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

  1. What causes inflation? Labor costing more. Increasing the min. wage will lead to higher prices and less jobs. In a healthy economy inflation should essentially not exist. In an economy that is messed with by politicians who have nothing to gain or lose in how well the economy is doing, the economy will not grow properly if at all.
    1
  2. +DynamicUnreal Ok, what about children right now who become senior citizens and there is no money left?
    1
  3. +46619TAB The mindset of Bernie supporters "I am poor, it is the rich fault" "Bernie lost, it is the fault of voter suppression" Bernie and his supporters can't take any self responsibility.
    1
  4. +Karuska22ps You really need to stop comparing us to other countries. You are ruling out several variables when you do, mainly the massive cultural differences. Even with that, other countries face problems as well. Replacing a system with problems with another system with problems is not the solution. When you say other countries do it you are limiting your argument ot 1. they are countries 2 people live there Not a strong argument. And no, you are not entitled to education.
    1
  5. +SlowerMindsKeepRight If you want a say in how taxes are spent then you need to support smaller more local government. Expanding the size of the federal government is not the solution, it is actually the problem.
    1
  6. +SupremeStoops You just made one of the most ignorant arguments ever. You can't just sit there and says "well socialism works in other countries, it can clearly work in the US". You are taking a complex situation and limiting down to 1. they are countries 2. people live there That is a completely ignorant argument. You are eliminating so many variables, especially cultural ones. This is also disregarding that those countries have problems as well, and are arguably not doing as well as the US. Which country do you want to copy? Denmark who has mandatory military? Germany who limits who can go to college? Norway who subsidizes their socialism with oil? Which model? Tell me.
    1
  7. +KoiandDragon Firefighters: Around 70% of firefighters are volunteered and the fire department is locally funded.....you are already not off to a good start Police: locally ran an funded Garbage: Depending on where you live it is either locally funded or privately. In my hometown it was privately funded where you paid to have someone take it SS and Medicare: Unconstitutional and losing money Libraries: locally funded and ran locally EPA: A job killing program and unconstitutional Public schools: Locally ran and locally funded So to recap you listed 4 programs that are locally ran and funded 1 that is privately funded 1 where most of the workers are volunteered 2 unconstitutional programs that do more harm than good And you are using this to justify voting for Bernie Sanders? Really?
    1
  8. +KoiandDragon We don't need a federal EPA because the states can run it. I don't have a problem with locally funded programs because they are constitutional and that is the most effective form of government. That is my overall problem with Bernie, he wants to expand the fed which is just going to create more problems. Finland is a country that has a smaller population than some of our states. Finland has a completely different university system than the US does. It is not comparable. Even if you were to compare the US has a very strong university system.
    1
  9. +O v e r T i m e Shhhh, Bernie supporters don't understand economics. What I find to be funny is that they are pushing for a law that demands how much a company pays per hour but not per week. The min. wage intentions are immediately flawed off of that alone. Also even Bernie himself said prices will go up.
    1
  10. I love how Bernie complains about corruption in politics but want politics to run our healthcare, education and more of our money. His supporters are idiots.
    1
  11. +dipojones So he wants to remove corruption in government by giving it more power and thus more to sell to the highest bidder?
    1
  12. +Prashant verma I agree that with the correct checks and balances we can have an system with limited corruption. We have the blueprint for that already, it is called the constitution. Limit the powers of the federal government and give more to the states. Remove all federal taxes except for a tax on the states. Have the states run healthcare and college education if you want any government to run it at all. But expanding the fed. will just make the problem worse. " And that is what we are trying here." You are not saying that. All Bernie supporters are saying is "higher taxes and more government" without any standards to have checks and balances.
    1
  13. $12,000 should be enough. How about the fed stops causing inflation. Think about it, how much is $12,000 anyways? That is just an arbitrary number. The economy is far more complex than just looking at dollars.
    1
  14. +Yeniel Otero Why?
    1
  15. +Yeniel Otero But less than 2% of min. wage workers actually work full time? Very few people are trying to live off of it. When broken down there is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage.
    1
  16. +Kyrie Irving Yep, FDR was so good that he turned a recession into a depression.
