Comrade Bernie’s views on policy


A number of people have written to express dissatisfaction with my representation of Comrade Bernie's views.  Here I give you his views as published by Politico.  This does not mention his statements on 60 Minutes to Anderson Cooper to the effect that he does not know what his policy initiatives would cost or how to pay for them other than to raise taxes on people with money (me until today).  And then there was the statement today by Donna Shalala (DL -of Florida) that his favorable views of Communist Cuba will be unacceptable in Miami in spite of Cuba's high rate of literacy.  pl

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Comrade Bernie’s views on policy

  1. J says:

    Ah yes, Товарищ Bernie, what a Comrade, what a guy. Never had a job until he was 40, most financial dealings that made him a buck were at the expense of others.
    There is one pearl of his ramblings that I do like, the care for the children, after all when it’s all said and done, the children are our future. And us Old Farts have had our moments in the sun. Take care of the children first. But wait…..our nation’s sperm count is down because we’re poisoning ourselves with our EMFs and junk in the food.
    I do have one question for Товарищ Bernie, if he supports the Communist U.N.’s Agenda 2030, if he does, then he’s toast for sure in my book!

  2. Jack says:

    I always find it fascinating that folks like Anderson Cooper always ask “How are you gonna pay for it?”, when proposals on healthcare or education or infrastructure are made. However they never ask that question when it comes to regime change wars (which according to Brown University has cost us over $8 trillion just in our ME & Afghan adventures) or when trillions were used to bail out Wall St speculative losses.
    Is there a double standard here?
    Trump just like Republicans in the past is a spendthrift too, adding a trillion dollars to the federal government debt annually. Reagan, the Republican idol tripled the national debt during his presidency. George Bush added $5 trillion and Obama added $9 trillion during their respective terms.
    BTW, as a registered non-partisan voter I have no dog in the Democratic party primary fight. I find both parties distasteful and typically write-in a sound money, limited government, original constitutionalist for president. I recognize that I belong to the fringe minority in contemporary America.

  3. Serge says:

    From my humble perspective the cost of these wars is highly overrated. A very large part of the USA economy depends on war just like a very large part of the USA economy depends on private health insurance. These trillions of dollars spent on wars are imaginary figures, the USA can spend anything it wants owing to its overwhelming military,cultural, and economic superiority to any other country on earth. Call it the petrodollar call it whatever, the USA is in a unique position in human history when it comes to dominance of the world economy. I am not saying that these wars are fought for reasons of economic determinism, quite the opposite. I believe that the reported cost of wars like Iraq is totally detached from the reality. Bernie’s socialist proposals, unlike the fighting of wars, can only harm vast sectors of the American economy in the short term.

  4. ISL says:

    Apologies, Colonel, for posting here, but it is the most recent and I think has relevance to the upcoming election.
    I would like to note that a pandemic makes medicare for all a very persuasive argument. Given that the difference in mortality rate seems 3% with minimal medical care and 1% with months of expensive care. The electoral economic implications are just as important – vast portions of the US economy are integrated into the Chinese supply chain which was shut down a month ago and will remain shut down for months more.
    A Harvard epidemiologist recently estimated there are 200 typhoid Mary’s wandering around the US now, and patient zero’s are no longer being able to be identified.
    Mortality rates are much higher in the 60+ population, who vote.
    This presumes the election is not cancelled – polling stations and fighting a pandemic are incompatible.
    For anyone who desires to research more, zerohedge has had a number of articles, I also recommend
    Last month I ordered 100 N95 masks at $1 each for my employees. Today they are sold out most places (or from my industrial suppliers who state only for health industry businesses).

  5. turcopolier says:

    You don’t need to have single payer government health care to fight this virus.

  6. harry says:

    Heterosexuality is also viewed with great distaste in much of Miami. Im not sure we should allow the residents to be arbiters of good sense.

  7. gerald forward jr says:

    I had the unpleasant experience of being required to pay the “shared responsibility” tax to prop up Obamacare. I’m now severely skeptical of government’s ability to legislate health-related policy. They always manage to break anything they touch.

  8. ISL says:

    Dear Colonel,
    Agree 100%, and if Trump listened to anyone he would stop his happy coronavirus talk and tweeting – virus’s do not listen to president (or lab mice), and announce that all medical costs associated with the virus would be covered 100% no questions asked.
    My prediction is he wont because its easier to not listen to experts (I reference Tillerson’s description – Exxon lives in a fact-based world of cost accounting, DC and NY real estate remain swampy).
    My comment was in reference to the optics. My observations suggest US elections are largely fact free, following “narrative-driven” emotions. Trump realized how to leverage new social media to drive the narrative in 2016, other politicians have followed.
    With respect to emotions, nCoVid19 has the bad taste to be equally opportunity with respect to mortality and income (excepting noted hospital costs, which I think will overwhelm the US medical system after decades of consolidation of facilities and bed number optimizing). We used to have a resilient system (in case of a limited nuclear exchange), but resiliency costs profits….
    Being wealthy or a politician (even president) has no bearing on mortality or infection. The 27 days asymptomatic infectious period ensures that it can pass to anyone who is not isolated.
    Meaning: When the wealthy and powerful die of CoVid the media will report a narrative not of containment, but helplessness and fear. particularly, when reporters also get ill. Very bad optics for defense of the current system.
    Geraldo, Obamacare is a gov’t enforced subsidy taken straight out of our pockets to keep the health insurance company gravy train rolling. Obama sold out (Surprise! Which senator by a factor of two took the most health insurance bribes- oops donations) and we all pay.
    To quote “Galbraith” when something cannot continue forever, it does not. The US cannot continue forever to pay a higher and higher percentage of its GDP to insurance (or print $$). At come point change will arrive and a study of history says it will not be nice.
    I am not here advocating for any specific policy (the Bernie or Bloomberg or Trump plan) just point out that change is needed and for decades the US has taken an “Apres moi le deluge” approach, whether a D or R runs the show.

  9. blue peacock says:

    Do you have any factual basis for your assertion that “the cost of these wars is highly overrated”?
    Using your logic, why wouldn’t government procurement of healthcare especially if they double or triple the spending amount be beneficial? Why would that be any different than government procurement of military supplies and personnel?

  10. turcopolier says:

    Obamacare as originally enacted was also a program for a mass transfer of wealth to the people Obama cares for.

Comments are closed.