Bernie supporters...

[Corgi]

you're assuming my support for trump.

I don't support anyone who wants to spend my money for their needs. The only candidates that don't fit that bill are typically libertarian

No I just think that it's more deserving of an argument than this bullshit.

 

[The Necromancer]

I did I just think you lost sight of what this conversation was about.

You were never even a part of the conversation. And I was the one who created this conversation.

Don't bother replying to this. I won't read it. I'm done here.

 

[SolarSpider]

You must be registered for see links

^ Site explaining his plan

You must be registered for see links

^ Non-comedians explaining it


Video Response-
0:43 - He's given examples of how he plans on paying for everything he's talking about, including the fact that taxes will have to go up.
1:10 - First of all, there is no mathematical analysis that can take into account the entire economic state of the united states, so it really is an irrelevant piece of information that "all of them say no". But even assuming they did matter, I'll point out that countries that have programs like universal healthcare and universal education spend less on those things per capita than we do here in the states. You could make an argument about the quality of care, but you're focusing on the cost here, and so will I. Universal healthcare, in the real empirical world, is cheaper.
2:15 - No it wouldn't. 18T dollars is the total cost of all programs after implementation. What that number doesn't count is that amount of money we already spend on things like medicaid, medicare, infrastructure repair, social security, welfare and so on. All of these things would be obsolete or would be a part of that 18T. If you actually did any of the ****ing math instead of reading the cliff notes and making a knee jerk assessment, you're realize the plan could potentially save us money. The government already spends double the per capita amount on medical care as places like Canada. This isn't just the case in healthcare either. The only one that this might not be true on is education, but countries with higher rates of college graduation are very highly correlated to stronger economic growth and stability. Ask Germany.
2:55 - You just described the difference between debt and deficit and then promptly said that in addition to the deficit he'd add to the debt. What the **** was the point of criticizing people for mixing the two together and then immediately doing just that? Are you TRYING to confuse people? Be. ****ing. Consistent.
3:40 - We don't have to, you lazy ****. We did the math and we put it out there for you. YOU JUST ****ING ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FACT. You're not arguing that the NY times report was wrong, you're just butt hurt that Bernie himself hasn't officially said it. Except that he's linked the article on nearly every social media platform available. It's not his job to sit down with every god damn person and explain it to them. You can read the ****in' article yourself.
4:15 - 'That may be' How nice of you to acknowledge that it's possible, and then immediately jump to an extreme statement that is factually incorrect thanks to that hand 'more complex than it seems' argument.
4:40 - They've been asking from day one, and he's been answering from day one. ****ing hell, watch an interview ANY INTERVIEW.
5:00 - That graphic is misleading, as Social Security is separate from out national deficit. It's funded by a separate payroll tax and a trust fund. Healthcare spending is as high as it is because the government foots the bill win people who go into an emergency room visit for that liver problem they didn't get checked thanks to not having insurance turns from what should have been a diagnosis and some medication to a month stay int he hospital and weekly dialysis. Healthcare is cheaper if you don't avoid getting things checked early. Most people, when they can't afford healthcare, can't afford to go get something checked. And we spend more on our military than the other top 9 countries combined. That 17% (Which is again, inaccurate) is way too ****ing much for how IMMENSE our economy even is.
