America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by tamapatom. 179 replies replies.
4 Pages1234>
What exactly is Bernie's cost for all this free stuff?
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
frankie_ace Offline
#1 Posted: Mon, Oct 26 2015, 11:57 PM EST
Joined: 06-15-2012
Posts: 2
I stumbled upon a rather funny WSJ meme of the cost of Bernie's cause for everything free. I was stunned when watching the debate, and also appalled by all the cheers and whistles heard, when Bernie was pulling an Oprah-like spree. According to the WSJ, and those guys and gals know about money, Bernie's bill would cost us $18 trillion.

Key costs for everything free are:

Medicare: $15 trillion
Retirement: $1.2 trillion
Infrastructure: $1 trillion
College (cause education is a right and NOT a privilege): $725 billion
Family leave: $319 billion
Pension: $29 billion
Jobs programs: $5.5 billion

The link for the article is here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511

I think that Bernie forgets that we're in pretty serious debt as a nation.

Side note: I also think...err...know that Keynesian economics never works -- and WILL NEVER work. For those that are going to argue that it helped bring us out of the depression, please read up on your history a little more.

What are your thoughts on Bernie's initiative? What are your thoughts on Bernie Sanders, if you even bother to give him any thought at all?

- frankie_ace
ZRX1200 Offline
#2 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 12:15 AM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,662
He's more honest than Hilldog.

But his voice isn't as sexy as hers.

Do you own a Justin Bieber poster?
tonygraz Offline
#3 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 7:40 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
Troll alert - first post in politics and a stupid and misleading one. No mention of the plan to pay for most of those things and no wars is a good start along with raising taxes on the rich.
Do you have one of those "Make America Great Again" hats that are made in China ?
DrafterX Offline
#4 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 7:47 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
Troll alert..?? Really..?? just cause he's against Communism..?? Huh
TMCTLT Offline
#5 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 8:18 AM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
DrafterX wrote:
Troll alert..?? Really..?? just cause he's against Communism..?? Huh




Nobody KNOWS trolls like our boy Tony.....after all ones been looking back @ him for a very long time every morning in the mirror!!!!! I'm just waiting for him to openly admit that He IS on board for our first known Soc /Comm leader in U.S. history. ( Well after Barry)
Speyside Offline
#6 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 8:28 AM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I think Bernie would make a fine president!






Say in Pakistan or Albania.
frankie_ace Offline
#7 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 9:44 AM EST
Joined: 06-15-2012
Posts: 2
tonygraz wrote:
Troll alert - first post in politics and a stupid and misleading one. No mention of the plan to pay for most of those things and no wars is a good start along with raising taxes on the rich.
Do you have one of those "Make America Great Again" hats that are made in China ?


Keep sipping the Sanders Kool-Aid, brother.

Final thought on Bernie:

He needs to understand the that a need is not a right; rights are not goods and service -- they are a set of MORAL principles that are designed to protect the moral actions of an individual from the interference by society.

Just because you need something doesn't mean you're entitled to it. Because if you are given what you haven't earned, it means someone else has been deprived of a part of the fruits of their labor to pay for that good or service being offered -- and that is a form of slavery.

Healthcare, for example, does the supposedly poor person care about how hard the person works to pay for it?

If you're truly concerned about the plight of the poor YOU should be allowed to allot whatever portion of your income to VOLUNTARILY pay for whatever services you wish to supply OR support.

The best way to create faction, division and resentment in any society is to create an atmosphere where one group of the populace is forced to provide the material support for another, and Bernie (Hillary any liberal progressive or socialist) is doing this to us.

P.S. I don't support Trunp, but I do support his notion of making America great again. If you want to know who I'm a supporter of, it's Ted Cruz.
banderl Offline
#8 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 10:00 AM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
The Canadian, Ted Cruz?
DrafterX Offline
#9 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 10:46 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
I'd vote for Penelope... Beer
TMCTLT Offline
#10 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 10:53 AM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
banderl wrote:
The Canadian, Ted Cruz?




Sure...why not we're just wrapping up with a Kenyan
rfenst Offline
#11 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 11:05 AM EST
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,436
Don't mind Bernie. he's whacko.
frankj1 Offline
#12 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 12:27 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
DrafterX wrote:
I'd vote for Penelope... Beer

I saw her boobs once.
well, maybe more than once.
DrafterX Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 12:32 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
Laugh
DrMaddVibe Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 2:14 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,556
frankie_ace wrote:
Keep sipping the Sanders Kool-Aid, brother.

Final thought on Bernie:

He needs to understand the that a need is not a right; rights are not goods and service -- they are a set of MORAL principles that are designed to protect the moral actions of an individual from the interference by society.

Just because you need something doesn't mean you're entitled to it. Because if you are given what you haven't earned, it means someone else has been deprived of a part of the fruits of their labor to pay for that good or service being offered -- and that is a form of slavery.

Healthcare, for example, does the supposedly poor person care about how hard the person works to pay for it?