    1
  17. +Kyrie Irving When did the depression take place?
    1
  18. +Kyrie Irving Every other recession took around 5 years or less to recover from with little to no federal government action. You never hear of the Panic of 1873 or 1837 because they were not as big as the great depression. Or what about the recession of 1920 to 1921? That was just as big as the one in 1929, but due to the federal government not doing anything the economy recovered quickly. FDR took the federal government and tried to "fix" the economy which led to a depression. I said this before, people who felt that FDR was a good president and good for the economy most likely feel that Matt Millen was a good GM for the Detroit Lions.
    1
  19. +Kyrie Irving In 11th grade did you learn about the Panic of 1873 or the Panic of 1837, or the recession of 1920, or other recessions? Most likely not. The reason why is because they were small, recovery was quick. Under FDR recovery was slow for a reason. It was also the first time, and only time until 2007 that the federal government tried to "fix" the economy with massive spending and regulations. FDR was killing off cattle and crops to keep supply slow trying to stimulate the economy. When people needed cheap food he was destroying it. There were other recessions similar to 1929, the one in 1920 was just as bad, but recovery was quick. FDR's regulations did not prevent future recessions, they still happened. FDR's policies he passed just compounded our problems and the problems we are seeing now are linked to them. They were not a big until now because 1. After the war every other country was rebuilding where we weren't, thus we had a head start on the global economy, which is why the depression ended then 2. It takes a couple generations until too many people become dependent on the federal government to really become a problem FDR was not a good president. His policies led to a slow recovery, and his policies are causing more problems. The Founding Fathers wanted a federal government with limited powers because they saw a time where future politicians will take advantage of it. FDR went against that and future politicians took advantage of it. FDR's policies have been destructive, not beneficial.
    1
  20. +Kyrie Irving I think the fact that we saw the slowest recovery ever is large enough. And saying correlation does not equal causation can easily be turned around you. You said FDR's policies prevented future depressions......well correlation does not equal causation. The great depression was unique in that it was the first time the federal government tried to "fix" the economy through massive spending and regulations. People wanted Wilson to do something during the 1920 recession and he did nothing. We recovered quickly. WW2 gave the government a reason to spend and invest. It has always been constitutional for the government to spend on foreign affairs thus it has always been a part of the economy. It also distracted FDR from domestic policies so that the federal government was not having a large role in it. The war forced investment instead of waste. If the waste was never there to begin with we would have never had a depression. "Another piece of evidence was that FDR reduced government subsidies to farms and the WPA, unemployment went from 15% to 20% in an instance." Correlation does not equal causation........actually I can give an explanation for that as well. FDR's spending was the first time the federal government tried to "fix" the economy. That lower unemployment was artificial. That is why there was a spike in unemployment after he pulled out. Today what we have seen is that people are wiser and understand history. That is why after the stimulus for the 2007 recession we did not see any recovery.
    1
  21. +Kyrie Irving It was a good source of information, I will give it that. What that video shows is the expansion of the federal government under FDR which I feel is the worst thing to happen under FDR. It made people dependent on the federal government. Milton Friedman said that we should follow the Founding Fathers' model in a limited government and keeping government as local as possible to ensure that government remains the servants instead of the masters. Instead, under FDR we went the exact opposite. As the guy said in the video we now expect the federal government to do things. That is a very scary thought to have that we have become so dependent on the federal government. As far as the New Deal ending the depression, I still feel it didn't. He mentioned subsidizes and when he stopped them unemployment went up. The reason why is because the first "recovery" from the initial subsidizes was artificial. That is why it crashed so quickly. I agree the war ended the depression. The war ended up being an investment for the US government, who always spent on foreign relations as listed in the constitution. It also distracted FDR so he no longer did destructive domestic policies. Spending on arms creation that other countries bought is an actual investment as opposed to paintings that no one cares about. In the end the worst thing to happen under FDR was our dependence on the federal government. People complain about government corruption and I say that the best way to end it is to limit the federal government. Talks of that means no more Social Security, no more Medicare/Medicaid, no more Department of Education and so on. People get scared at that point and don't want to limit the government. It is like the child that does not want to listen to their parents, so then their parents say "fine, go get a job and live in your own place and make your own rules". At least that is what my parents said to me as a kid. It quickly got me to follow their rules because they provided a roof over my head, or "welfare".