5:16 - We spend about 10 times more on corporate welfare than we do social welfare. Kind of a problem.
5:35 - Yeah, let's just avoid the REASON people dislike so much military spending, that doesn't support your argument, so **** it. Cutting the US military might make us less save, but there's a whole lot of the rest of the world that would be safer. Also, staw man. No one wants to cut ALL spending in the military.
6:20 - First, many of them didn't earn that, they inherited it. Second, even if we assumed all of them just worked hard and saved the most money, let's talk about proportionality. Someone who owns a fleet of delivery trucks, has 30 factories and can afford world class lawyers is going to get much, much, much more out of all the government spending we push out. Those trucks all run on government roads, all 30 factories are protected by the police from B&E and those lawyers are going to be a lot more effective if they end up in legal trouble. The richest people in our country benefit more from the protections the government affords compared to the little guy who might have 1 car, 1 house and has to rely on a public defender. And you're completely ignoring the possibility that some people might be poor because they just plain got screwed. Robbery, coercion and manipulation do occur. Taxation is not theft. It's written into our constitution, as is welfare. If you don't like that the US retains the right to take your money, go somewhere else. Also, some billionaires make literally millions of times more than their lowest paid employees. Are you REALLY trying to imply they work MILLIONS of times harder and are MILLIONS of times more intelligent about spending their money? A yacht really doesn't seem like a fiscally responsible purchase to me. Maybe, just maybe, people like to buy nice things when they are poor so their lives don't suck total ass in the process of rising in the ladder of "success", you know, if Joe millionaire decides to promote them. Something that is in fact entirely possible they might not EVER do.
7:00 - Another straw man, but again, the debt added would not be 18 trillion, so this is a moot point.
7:30 - Most small business owners are not taking home a half a million a year. These taxes only apply to the income of the CEO, not the corporation itself, so small businesses are unaffected. Unless, that is the CEO guts his company to make up for his lost earnings, which would be... stupid.
7:40 - He never talks about taxing the top 5% for a reason. Now you're getting into small business owner territory and you're talking about a much, much, much larger portion of the population. I should also point out the top 1%, at one point, was paying 90% and the economy went through one if its largest economy growths... ever. It ended with a whole new gambit of millionaires in power, so clearly, taxing that high (which, by the way, he's not pushing for) clearly didn't do much to hamper the potential for people to get really, really, really, really ****ing wealthy.
8:30 - Greece is in the financial situation it's in because of greedy banks pulling the same exact shit they pulled here. They made a **** load of bad loans, then borrowed from foreign banks to cover their loses and when they were going to have to default on the loans THEY took, they had to go to the Greek government to bail them out. Capitalism at its finest, gentlemen.
8:42 - Except in the case of the US where we had the highest growth rate in our history while our taxes were through the roof, or all those OECD countries who continue to grow even though they have high taxes. Maybe studies aren't as accurate as we'd like to believe? GASP, trying to encapsulate an entire economic position is hard to do in a 10 page paper, WOW BATMAN, SAY IT ISN'T SO. If what you were saying is true, the united states, over the last 40 years should have had an unparalleled economic growth, given that we've been lowering taxed the entire time. Funny how our growth rate hasn't changed much at all since 1940, and in fact has fallen dramatically in the last 8 years. Damn. You'd think the two weren't related at all. (Protip, they aren't.)