If you're truly concerned about the plight of the poor YOU should be allowed to allot whatever portion of your income to VOLUNTARILY pay for whatever services you wish to supply OR support.

The best way to create faction, division and resentment in any society is to create an atmosphere where one group of the populace is forced to provide the material support for another, and Bernie (Hillary any liberal progressive or socialist) is doing this to us.

P.S. I don't support Trunp, but I do support his notion of making America great again. If you want to know who I'm a supporter of, it's Ted Cruz.



STFU Stroker Ace
banderl Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 2:25 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
DrMaddVibe wrote:
STFU Stroker Ace



LOL
teddyballgame Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 3:58 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
frankie_ace wrote:


P.S. I don't support Trunp, but I do support his notion of making America great again. If you want to know who I'm a supporter of, it's Ted Cruz.



Amen brother, Amen. Likes me some Cruz and some Carson. Cruz/Carson Carson/Cruz ticket would be nice.
tonygraz Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Oct 27 2015, 6:56 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
Yeah, like the bigot party would go for that.
DrafterX Offline
#18 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 7:18 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
There's a bigot party..?? Huh
gummy jones Offline
#19 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 8:07 AM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
who doesnt love free stuff!?!

as long as someone else is paying my xboxlive account and my copay on the percocet is under $5 im a happy camper!!!
gummy jones Offline
#20 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 8:07 AM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
DrafterX wrote:
There's a bigot party..?? Huh


maybe the one that is only running rich old white folks?
tonygraz Offline
#21 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 9:28 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
DrafterX wrote:
There's a bigot party..?? Huh


I'm surprised you didn't get an invitation.Herfing
DrafterX Offline
#22 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 9:29 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
OhMyGod
TMCTLT Offline
#23 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 9:30 AM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
tonygraz wrote:
I'm surprised you didn't get an invitation.Herfing




I'm SHOCKED your not the Host....
tonygraz Offline
#24 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 9:38 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
Been there , huh !
teddyballgame Offline
#25 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 11:02 AM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
Wow, for a "bigot party".. how could Ben Carson be even in the running? Cruz is always up there too and he ain't even "all white."

tony, your party is the party of segregation and slavery. Embrace that fact, you need to own it. Then you can carry on embracing that battle axe of evil, Hillary.

Pucker up buttercup!
Covfireman Offline
#26 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 11:29 AM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
Both parties are using the tactic of divide and conquer. You can read the post here and see how successful they are . If you don't believe both parties aren't owned by corporate America you probably can't read.
MACS Offline
#27 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 4:38 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,888
DrafterX wrote:
There's a bigot party..?? Huh


The Democrats. Look at history, bro...
tonygraz Offline
#28 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 4:50 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
The repubs always try to throw a token in the mix, just so they can say - see we are not bigoted. When did they ever run a non-white male or female for president. I wonder if they ever would.
banderl Offline
#29 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 5:03 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
tonygraz wrote:
The repubs always try to throw a token in the mix, just so they can say - see we are not bigoted. When did they ever run a non-white male or female for president. I wonder if they ever would.



I don't know, wasn't Nancy Raygun running the country for 6 or 7 years?
teddyballgame Offline
#30 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 5:48 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tonygraz wrote:
The repubs always try to throw a token in the mix, just so they can say - see we are not bigoted. When did they ever run a non-white male or female for president. I wonder if they ever would.



Your beloved democrats have never run a female for president. Also, Obama was the ONLY black man (although he is half white) to run for Pres in your party. Your statements are as foolish as you are.

How old and white are the candidates for your party's nomination?
The Repubs have a Cuban up there, a black guy, a woman, younger people, older people.


Was Clarence Thomas a token?
Or just not the "right type" of black man for your tastes?

Why does skin color matter so much to you and not the content of one's character?
You are harboring some deep seeded shame because you hail from the party of racism, the KKK, slavery and segregation.
tonygraz Offline
#31 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 6:43 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
teddyballgame wrote:
Your beloved democrats have never run a female for president. Also, Obama was the ONLY black man (although he is half white) to run for Pres in your party. Your statements are as foolish as you are.

How old and white are the candidates for your party's nomination?
The Repubs have a Cuban up there, a black guy, a woman, younger people, older people.


Was Clarence Thomas a token?
Or just not the "right type" of black man for your tastes?

Why does skin color matter so much to you and not the content of one's character?
You are harboring some deep seeded shame because you hail from the party of racism, the KKK, slavery and segregation.



You really are a wacko ! Clarence Thomas was a disgrace. The current republican clown car is a disgrace, no matter how many tokens are involved. None of them are worthy to be a candidate. The current president is a democrat and he is black. The r-pubs are the party of choice for racists and bigots and that includes you.
teddyballgame Offline
#32 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 8:01 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tony tony tony,

Truth hurts you, doesn't it?

Sure, not as much as sticking your face in a fan..but it hurts all the same.

You had to be the worst Republican (yeah right!) in the history of Republicans.