    1
  22. +Joyce Nielsen Bernie did not run earlier because this is his retirement run. He is a career politician that is retiring with a bang. If he were to win the presidency he would serve his time and retire while speaking rhetoric. If he loses he goes out like he is now, making noise. This is his victory lap for being a career politician.
    1
  23. +Ochoaj300 Bernie has been absent at higher percent of time on voting when compared to his peers. "He has worked in 32 consecutive years of elected office in order to fight for the working people in this nation and his home state of Vermont. " So he is a career politician. He absolutely refused to challenge himself. So what? I see that as a sign as laziness. I have done a lot of research on Bernie. Here is a guy that after all these years switches parties and runs for president. He has basically no chance of winning but he is still there making noise. This is nothing more than a retirement plan for him. Bernie doesn't care. He got his free meal as a politician.
    1
  24. +Ochoaj300 I sent a link on another comment. Let me know if you get it. Here is what it said "From Jan 2007 to Apr 2016, Sanders missed 160 of 2,894 roll call votes, which is 5.5%. This is much worse than the median of 1.6% among the lifetime records of senators currently serving." So I was wrong, it was the median. He is a career politician and thus the establishment. He wants to expand the powers of the federal government. This is the same federal government he complains about being corrupt and "rigged". He wants to give that federal government power over your healthcare and college education. He is giving corrupt politicians more bargaining chips so when he is done they can use it to screw us over. I don't support that at all. " He has challenged the establishment with his very liberal views and pushed the Democratic party to become more progressive. " And he is losing because he is lazy. "If he was a Libertarian or part of another party's guidelines, then I would totally understand where your coming from. But the things he believes and stands for have are the most progressive and liberal standpoints in our Congress so far." What he stands for is expanding the problems we currently have. Most of our problems stem from the federal government. Giving it more power will not solve anything "To say that Bernie does not care is a completely misleading statement because you are throwing his career in the garbage by saying that, and that is just shameful." He doesn't. If he did he would listen to the other side. His economic policies are crap and he wants to make the federal government larger which makes it more prone to being bought out and corrupt. He is doing all of this for his own benefits and you got fooled.
    1
  25. +Ochoaj300 I am not talking about the past months, I used that exact same source back in August to show the exact same thing. He does not show up to roll calls as much as his peers. There was that time near 2014 where he missed quite a bit. He is an established politician, what else has he done besides be a politician? He sided with democrats on several occasions. He voted for Obamacare when he could have easily said no unless it was universal healthcare. "I understand that you say that expanding the government would just expand the corruption, but you're looking at it in the current state, and not in the possible future state." The founding fathers saw the future state as well. Their solution was to limit all governments, especially the federal government. If the federal government has no power then it can't be bought. " Bernie wants to dismantle the Citizens United, which would end the ability for corporations to funnel money into political campaigns through SuperPACs." You can't do that because people have a right to donate their money if they want to. "Therefore, allowing public funding of campaigns." Which is allowing government to control funding instead of the people. If you had that Bernie would not receive a dime because the DNC would not give him any. "There's a reason why he wins in every general election poll against the Republicans. " But yet can't make it past the primaries. "He is a man of the people" Unless you are rich, white and straight. " and if you would actually take some unbiased time and read about the things he's done, then you would understand that as well." I am a moderate, and I am very fair at how I analyze things. Bernie is a fool. His policies will make our situation worse, not better. The people who are voting for him are doing so purely based off of emotions and not on any actual logic or reason. Your entire comment was just that. You are saying "he is different' or "he works for the people" and "he will end corruption". You never say how? How will he end corruption, especially after he is gone? It just amazes me how he gets support.