> I didn't actually write this, but I read it over and I agree with it. Then again you didn't make that video so, I say it's fair game.

/Thread

 

[CloyEscapade]

Deflection at its finest. Instead of arguing facts, try to discredit the source

That's not deflection... That's how life works. You ask a scientist about science, then you check their credentials

 

[slimreaper]

You must be registered for see links

^ Site explaining his plan

You must be registered for see links

^ Non-comedians explaining it


Video Response-
0:43 - He's given examples of how he plans on paying for everything he's talking about, including the fact that taxes will have to go up.
1:10 - First of all, there is no mathematical analysis that can take into account the entire economic state of the united states, so it really is an irrelevant piece of information that "all of them say no". But even assuming they did matter, I'll point out that countries that have programs like universal healthcare and universal education spend less on those things per capita than we do here in the states. You could make an argument about the quality of care, but you're focusing on the cost here, and so will I. Universal healthcare, in the real empirical world, is cheaper.
2:15 - No it wouldn't. 18T dollars is the total cost of all programs after implementation. What that number doesn't count is that amount of money we already spend on things like medicaid, medicare, infrastructure repair, social security, welfare and so on. All of these things would be obsolete or would be a part of that 18T. If you actually did any of the ****ing math instead of reading the cliff notes and making a knee jerk assessment, you're realize the plan could potentially save us money. The government already spends double the per capita amount on medical care as places like Canada. This isn't just the case in healthcare either. The only one that this might not be true on is education, but countries with higher rates of college graduation are very highly correlated to stronger economic growth and stability. Ask Germany.
2:55 - You just described the difference between debt and deficit and then promptly said that in addition to the deficit he'd add to the debt. What the **** was the point of criticizing people for mixing the two together and then immediately doing just that? Are you TRYING to confuse people? Be. ****ing. Consistent.
3:40 - We don't have to, you lazy ****. We did the math and we put it out there for you. YOU JUST ****ING ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FACT. You're not arguing that the NY times report was wrong, you're just butt hurt that Bernie himself hasn't officially said it. Except that he's linked the article on nearly every social media platform available. It's not his job to sit down with every god damn person and explain it to them. You can read the ****in' article yourself.
4:15 - 'That may be' How nice of you to acknowledge that it's possible, and then immediately jump to an extreme statement that is factually incorrect thanks to that hand 'more complex than it seems' argument.
4:40 - They've been asking from day one, and he's been answering from day one. ****ing hell, watch an interview ANY INTERVIEW.
5:00 - That graphic is misleading, as Social Security is separate from out national deficit. It's funded by a separate payroll tax and a trust fund. Healthcare spending is as high as it is because the government foots the bill win people who go into an emergency room visit for that liver problem they didn't get checked thanks to not having insurance turns from what should have been a diagnosis and some medication to a month stay int he hospital and weekly dialysis. Healthcare is cheaper if you don't avoid getting things checked early. Most people, when they can't afford healthcare, can't afford to go get something checked. And we spend more on our military than the other top 9 countries combined. That 17% (Which is again, inaccurate) is way too ****ing much for how IMMENSE our economy even is.
5:16 - We spend about 10 times more on corporate welfare than we do social welfare. Kind of a problem.
5:35 - Yeah, let's just avoid the REASON people dislike so much military spending, that doesn't support your argument, so **** it. Cutting the US military might make us less save, but there's a whole lot of the rest of the world that would be safer. Also, staw man. No one wants to cut ALL spending in the military.
6:20 - First, many of them didn't earn that, they inherited it. Second, even if we assumed all of them just worked hard and saved the most money, let's talk about proportionality. Someone who owns a fleet of delivery trucks, has 30 factories and can afford world class lawyers is going to get much, much, much more out of all the government spending we push out. Those trucks all run on government roads, all 30 factories are protected by the police from B&E and those lawyers are going to be a lot more effective if they end up in legal trouble. The richest people in our country benefit more from the protections the government affords compared to the little guy who might have 1 car, 1 house and has to rely on a public defender. And you're completely ignoring the possibility that some people might be poor because they just plain got screwed. Robbery, coercion and manipulation do occur. Taxation is not theft. It's written into our constitution, as is welfare. If you don't like that the US retains the right to take your money, go somewhere else. Also, some billionaires make literally millions of times more than their lowest paid employees. Are you REALLY trying to imply they work MILLIONS of times harder and are MILLIONS of times more intelligent about spending their money? A yacht really doesn't seem like a fiscally responsible purchase to me. Maybe, just maybe, people like to buy nice things when they are poor so their lives don't suck total ass in the process of rising in the ladder of "success", you know, if Joe millionaire decides to promote them. Something that is in fact entirely possible they might not EVER do.
7:00 - Another straw man, but again, the debt added would not be 18 trillion, so this is a moot point.
7:30 - Most small business owners are not taking home a half a million a year. These taxes only apply to the income of the CEO, not the corporation itself, so small businesses are unaffected. Unless, that is the CEO guts his company to make up for his lost earnings, which would be... stupid.
7:40 - He never talks about taxing the top 5% for a reason. Now you're getting into small business owner territory and you're talking about a much, much, much larger portion of the population. I should also point out the top 1%, at one point, was paying 90% and the economy went through one if its largest economy growths... ever. It ended with a whole new gambit of millionaires in power, so clearly, taxing that high (which, by the way, he's not pushing for) clearly didn't do much to hamper the potential for people to get really, really, really, really ****ing wealthy.
8:30 - Greece is in the financial situation it's in because of greedy banks pulling the same exact shit they pulled here. They made a **** load of bad loans, then borrowed from foreign banks to cover their loses and when they were going to have to default on the loans THEY took, they had to go to the Greek government to bail them out. Capitalism at its finest, gentlemen.
8:42 - Except in the case of the US where we had the highest growth rate in our history while our taxes were through the roof, or all those OECD countries who continue to grow even though they have high taxes. Maybe studies aren't as accurate as we'd like to believe? GASP, trying to encapsulate an entire economic position is hard to do in a 10 page paper, WOW BATMAN, SAY IT ISN'T SO. If what you were saying is true, the united states, over the last 40 years should have had an unparalleled economic growth, given that we've been lowering taxed the entire time. Funny how our growth rate hasn't changed much at all since 1940, and in fact has fallen dramatically in the last 8 years. Damn. You'd think the two weren't related at all. (Protip, they aren't.)