Liberals resort to calling racism when they have nothing.. and you sir, have nothing.
ZRX1200 Offline
#33 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 8:21 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,662
Pretty sad when Trolly gets trolled.
frankj1 Offline
#34 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 8:24 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
all political parties have shifted and changed over a couple of centuries. Believe it or not, many of the "racist" dems alluded to in this thread were Southerners many decades ago.

And many of them were successfully recruited by Jesse Helms (one of your ultraconservative idols I assume, teddy?) to leave the "too liberal Democrat Party" and join the GOP in defeating Civil Rights for Negroes.
ZRX1200 Offline
#35 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 8:32 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,662
A lot of "ultra conservatives" didn't support the civil rights act and not because of the "negros".
frankj1 Offline
#36 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 8:40 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
ZRX1200 wrote:
A lot of "ultra conservatives" didn't support the civil rights act and not because of the "negros".

I like the word though.
frankj1 Offline
#37 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:00 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
ZRX1200 wrote:
A lot of "ultra conservatives" didn't support the civil rights act and not because of the "negros".

OK, seriously, just trying to knock teddy off his high horse of moral superiority. It is the most unattractive quality a person can have.

as you say, lots of his heroes did not support civil rights, and some were recruited Democrats called to the cause by Helms and the rest of his Republican ilk. Not all on either side were because of negroes...but a whole lot simply did believe in racism. Not even debatable.

The point though is that it is idiotic to cherry pick through history and come up with "facts" like the Dems own segregation etc. So many changes over the decades that many on each side, if born today, would be on the opposite side now.

I'm not even a registered Democrat!
tonygraz Offline
#38 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:17 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
Not party registered here either. Eisenhower would not recognize today's republican party.
DrafterX Offline
#39 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:23 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
Speculation... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#40 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:23 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,252
^
agreed. But let's not mistake my including teddy's morally superior gang with letting Dems off the hook though.
No one owns purity, and no one owns blame.

agreed meant for tony, somehow you snuck in Drafter.
DrafterX Offline
#41 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:29 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,588
Laugh
Brewha Offline
#42 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 10:35 AM EST
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,202
Covfireman wrote:
Both parties are using the tactic of divide and conquer. You can read the post here and see how successful they are . If you don't believe both parties aren't owned by corporate America you probably can't read.

+1

"It is not the job of the president to wield power.
It is the job of the president to draw attention away from those who do."
teddyballgame Offline
#43 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 12:32 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
ZRX1200 wrote:
A lot of "ultra conservatives" didn't support the civil rights act and not because of the "negros".



The republicans were over 80% in support of the civil rights act and the democrats were just over 60%.

So were the "ultra conservatives" in the democratic party? or was that a bunch of racists, like AlGore's father who participated in a filibuster against the bill?

Just need some clarification as I am confused about the "logic."
Covfireman Offline
#44 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 2:02 PM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
teddyballgame wrote:

Just need some clarification as I am confused about any "logic."





The first true statement you've made on here
teddyballgame Offline
#45 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 3:16 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
I'd take you more seriously if you took off your tin hat
tonygraz Offline
#46 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 6:15 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,320
Of course there were ultra conservatives in the democratic party back then. There were even some moderate republicans. Things have changed, downhill for pubs, forward for dems.
teddyballgame Offline
#47 Posted: Fri, Oct 30 2015, 10:55 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
and I repeat:

"The republicans were over 80% in support of the civil rights act and the democrats were just over 60%."

The racist, kkk, segregationist party is the democrat party..

They own it. It is historical fact.

ban "Redskins?"

You should be screaming to ban the name "Democrat party" with all the horror they put blacks through.

and then lets not forget FDR and his internment camps, How Constitutional was that?
Covfireman Offline
#48 Posted: Sat, Oct 31 2015, 12:42 AM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
Teddyballgag I believe the tin hat is yours because you have no heart . Are you for anything? Or do you just want to destroy everything?
cigarlover22 Offline
#49 Posted: Sat, Oct 31 2015, 12:52 AM EST
Joined: 06-29-2015
Posts: 490
I love these political threads. They are always so friendly :)
teddyballgame Offline
#50 Posted: Sat, Oct 31 2015, 2:18 AM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
I don't understand why some are so hell bent on big government. Throughout the history of man, the individual has been subjugated to those in power.
For thousands of years under kings, tyrants, dictators, czars, emperors.
Why are we trying to turn the ship back to tyranny? That is not progress.
The U.S. broke the mold. The Framers knew all about tyranny in its many forms.
They could have broke from the crown and ruled as all men before them had, but they did not.
As imperfect as they were, they set forth to limit the propensity of man or a handful of men to rule and gain power over others.

I'm for that America- not for the government, but for what the founding documents pointed to.

I'm for LIMITED government.

I'm for the Constitution and the limits it places on a powerful centralized government.

I am for the individual and liberty and freedom.

I'm for our brave soldiers in the military.

and I believe in love,
I believe in babies,
I believe in Mom and Dad
and I believe in you
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages1234>
Back to Top