    1
  26. +Ochoaj300 He sides with big money, he just sides with big money when a bunch of fools are willing to give it up to him. With Obamacare is shows Bernie is not willing to go all the way. He will have no problem expanding the powers of the federal government but would not dismantle money in politics in the process. Now we have a bigger problem. " Look at the other democratic socialist countries in the world such as Canada, France, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, etc, and tell me that they are manipulating their people" Those are countries of much smaller size and completely different societies. You really can't compare. Norway subsidizes their programs with oil. Canada has been doing fracking for a couple decades now. Denmark has mandatory military. France has double digit unemployment. You can't just simply say that "well those countries do it then so can the US." Not to be a jerk, but when I hear that I compare it to "murica is numba 1". It is an incredibly ignorant approach. Those countries are completely different. Even at that they still have problems. For example the US has arguably the best healthcare system in the world. So why change? "On the topic of Citizen's United, don't you think it's unfair that millionaires and billionaires get to dump as much money as they want into the candidates they want in order for them to win?" I don't think so. To me it wouldn't matter who wins at the federal level if they had strict limitations on their powers. You are concerned with them getting money, I am concerned with what they can do when they get into office. Money in politics is nothing more than a symptom of a disease. That disease is a federal government with too much power. Limit the federal government and establish state rights and stronger local government (follow the constitution) and the problem goes away. "Also what makes you think that he is not being 100% publicly funded? " He received money from private citizens, no different than any other candidate. "You can see this because of the states that have closed primaries and caucuses, meaning that Independents cannot vote for the candidate of their choice" Just like publicly funded elections will prevent him from running. Also those are state laws. Maybe if his supporters were more involved in politics they would change their party stance sooner or vote in local elections as well to get state laws to change. What this also shows is a flaw in government. Government created those voting laws, so your solution in solving that is giving it more power? "What he is saying, is that it is time for the rich people and rich corporations to stop avoiding paying taxes" The top 10% pay 70% of federal income taxes (which used to be unconstitutional) even though they earn 40% of the income. The fact is that Bernie will make the problems we have worse. If you want to solve our problems then limit the fed., don't allow it to control our healthcare and education along with remaining corrupt.
    1
  27. +Ochoaj300 If Bernie makes college free I would advise you to avoid college because a college degree won't be worth anything.
    1
  28. +Ochoaj300 If Bernie makes college free I would advise you to avoid college because a college degree won't be worth anything.
    1
  29. I am sick and tired of the federal government messing things up and causing income inequality. That is why I am against Bernie Sanders.
    1
  30. +MrBigEnchilada "so there's inflation in all things, except wages," Actually wages have been going up as well.
    1
  31. +RainMirron Those numbers don't include increases in benefits such as healthcare. Businesses around that time started offering payments in benefits because they were 100% tax free. Around that time the payroll tax was expanded thus anyone who was given a higher wage meant that businesses had to pay a higher tax. They avoided that with benefits. It also doesn't include the fact that prices of goods and services have been dropping and the quality of those goods and services have been increasing. So no, wages have not been stagnate.
    1
  32. +Wolves And Sheeple Get ready for the cry baby excuses from the Bernie supporters
    1
  33. +Some Edgy Anime Fan Rules are rules. If those Bernie supporters paid more attention to politics they would have changed earlier or vote in local elections as well to change the rules.
    1
  34. Saying we are the richest country in the history of the world is a poor standards. Those poor school districts are still better than any school in Rome during the Roman Empire and they were the richest nation in the world during their peak.
    1
  35. +Ralph “Lee” the 4th It isn't about money. You can't eat money, you can't live under money, you can't keep yourself worm with money. You need resources and proper management of those resources to do that. Just saying we have money means nothing. As I said, the Roman Empire had a ton of money during their time but had far more problems then what we have.
    1
  36. To equal when the min. wage was first implemented it would be around $4/hr with no benefits.
    1
  37. +Greg Batmarx You cherry pick the areas it "works" (which is debatable) but leave out so many variables in why and how. Denmark has mandatory military, do you want that? Norway subsidizes their programs with oil. Bernie wants to get off of fossil fuels so that is out of the question. When people start pointing at other countries it displace a high level of ignorance. It is no different than the crowd of people who call Bernie a communist.
    1
  38. Bernie Sanders only pays their interns $12/hr. Also they provide no housing and only want those with a degree or those pursuing a degree. Sounds hypocritical to me.
