Getting Berned

Bernie Sanders has convinced a large portion of the Democrat electorate that he will right the economic injustices in our nation. Socialism is a lie, and a proven failure. It doesn’t encourage entrepreneurs, innovators and those who create wealth. It encourages the poor to rely on a huge government to take care of them, instead of creating jobs so they can earn money. Socialism is a half-step to Communism. The result is not prosperity for more people, but widespread poverty and centralized control over every area of people’s lives. Take a close look at the failed USSR and, more recently, Venezuela. There are eery similarities between the promises Lenin made to Russia in the early 20th century and those being made by Bernie to packed auditoriums in the USA currently.

If you would like a comparison that’s closer to home, how about California vs Texas. Democrat controlled socialism vs. sensible conservatism. California’s high taxation and widespread social programs make it far closer to Bernie’s vision for America. California’s state income tax is to 13% for highest incomes, and around 8% for middle incomes, yet they still have a 15.1 billion dollar budget deficit. State regulation on business is strict and taxation is high. Texas has no state income tax, and encourages business. Texas has an 11-18 billion dollar budget surplus. Perhaps you can understand why Toyota moved its headquarters here, and why more businesses are coming. 11,000 people per month are moving to Texas. Tell me again how Bernie Sanders’ socialism is going to help America? The proposals he has endorsed would make the US more like California, not Texas. We don’t need to get Berned…

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Getting Berned

  1. Jeremy

    What if the free handout wasn’t money to the poor, but free college? Then it wouldn’t be totally free and it’d require the recipients to show up and do the work. Then the poor could be boosted in a way that doesn’t breed dependence.

    Also what do we think about the struggles of small business in so far as big business putting them out? Wouldn’t it be nice if we had more Mom&Pop shops? Those create jobs too. And if we have more college educated, more small business will probably follow. And jobs. Decent logic there? Do we need the incentive of brings billionaire to work for ourselves (no boss!) and earn six figures? I personally don’t. I think there are plenty of incentives without depending on feudal lords (billionaires).

    Do we need “socialism” to move in these directions, like many successful countries have? Nope.

    Socialism is just a word that makes us think in black&white narrow terms, rather than seeing it as a fluid gradient. Is Medicare a socialistic program? Yes, by definition it is. Thus it must be bad. Further back in the gradient is “public” schools. Where do we draw the line where this horrendous notion of socialism begins? Is it terms like these that is the true partisan divisiveness in our country? The hate it breeds?

    I want to help the poor. The underdog and the needy were who Christ called us to help. But we don’t want dependence on handouts. True!

    So what’s an in between?? Free college sounds like a start. That’s the Bern.

    1. deorl Post author

      He’s promising more than free college. He wants to raise taxes significantly. He has a history of support for classic socialism/communism, which is why this is not just a word. He has the same goals and seeks to grow the government even more to achieve them. I keep hearing the same arguments about medicare and social security, as well as roads and many other items. However, when you consider that Social Security is close to insolvency, and it is technically a savings program managed by the government, consider that the US is trillions of dollars in debt, and consider that Bernie was on the oversight committee for the disastrous VA, which is socialized medicine, I think his voters are getting Berned. Taking care of the poor is a good idea. There are better ways to do so than classic socialism. Start the WPA once again and put everyone to work. If someone doesn’t work, they don’t get paid. Make the qualification for getting disability more strict and have better oversight. I didn’t have parents to get me through college. I did it on my own. Had to take out loans, get grants, scholarships and other financial aid, but it wasn’t free. We don’t need bigger government or more free anything. We need everyone to have real opportunities to work and earn. THAT is America.

      1. Jeremy

        Well then let’s get away from classical socialism. I’m all for it. Seriously. However, free market led us to the 2007 crash and all the bail outs. Doesn’t it take some government to regulate it? Founding fathers didn’t want to allow monopolies, which requires regulations. So regulation also isn’t blak&white. Should most of the wealth be tied up in a few who can buy the media (brainwashing them by fear to support the billionaires), and buy Washington? Do we need campaign reform? How do we help the poor without a government?

        Basically, do we continue to support greed in this country because we’re scared of government? It seems that this big govt vs big business (the Left and the Right) has really collided and is now almost the same thing, in that big business controls government (to a high degree) and the only answer is to reform the govt to not allow big business to control it (I.e. Defend true democracy).

        I have to admit that as long as the checks and balances are in place and the constitution still exists, I’m not scared of govt doing certain things. It can shrink in some ways and grow in others. But what we want is for the people to say where it shrinks and where it grows, not the greediest upper eschelon. I’m not afraid we’ll ever slip into communism. That would take a total trashing of the constitution. And all presidents are only in office for 4-8 years. It’s pliable. Big money does want us to be scared of this slippery slope into communism, though. And they also don’t want us to learn about Canada and New Zealand and many others. Isolation helps their cause.

        But I do have a heart for those whose socioeconomic circumstances make it hard financially and psychologically to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Christ is the reason for my compassion and lack of “suck it up, I can do it then you can do it” attitude.

      2. deorl Post author

        I do not subscribe to unbridled free market for the same reason I reject socialism: a cabal gains power over peoples’ lives. That cabal may be big business or big government, but people must be given both the freedom and required to be responsible for their own lives. Excessive regulation kills small business. Excessive taxes kill the middle class. Government controlled health care results in poorer services and, as we are already witnessing, crushing the rights of those who believe that they should not be forced to subsidize abortion. Government control of education, whether it is through common core or something more invasive, results in the kind of indoctrination we see in our public schools today. I read an editorial posted (appropriately) by The Federalist, which advocated the creation of a third political party, Federalists. This party would not be based on a new idea, but an old and very constitutional one. As I’m sure you’re aware Federalism is the belief and practice of smaller centralized government, wherein more power is given to the citizens of each state to determine for themselves how they will be governed. Reagan was a strong federalist. It seems to me that in a nation as divided as our own this may be the way forward. States like California that want to be more socialist, pass their own laws and follow that failed dogma. States like Texas that believe in empowering small business and keeping taxes low are free to continue to do so and attract increasing numbers of both companies and citizens. Above all, freedom of religion and speech need to be upheld at the national level. There is a very disconcerting, (and quite Socialist) practice of forcing people to uphold ideals their religious belief opposes. The danger of Socialism is seen in the failed USSR. It is fueled by an atheistic utopianism that has little tolerance for other beliefs. No free speech. No freedom of religion. Even though we have the Constitution and its 1st Amendment, we also have a Supreme Court that legislates and interprets that document in accordance with the current winds of ideological change. The recent ruling on same sex marriage is a perfect example of this. I think Bernie Sanders is more dangerous than Donald Trump for this reason. Idealistic young people are believing an old lie that will not die. The Donald will burn out and his supporters will move on, but the Bernie generation is just beginning, and we will rue the consequences of future elections where socialism is established and the USA is weakened.

Comments are closed.