My Opinion

50% increase in government ‼️ This 🐝🐞🐜🐛🕷 me

What is most scary about Bernie Sanders is not the old hippie himself, but his ardent supporters who accept, as gospel and without exercising a modicum of prudence, what he says and promises. 

NYTimes: Left-Leaning Economists Question Cost of Bernie Sanders’s Plans

Some who share the candidate’s goals suggest that his proposals, especially on health care, could increase the federal government’s size by over 50 percent.

While I admit I can’t figure out how my grandchildren are being taught the new way to add or multiply numbers, I still think 2+2=4, nothing is really free and you can’t run a country on taxes paid by two percent of the population. 

Simply put, what Sanders proposes does not add up or more accurately adds up a to financial apocalypse. Sure it sounds good and it fits well into his socialist ideology. However, his rhetoric is appeal to people seeking easy answers and ready scapegoats, but neither government nor life work that way which apparently only those of us on plant earth for more than four decades understand. 

It’s not as if all this is that hard to figure out. After all, many of his supports are well educated (they must be since they are complaining about student loans all the time). 🙄 So why are people willing to accept his promises as gospel while ignoring even the tax burdens required in the countries he admires?

Do you have the answer❓


7 replies »

  1. Two posts – first, on “Democratic Socialism”. Here are two John Stossel opinion pieces – that discuss some aspects of socialism:

    But, no one should be allowed to vote for Bernie without first being required (this is socialism, after all) required to read the WSJ article on that pinnacle of socialism, the most recent experiment of a change from capitalism to democratic socialism, Venezuela.

    The article is titled: Venezuela’s Collapse Brings ‘Savage Suffering’ Dying infants, chronic power outages and empty shelves mark the world’s worst-performing economy, and may be available to non-subscribers on line today at: If you don’t want to spend the money on a subscription (if you are a socialist and don’t want to support anything that includes “Wall Street” in the title), go to the library for a copy.

    Remember that Venezuela is the most recent experiment in “Democratic Socialism”. Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías died in 2013 after leading the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) until 2012.

    Chavismo policies took effect after he was elected president of Venezuela in 1998, after he started the Bolivarian Revolution – a political revolution following the adoption of a new constitution in 1999. Bolivarianism is “popular democracy, economic independence, equitable distribution of revenues, and an end to political corruption” through socialism.

    What do the Venezuelans think of Bolivarianism and other Chavismo policies? They are “voting with their feet”. In 1998, the year Chavez was first elected, only 14 Venezuelans were granted U.S. asylum. In just 12 months in September 1999, 1,086 Venezuelans were granted asylum according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The number has significantly increased – from 1998 to 2013, over 1.5 million Venezuelans, between 4% and 6% of the Venezuela’s total population, left the country following the Bolivarian Revolution.

    I say go ahead and “Vote for Bernie”, but remember to first pack your bags.


    • Also, redistribution, as Bernie and Hillary support, is clearly the wrong answer.

      Much of our dysfunction comes from a lack of growth – not income inequality from mal-distribution.


      My criticism of the author is that there is no such thing as an “average American”. He states: “… Sclerotic growth is the overriding economic issue of our time. From 1950 to 2000 the US economy grew at an average rate of 3.5% per year. Since 2000, it has grown at half that rate, 1.7%. … The average American is more than three times better off than his or her counterpart in 1950. Real GDP per person has risen from $16,000 in 1952 to over $50,000 today, both measured in 2009 dollars. Many pundits seem to remember the 1950’s fondly, but $16,000 per person is a lot less than $50,000!

      If the US economy had grown at 2% rather than 3.5% since 1950, income per person by 2000 would have been $23,000 not $50,000. That’s a huge difference.

      Nowhere in economic policy are we even talking about events that will double, or halve, the average American’s living standards in the next generation.

      If GDP had grown at 2%, not 3.5%, we would only be able to afford half the military we have today. The immense improvements in the quality of goods and many services we have today are part of the engine of economic growth. …

      Looking forward, solving almost all our problems hinges on reestablishing robust economic growth.”

      So, I say: NOTHING PROPOSED WILL SUCCEED AT ADDRESSING ISSUES AMERICANS FACE, UNLESS GROWTH IS RESTORED. So, I plan to become a single issue voter, I encourage you to become a single issue voter, and encourage you to


      Vote for the individual who has the proposals/plans that are the most likely to trigger a return to 3.5% – 4% economic growth. Or, at worst, vote against the D’s who favor socialism or redistribution in response to income inequality, and wealth inequality.


  2. You have been ranting and raving against “old Bernie” for months on end and it’s becoming tiresome. The vast outpouring of support from young people for Bernie should help you understand that your ideology is doomed as are the aging viewers of Teapublikkkan propaganda from Crox Nuz. You are on the wrong side of history and you are “pitching sh*t and the tide”. We are the same age and we are both white. We are no longer in the majority of American voters. Live with it, old man. Americans can do anything that we choose to do and young Americans choose to do what Bernie advocates.


    • Did you actually read the article in the link and still conclude we just sit back and turn the future over to people with no clue of the world?


      • Clinging in desperation to the status quo and refusing to believe that Americans can no longer achieve exceptional achievements only shows your senility.


      • Wow! What a sad commentary you relate. You are correct, I refuse to believe that Americans can no longer achieve great goals.


What's your opinion on this post? Readers would like your point of view.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s