    1
  39. +James Rowsell I know that. The point is that Bernie has no problem forcing others to pay their workers more, but he gets a free pass. Jan Helfeld called out Nancy Pelosi on the same issue when she did not pay her interns. Why does Bernie want to force others to pay more but he doesn't follow suit? And why does he hire those with a college degree already? Most internships are for those pursuing a degree. This isn't so much being common knowledge or not, it is calling out Bernie's hypocrisy.
    1
  40. +Kemal Cem Söylemez It doesn't matter. He needs to lead by example. He obviously isn't.
    1
  41. +James Rowsell A worker is a worker and the pure fact is that Bernie is paying his workers less than the min. wage he wants. He is also selective in the workers he picks which happens when one pays a higher wage. When a company pays a higher wage they will demand higher skills. That is why when the min. wage goes up so does teenage unemployment. But yet Bernie wants to solve that problem. In all I am being intellectually honest. Bernie is saying that this group of people have to treat their workers like this, but he doesn't. It is pure hypocrisy. And in some cases an internship is the only job one can do. That as opposed to college you can take courses and work when you are not taking courses. When I took my paid internship I had to be devoted to that and could not pick up another job. So it is not a silly point.
    1
  42. +Pill Cosby Ok, what if someone wants to work for McDonalds for $4/hr, and sees the missing money as a choice for getting a job, thus an investment?
    1
  43. +James Rowsell There are several reasons why I am against raising the min. wage and I can break it down easily. My problem is the hypocrisy. If Bernie had volunteers then why can't someone volunteer to work at Walmart? Say someone can't get a job so to prove their worth they volunteer at Walmart in hopes of getting a job later to get paid? That is no different than someone who volunteers at an internship. They lack skills and experience thus they put themselves in a position to gain skills and experience to get a job in the future and get paid more. In the end Bernie is being a hypocrite. He is hiring workers at less than $12/hr but wants other employers to pay $15/hr. Internships are temporary jobs, so are low wage jobs (min. wage jobs). Min. wage jobs are seen as temporary, entry level jobs, and stats show that with a small percent actually working full time, and most of them being young (under the age of 25). Internships are entry level jobs to gain experience and expand a resume. But yet Bernie, through the design of the law he has the ability to create, can pay his entry level workers less than $15/hr. But wants other employers to pay their entry level workers more. I bet if those same employers were to get representatives in office to lower the min. wage, or make them exempt from the min. wage, Bernie will get furious. But yet he has no problem being exempt from it.
    1
  44. +James Rowsell In the end an internship is an entry level, temporary position designed to give people experience to build a resume. That increases their chance of getting a better job. The same is with low wage jobs. They are jobs designed to give people with limited, if any, work experience to gain experience an build a resume to get a better job in the future. I bet Bernie, with his $12/hr internship, he 1. Is selective in who he hires. As in he will only hire the best of the bunch (shown with only wanting college students) 2. Is limited in who he hires and does not hire more workers due to him not being able to afford them The latter I have no numbers on. But my guess he does hire a limited amount That is no different then when the min. wage goes up businesses 1. Hire less teenagers and hire older workers with more experience 2. Hire less workers overall and cut their hours In the end Bernie is being a hypocrite.