> I didn't actually write this, but I read it over and I agree with it. Then again you didn't make that video so, I say it's fair game.

/Thread

firstly in the video they try to convince me ill save money with bernie's plan. This is false just for me. I pay 3600$ a year for medical insurance. Under bernie's plan I'd be paying closer to 4500$ a year for insurance. so **** that

second calling the young turks "not comedians" doesn't mean they are immune from being shit on by a "comedian"

[video=youtube;wZrcR3guGG0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZrcR3guGG0[/video]

utterly pooped on

I'm not writing an essay for this. Just read the counters on the video if you want counters to this. I might get around to it in a few days

 

[Hawker]

firstly in the video they try to convince me ill save money with bernie's plan. This is false just for me. I pay 3600$ a year for medical insurance. Under bernie's plan I'd be paying closer to 4500$ a year for insurance. so **** that

second calling the young turks "not comedians" doesn't mean they are immune from being shit on by a "comedian"

[video=youtube;wZrcR3guGG0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZrcR3guGG0[/video]

utterly pooped on

I'm not writing an essay for this. Just read the counters on the video if you want counters to this. I might get around to it in a few days

You got soloed already. Why is this thread open anymore

 

[SolarSpider]

firstly in the video they try to convince me ill save money with bernie's plan. This is false just for me. I pay 3600$ a year for medical insurance. Under bernie's plan I'd be paying closer to 4500$ a year for insurance. so **** that

second calling the young turks "not comedians" doesn't mean they are immune from being shit on by a "comedian"

[video=youtube;wZrcR3guGG0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZrcR3guGG0[/video]

utterly pooped on

I'm not writing an essay for this. Just read the counters on the video if you want counters to this. I might get around to it in a few days

All I read from this was "I lost, and don't want to accept it". Also, the snarky comment "Just read the counters on the video if you want counters to this." I find this comment hilarious, considering the video you posted is an argument itself (very flawed argument) that you coat-tailed on this entire thread. You are seriously the most contradictory person I think I have ever had the displeasure of knowing. How are you going to discredit a rebuttal I agreed with, to the shitty video you posted, then act as though my response was irrelevant because I didn't want to take the effort to type it myself, when you didn't make the video! Ugh...

I can say I have come to understand one thing about you. ANY.. AND I MEAN ANYTHING.. that sides with your viewpoint, be it by some 3 views you-tube channel or a comedian who halfway researches, you will believe it to the end of time because you're so blinded by your own bias, you completely forget to use logical reasoning. As I have said before, TYT has made mistakes, they are human, and they will admit and correct themselves. However, to discredit someone who has made a mistake, is to discredit everyone including yourself, thus no information is valid. I don't know what TYT did your ruffle your feathers, but you are one cawing crow.

Back to the health care argument. The average family spends X amount on health care a year, and just because you aren't currently spending X amount on health care, doesn't mean that you wont be in five years. For all you know, you could have lymphoma and may need serious medical attention until the day you die. On the off chance you are completely healthy till you just suddenly die one day, billions of lives would be saved by this plan, likely including people you care about.

