marcus Ryser Oh please go into detail. The fact is that if you did you will find out that Denmark is not that great. A larger population means more diversity and a less homogeneous culture. It is easier to create policies when that is the case. But with the completely different society you really can't compare the US to Denmark. If you wanted to one thing you will find that if Denmark was a US state (it is smaller than most of our states) it would be one of the poorest states in the union.
    1
  11. +Marcus Ryser It comes down to checks and balances. You don't want to place all this power in one place. Education and healthcare can be handled in the states. http://www.timbro.se/bokhandel/pdf/9175665646.pdf There is the study
    1
  12. +Marcus Ryser Equality as in what? Everyone has the same low quality goods and services? That is not a successful model you want to follow. You don't improve society by bringing people down. Less poverty? That is debatable. I already showed you that if Denmark was a state it would be one of the poorest. As far as crime? That once again goes back to a complete difference in society. If Denmark had over 300 million people it would face several challenges as well. I see the benefits of "free" healthcare and education. I just don't want all the power to be in one place, neither did the founding fathers.
    1
  13. +Dave Sipsy The top 6 CEOs of Walmart earn a combine $77 million a year. If you were take that money and spread it to the 525,000 workers of Walmart who earn less than $25,000 a year they will earn an extra $148 a year. That is it. When you compare a CEO to one worker it does look outrageous, but when you compare it to their entire staff it shows how much a CEO is responsible for.
    1
  14. +Dave Sipsy You have to realize that if those CEOs fail at their job then the company goes under resulting in several jobs being lost, or shareholders get mad and vote them out. If the typical worker at Walmart messes up a shelf does not get stocked, so what? Based off of responsibilities they are worth that much. Also I showed you how if you cut their salary down to $0 the workers still won't get that much money. So what are you accomplishing by cutting their pay? $77 million is not a large portion of the profit by the way. More goes to the workers. Around 1,500,000 Walmart workers earn at least $25,000/yr. (Walmart employes around 2 million workers). Say 1.5 million workers at $25,000 you get 37.5 billion dollars. Seems like the workers are getting more.
    1
  15. +Dave Sipsy Not comparable. Walmart has over 2 million employees. They have less skills and responsibilities. In your scenario your workers have more skills and more responsibilities. Also your business does not move that much product compare to what Walmart does or deal with as many customers on a daily basis. Thus you earn less profits as a whole. So your comparison is very poor as in you are comparing different businesses and different workers all together.
    1
  16. +Clifford Blackson Ever been to a walmart lately? They have long lines at checkouts. Shelves are not always stock. Carts are all over the place in the parking lot. The employees of Walmart are not doing their job well already. Walmart attracts consumers based off of their low prices and multiple locations 24 hours a day. People don't necessarily go there for great service. Now if the workers of Walmart were to do a very poor job then they will simply get replaced. There is someone out there that is looking for a job to earn extra income and hopefully move up.
    1
  17. +Clifford Blackson "A company with hard working employees  and a bad CEO can make a healthy profit," No, because there will be bad investment on top. A good CEO won't allowed bad employees to be hired. It all starts at the top.
    1
  18. And how would these laws prevent any of these shootings?  The Louisiana shooter passed a background check and had no record.  So how are these gun laws going to prevent shootings? Gun control is a smoke screen from the political left to say "we want to lower violence, but we don't want to do any actual work in doing so".  There are other ways to lower crime that don't involve taking our rights away.
    1
  19. +Karl Thiecke Difference in society. Also if you change the definition of a mass shooting of 4+ people getting killed then it the number goes down to 29. That 355 is 4+ people getting injured.
    1
  20. David Zare Oppressing others and using "we the people" or using "protection" is how corrupt and dangerous governments become into existences. The powers of the federal government were to be limited. The constitution was to protect us from the government.
    1
  21. David Zare Yes we are in that situation. It if funny how you mention greed. So taxing the rich to give money to people for doing nothing is not greed?
    1
  22. greenjelly01 The top 10% pay 70% of taxes. They pay a lot as is.
    1
  23. David Zare The top 10% pay 70% of taxes. We have half of the country who don't pay taxes. The reason why we have a growing income gap is because of that. We have half of the country who don't do anything but receive money for it. So I have to ask, what is their "fair share"? That sounds good but when broken down is broad and means nothing.
    1
  24. David Zare So you are going to avoid the question? I am also not blaming simple people. And I currently live 2000 miles from the town I grew up in and live in for 20 years. So yes, I have "left my village" as you put it.
    1
  25. greenjelly01 And those businesses are taking the financial risk. They can always decide to close down or hire less people. Those roads mean nothing if people are not going to use them to get to work.
    1
  26. greenjelly01 "Corporations are great at privatizing profits and publicizing losses." I agree that corporations do take advantage of government when it comes to loses. That is because the federal government has power to begin with. The main thing about roads is that one, it is a small portion of federal spending, most funding for roads comes from local government. Another is that it is really the only concrete thing government can show it does. "Yes, roads are meant for people to use them, and those that use them more must pay more for them. That is why we have vehicle road taxes, and that is why corporations must pay more in taxes." What makes you think that corporations use the roads more? Also, as I said, if you chase out the corporations then those roads are meaningless.