    1
  45. +James Rowsell If you want me to break down why I am against the min. wage I can by simply saying that it kills jobs and raises prices. There is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage. And I say that being a moderate. Breaking it down you see that nothing positive comes from it at all. My argument is that Bernie is hiring workers but pays them less than $15/hr. He created a law that made him exempt from paying workers more. That is hypocrisy in that he wants to make a law that forces other places of employment to pay more, but not his due to a loophole of it being an internship. This is no different then tax loopholes he complains about. He is running a program that creates a jobs, but due to a loophole he can pay workers less. Now I will ask you, why did you volunteer for free? Because you wanted experience to move up. People are willing to work for a low wage at a place like Walmart because that allows them to gain experience and get a better job in the future. That is capitalism, people selling their labor for less to get a job and benefit. Someone volunteering at an internship is no different than someone wanting to work at a business for $5/hr. The problem is that the latter of the two is illegal due to min. wage laws. The former is legal due to a loophole. Now you say an internship is a training program. I agree to a point. When I first got my min. wage job in high school I had to go through training. Why can't a business pay their employees $4/hr during that training program and then afterwards pay them the min. wage? Yes min. wage jobs are temporary jobs, that is until you make the min. wage so high to where businesses refuse to hire new workers. That is called labor to labor substitution and hurts workers who are at a disadvantage, typically the young who are poor. Saying the average age of the min. wage worker is 35 years old is being deceptive. Around half of min. wage workers are 25 years old or less. Over 3% are over the age of 70. That skews the average age. 71% of min. wage workers are less than 30. That 35 years of age also comes from if the min. wage is $10.10. Only around 2% of min. wage workers work full time. Min. wage workers are part time workers either for 1. The young looking for their first job who currently have an empty resume 2. Someone working part time work for supplemental income 3. A retired person looking for busy work (hints those over 70 working) Min. wage workers are young, work part time, and temporary. Those are the facts.
    1
  46. +idwita "and the only reason you're getting real replies is people here think you deserve Bernie's presidency just like anyone else." So I deserve to live in an economy that would be under a depression? I deserve to live in an economy with little jobs, little wealth growth, and more federal government dependence? I personally want to educate Bernie supporters because in all honesty they are not too bright.
    1
  47. +Naga Sadow We still haven't recovered from the last recession. History has shown that when the economy is left alone by the federal government then recovery is quick. If Bernie comes in and tries to regulate the economy and spend then the economy will suffer leading to a depression. You claim republicans are known for one liners but as a moderate I realized that Bernie is the king of one liners (or more talking points, he rambles about nothing a lot of times). As a moderate I looked at both sides and realized that when broken down the ideas on the right actually work, and more importantly the policies on the left causes more problems. Bernie's policies simply won't work. You can give me any one of his economic policies and I can break them down showing how they won't work. That is why when he was asked simply how he expects to pay for his plan, or what the tax rate should be he can't answer. He himself realizes, he just doesn't want to admit it, or is in denial.
    1
  48. +Naga Sadow A wealth gap is good for a strong economy. A small wealth gap means little wealth. And happiness is completely subjective and can't be measured in any way. So asking who has the happiest residents is a dumb question. The US is arguably highly educated. We are near the top in productivity and we are number one in research and innovation in technology and healthcare. The US has arguably the best healthcare system in the world. If you remove murder and accidents the US is number 1 in life expectancy. Every country gets involve in foreign conflict. The US spends more money preventing violence then creating it. People fail to realize that but that is truth. Other countries require you to pay a fine if you don't vote. I hate to compare the US to other countries. The reason why is because the variables are to great. People who do compare the US to other countries end up cherry picking what they want to see and hear. When someone compares us to Denmark I say "oh, so you want mandatory military and no minimum wage then" which shows immediately how much they leave out.
    1
  49. +Naga Sadow The war and FDR's death is what ended the great depression. The largest injection of socialist ideas this country ever had is what turned a recession into a depression. Actually deregulation started after the war. Farmers we actually allowed to raise all their cattle and crops and not had it be killed off like it was under FDR. What also led to strong growth was the fact that every other country was rebuilding and we weren't after the war. But now they caught up we are starting to see these socialist programs cause the problems that basic economics said they would, along with what the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid. You need to study some history, and I don't even listen to talk radio.
    1
  50. +Naga Sadow I agree we should reform our laws to keep people out of prisons It is arguable that the US has the best healthcare system in the world, but as I said before I don't like to compare the US to other countries. Every healthcare ranking I have seen is cherry picked and broad. As I said, if you remove murder and accidents the US is number 1 in life expectancy. Our schools are fine. They can be improved upon but they are not "shitty". And we have a large military budget compared to other countries because we are so large to begin with. There are 3 countries that spend more than us if you look at percent of GDP. Wealth has to be created. The average homeowner has around 60% of their wealth tied into their home. Beyond owning a home the average person has little wealth because they don't desire to own and run a business. A large wealth gap means more wealth is being created thus more wealth is available for people. If you think you need the government to educate you then you are in a world of trouble.
    1