 

[slimreaper]

All I read from this was "I lost, and don't want to accept it". Also, the snarky comment "Just read the counters on the video if you want counters to this." I find this comment hilarious, considering the video you posted is an argument itself (very flawed argument) that you coat-tailed on this entire thread. You are seriously the most contradictory person I think I have ever had the displeasure of knowing. How are you going to discredit a rebuttal I agreed with, to the shitty video you posted, then act as though my response was irrelevant because I didn't want to take the effort to type it myself, when you didn't make the video! Ugh...

I can say I have come to understand one thing about you. ANY.. AND I MEAN ANYTHING.. that sides with your viewpoint, be it by some 3 views you-tube channel or a comedian who halfway researches, you will believe it to the end of time because you're so blinded by your own bias, you completely forget to use logical reasoning. As I have said before, TYT has made mistakes, they are human, and they will admit and correct themselves. However, to discredit someone who has made a mistake, is to discredit everyone including yourself, thus no information is valid. I don't know what TYT did your ruffle your feathers, but you are one cawing crow.

Back to the health care argument. The average family spends X amount on health care a year, and just because you aren't currently spending X amount on health care, doesn't mean that you wont be in five years. For all you know, you could have lymphoma and may need serious medical attention until the day you die. On the off chance you are completely healthy till you just suddenly die one day, billions of lives would be saved by this plan, likely including people you care about.

Oh now you want to talk. earlier it wasn't enough for you.

I never said I didn't accept the argument you posted, just I'm not gonna write an essay that would be required to counter it point by point. If you want to call that a win then fine.


And this is for the dude talking about the 1940's tax rate

You must be registered for see links

 

[Sasuke tyeezy]

[video=youtube;e-8spGrLrUM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-8spGrLrUM[/video]


Here ya go


and here are his sources for the sticklers who trust everything Bernie says but think everything against him is propaganda(hypocrites if you will)

You must be registered for see links

It isn't feasible


I also have another question for you...

Liberal job creation is basically creating government jobs via road construction, restoration, etc...


Now government workers get great benefits and great retirement packages. Where does them money for their retirement come from? The people. So this job creation that liberals tout, actually costs us down the road, no one care to look that far

Let me ask you a question regarding previous run-ins with you…

Do you support Donald J Trump?

 

[slimreaper]

Let me ask you a question regarding previous run-ins with you…

Do you support Donald J Trump?

nah. Ima libertarian

 

[Edogawa]

Socialist programmes have proven many times to be destructible to the economy. Although I'm for free healthcare and free education, but I'm against massive social security spending.

 

[Jack Spicer]

The only #Burnie 4 me is

You must be registered for see images

 

[slimreaper]