    1
  27. christopher clarhaut Bernie doesn't believe in democracy. You get democracy with a strong representation in the government. You get that with a stronger local government. The more local government is the more it represents the people. Sanders wants to centralize government which compounds our problems. Some of the largest programs that failed or are a failure are federal government social programs. It was the federal government the prolonged the recession in the 30s. A reason why we have a growing income gap is because we have a system where the federal government gives to those who produce nothing. The fact that the rich own 90% of the wealth isn't bad. There is always going to be a wealth disparity. Beyond owning a home the average person doesn't have much wealth. It doesn't mean they are not well off, it just means they have little wealth. You need to learn what wealth is.
    1
  28. greenjelly01 First, you need to learn the difference between wealth and income. Off of your idea I should get money form the government due to my negative wealth, something that around 1/4 of the country has. On roads, 1.7% of the federal budget is on roads.
    1
  29. greenjelly01 And we benefit from the jobs that the rich have. " Roads were just an example, the government invests your tax dollars in tons of ways that are essential for proper functioning of our society." Like helping out those on wallstreet and the big banks.
    1
  30. greenjelly01 My bad, but you get my point. To attack those with resources and those that actually work isn't wise. That is why socialism works until you run out of other other people's money. Bernie wants to increase the size of the federal government so it can be bought out by wallstreet and the big banks. I want to reduce the fed. I want to cut off the head of the snake. You want to increase the size of the fed. and then cry when it becomes corrupt. You can't have it both ways.
    1
  31. David Zare Where have I ever supported having no government? You have to understand that too much government is just as bad as no government. I support state rights which is a checks and balance system.
    1
  32. greenjelly01 You have some crazy fetish for fox news. I never watch it. Bernie wants to increase the size of the federal government and remove state rights. What is "reasonable" to you is radical to others. That is why we have to go to state rights. Too much government is just as bad as no government. Bernie wants too much.
    1
  33. greenjelly01 I can easily define what it is. In the US it is when the federal government steps outside of the bounds of the constitution and violates state rights. It is quite clear.
    1
  34. greenjelly01 I don't agree with what republicans do either. Why do you think I do?
    1
  35. Around 70% of firefighters are volunteer, and fire departments are funded locally. But nice to see you try
    1
  36. Lightmane321 Sanders is economically illiterate. He will get burned in any debate and has in the past.
    1
  37. Lightmane321 I can't wait either. It would be pure entertainment seeing Sanders get burned in the debates.
    1
  38. Tommy Latham So if a Joseph Stalin or a Kim Jon Il type took over will you feel the same way? What the one in control hinders the growth of the country then I should be concerned at least. Plus, we should be in control of the government, not the government in control of us. Consider that for a second.
    1
  39. Tommy Latham Expansion of the federal government is the complete opposite of democracy.
    1
  40. Lightmane321 Sanders is economically illiterate. His ideas were tried in the past under FDR, we happen to see the slowest recovery form a recession ever under him. It took the war and FDR's death to get us out of the recession. Take any Sander's economic policy and I can break down for you why it won't work.
    1
  41. cinnireseisri Give me any Bernie Sanders policy on the economy and I will show you how he is wrong. As of now you are just whining for not knowing better.
    1
  42. Lightmane321 Nope I am actually right on Sanders and FDR.
    1
  43. Lightmane321 If you think Bernie cares about you he is nothing but a career politician. Why hasn't he ran for president in he past? Because now he is around 72 years old. If he wins he sits in office for a few years and retires. If he loses he simply retires. The is a retirement run for him. He has never been challenged in his life. Here he comes out of the wood work all of a sudden. He is simply doing this for himself.
    1
  44. Lightmane321 If the only rebuttal you have is to laugh then I feel that I am clearly the more knowledgeable one here.
    1
  45. Lightmane321 Not troll statements, just pure fact. If you don't want to debate that is fine, you are no better than Bernie Sanders. I saw a debate with him where he changed the subject when it became clear that his talking points don't mean anything when broken down. Bernie is a fool. You can vote for him if you want, just remember this, he will lose and the reason why is because he is a fool.
    1
  46. Rob Bell Yes, he wants to just sit in office. Why didn't he run earlier in his life? Why now? If he was so much for the people why not at the latest in 2008 when we were in a recession?
    1
  47. cinnireseisri When on average the US worker works 34.4 hours a week businesses are not pushing for more hours and neither are employees. All OT laws do is prevent those from wanting to work more to earn more from doing so. Just like the min. wage laws prevent those looking for work from doing so because they have been priced out of the job market. You really need to learn what money is as well. When you do that you realize how off Bernie Sanders is. If all it took was giving more money to the lower class then why not just give it to them? Why have the middle man involved? Why not mail them a check for $50,000? That would help, right?
    1
  48. cinnireseisri By the way Robert Reich talks I would say I do know more than him. This is the same guy whose argument for raising the min. wage is because it is "common sense". If I were to stand in front of my committee during my defense and use the phrase "common sense" I would not get my PhD. Reich is a partisan hack.
    1
  49. Lightmane321 I posted the link, it is a youtube video entitled "Bernie Sanders Tells The Truth About the Minimum Wage" Really sad on his part considering how he kept avoiding questions and was using purely emotional arguments to push his propaganda.
    1
  50. Lightmane321 Where did I ever say I was voting for Trump? You are really digging yourself in a hole here. With your stupidity I am starting to see why Bernie has low support and why he can only win in a state the size of Vermont. People with actual intelligence won't vote for him. Have fun cheering for a loser.
    1