You must be registered for see links

^ Site explaining his plan

You must be registered for see links

^ Non-comedians explaining it


Video Response-
0:43 - He's given examples of how he plans on paying for everything he's talking about, including the fact that taxes will have to go up.
1:10 - First of all, there is no mathematical analysis that can take into account the entire economic state of the united states, so it really is an irrelevant piece of information that "all of them say no". But even assuming they did matter, I'll point out that countries that have programs like universal healthcare and universal education spend less on those things per capita than we do here in the states. You could make an argument about the quality of care, but you're focusing on the cost here, and so will I. Universal healthcare, in the real empirical world, is cheaper.
2:15 - No it wouldn't. 18T dollars is the total cost of all programs after implementation. What that number doesn't count is that amount of money we already spend on things like medicaid, medicare, infrastructure repair, social security, welfare and so on. All of these things would be obsolete or would be a part of that 18T. If you actually did any of the ****ing math instead of reading the cliff notes and making a knee jerk assessment, you're realize the plan could potentially save us money. The government already spends double the per capita amount on medical care as places like Canada. This isn't just the case in healthcare either. The only one that this might not be true on is education, but countries with higher rates of college graduation are very highly correlated to stronger economic growth and stability. Ask Germany.
2:55 - You just described the difference between debt and deficit and then promptly said that in addition to the deficit he'd add to the debt. What the **** was the point of criticizing people for mixing the two together and then immediately doing just that? Are you TRYING to confuse people? Be. ****ing. Consistent.
3:40 - We don't have to, you lazy ****. We did the math and we put it out there for you. YOU JUST ****ING ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FACT. You're not arguing that the NY times report was wrong, you're just butt hurt that Bernie himself hasn't officially said it. Except that he's linked the article on nearly every social media platform available. It's not his job to sit down with every god damn person and explain it to them. You can read the ****in' article yourself.
4:15 - 'That may be' How nice of you to acknowledge that it's possible, and then immediately jump to an extreme statement that is factually incorrect thanks to that hand 'more complex than it seems' argument.
4:40 - They've been asking from day one, and he's been answering from day one. ****ing hell, watch an interview ANY INTERVIEW.
5:00 - That graphic is misleading, as Social Security is separate from out national deficit. It's funded by a separate payroll tax and a trust fund. Healthcare spending is as high as it is because the government foots the bill win people who go into an emergency room visit for that liver problem they didn't get checked thanks to not having insurance turns from what should have been a diagnosis and some medication to a month stay int he hospital and weekly dialysis. Healthcare is cheaper if you don't avoid getting things checked early. Most people, when they can't afford healthcare, can't afford to go get something checked. And we spend more on our military than the other top 9 countries combined. That 17% (Which is again, inaccurate) is way too ****ing much for how IMMENSE our economy even is.
5:16 - We spend about 10 times more on corporate welfare than we do social welfare. Kind of a problem.
5:35 - Yeah, let's just avoid the REASON people dislike so much military spending, that doesn't support your argument, so **** it. Cutting the US military might make us less save, but there's a whole lot of the rest of the world that would be safer. Also, staw man. No one wants to cut ALL spending in the military.
6:20 - First, many of them didn't earn that, they inherited it. Second, even if we assumed all of them just worked hard and saved the most money, let's talk about proportionality. Someone who owns a fleet of delivery trucks, has 30 factories and can afford world class lawyers is going to get much, much, much more out of all the government spending we push out. Those trucks all run on government roads, all 30 factories are protected by the police from B&E and those lawyers are going to be a lot more effective if they end up in legal trouble. The richest people in our country benefit more from the protections the government affords compared to the little guy who might have 1 car, 1 house and has to rely on a public defender. And you're completely ignoring the possibility that some people might be poor because they just plain got screwed. Robbery, coercion and manipulation do occur. Taxation is not theft. It's written into our constitution, as is welfare. If you don't like that the US retains the right to take your money, go somewhere else. Also, some billionaires make literally millions of times more than their lowest paid employees. Are you REALLY trying to imply they work MILLIONS of times harder and are MILLIONS of times more intelligent about spending their money? A yacht really doesn't seem like a fiscally responsible purchase to me. Maybe, just maybe, people like to buy nice things when they are poor so their lives don't suck total ass in the process of rising in the ladder of "success", you know, if Joe millionaire decides to promote them. Something that is in fact entirely possible they might not EVER do.
7:00 - Another straw man, but again, the debt added would not be 18 trillion, so this is a moot point.
7:30 - Most small business owners are not taking home a half a million a year. These taxes only apply to the income of the CEO, not the corporation itself, so small businesses are unaffected. Unless, that is the CEO guts his company to make up for his lost earnings, which would be... stupid.
7:40 - He never talks about taxing the top 5% for a reason. Now you're getting into small business owner territory and you're talking about a much, much, much larger portion of the population. I should also point out the top 1%, at one point, was paying 90% and the economy went through one if its largest economy growths... ever. It ended with a whole new gambit of millionaires in power, so clearly, taxing that high (which, by the way, he's not pushing for) clearly didn't do much to hamper the potential for people to get really, really, really, really ****ing wealthy.
8:30 - Greece is in the financial situation it's in because of greedy banks pulling the same exact shit they pulled here. They made a **** load of bad loans, then borrowed from foreign banks to cover their loses and when they were going to have to default on the loans THEY took, they had to go to the Greek government to bail them out. Capitalism at its finest, gentlemen.
8:42 - Except in the case of the US where we had the highest growth rate in our history while our taxes were through the roof, or all those OECD countries who continue to grow even though they have high taxes. Maybe studies aren't as accurate as we'd like to believe? GASP, trying to encapsulate an entire economic position is hard to do in a 10 page paper, WOW BATMAN, SAY IT ISN'T SO. If what you were saying is true, the united states, over the last 40 years should have had an unparalleled economic growth, given that we've been lowering taxed the entire time. Funny how our growth rate hasn't changed much at all since 1940, and in fact has fallen dramatically in the last 8 years. Damn. You'd think the two weren't related at all. (Protip, they aren't.)

> I didn't actually write this, but I read it over and I agree with it. Then again you didn't make that video so, I say it's fair game.

/Thread

0:43- He's given vague plans at best. Example for his infrastructure plan he says will cost 1 trillion. His payment plan would only generate 100 billion. The rest will supposedly be made up by unspecified " other loopholes."

1:10- Just mad there's an academic consensus that he disagree's with. No real substance here

2:15- Notice in the attempt to get us to believe Bernie is going to actually lessen government spending he makes the argument that all of it is already being spent(true but not accurate). Show me where in that 18t we're currently spending is the free college located on the budget... While we're talking about this why does he include social security in this cost here but not later on? Either way social security should be included because it's not just as simple as you get out what you pay in therefore it's a form of government spending.

2:55-pointless to point out


3:40- tries to get me to believe that the numbers add up to us saving money yet doesn't explain why we need 8.4% in new taxes for the middle class to pay for something that is supposedly going to save us money

4:15- No explanation until the poster gives an explanation as to the point of this argument. So vague, no real argument made.

5:00- already pointed out the hypocrisy of this social security argument. as for the healthcare savings lets say we used exactly the same system as canada... we'd save around 6% of the gdp or 229 Billon dollars. Now obviouslythe spending is going to be infinitely higher for a country with over ten times the population size. So that savings is very generous at best. Even if he does save the mythical 229 billion, his very first proposal is still 900 billion short in actual proposed revenue so lets say its only 671 billion in new taxes( not including the retirement plans for the but load of new government workers that isn't calculated into the government spending) to pay for just his infrastructure plan. That's not including his free college plan

5:16-dumb argument to make against a libertarian. Let the corporations fail, that's true capitalism. Corporate welfare is directly a product of Obama and the rich. Let them fail

5:35- opinionated liberal argument that isn't really relevant. Making the rest of the world safer if liberal bullshit. Protect yourself

6:20- he'll never convince me it's morally right to forcefully take from someone else to pay for another's needs. not happening

7:30- totally untrue 8.4% tax increase is happening to everyone so suggesting you're safe if you make under 500,000 is ridiculous

7:40- already argued no they weren't paying 90%

You must be registered for see links

8:30- this is complete bullshit. calling it a failure of capitalism when it's manipulated by crony liberals is ridiculous.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

It is precisely because they went away from capitalism that they failed

8:42- again proven false. But while he wants to blame capitalism for stagnant american growth lets show why we aren't a capitalist nation at all
"A government that taxes 40 percent or more of our income, that controls our medical care, that regulates business so thoroughly that every firm large enough to afford it has a department of “compliance,” a government that controls the money supply, sets bank reserve-ratios, regulates stock offerings, margin-ratios, home construction, determines what pharmaceuticals and medical innovations can be sold, operates schools and universities, runs the passenger rail system, forbids “offensive” speech, increasingly intervenes in diet, subsidizes agriculture and “green” businesses, imposes tariffs, decides which businesses may merge, and, we have just learned, spies on its own citizens–is not a government remotely consistent with capitalism."


This dude is clueless