18 CEOs Called Out By Bernie Sanders

a reply to: undo

holy crap, plea bargaining is some evil #.

Yep. So is Jamie Dimon some evil # and so are all the other guys who are milking the system and not paying their workers enough to avoid "food stamps." Lots and lots of evil #.

In my idealistic, lily-livered, bleeding-heart, liberal opinion.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Except it is not.
But nice try to over simplify it.

originally posted by: Metallicus
How many jobs do these companies provide? How many families rely on these jobs? How much do those employed by these companies pay in taxes? These companies provide a benefit to the economy and the people and families employed and supported by them. Our Federal Government can't say that.

Actually the Federal Government is one of the largest employers in the nation. So yes the Federal Government can say that.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: undo
watch it, purty please.

Well, gosh. Since you said purty please I guess I'll have to watch the rest of it now.....

I'll get back to ya when I finish it ok. I may have to watch it in sections but I'll get it watched by this evening.

okay. i'd be thrilled if someone could show me how his idea of anarchy would be inferior to authoritarianism, which we already have

OK, so we know about these problem companies and we know about the tax system problems.

Now what's the solution start-to-finish?

originally posted by: xuenchen
OK, so we know about these problem companies and we know about the tax system problems.

Now what's the solution start-to-finish?

The tax system is not the problem, the spending system is the problem.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Metallicus

How many jobs do these companies provide? How many families rely on these jobs?

I don't know...you'd have to ask the people in call centers in India, or the wage-workers in China or Bangladesh.

slam dunked that one, you did. that kinda stuff arises when the government promises their biggest contributors, that they will maintain the trade deficit (to bring the whole world under the financial dominion of globalists) but give them a nice juicy loophole to hire slaves elsewhere. the socialists go along with it because they think allowing the gov to do that to americans (moving our industry elsewhere), will bring us to the edge of ruin, destroy the peoples faith in capitalism and demand socialist solutions, which further enhances the globalists power. it's a vicious cycle. imagine you're playing a series of chess games, with boards in every country and you are a chess master, hopping from one board to the next and destroying whole economies along the way.

a reply to: undo

I'm aware of your points, hun.

That doesn't minimize Bernie's message for now.

I do have a problem trying to imagine that he's a puppet like the others...but, I understand how it could appear (and possibly be exactly) like that.

So - what is the end-game? He gets elected and then sells out to them????

I just think Bernie is too old to fall for that #. Too mature to buy into it. Unless there is a 'NWO Cabal PIstol' held to his head....which, I suppose, is possible.

a reply to: xuenchen

Are you addressing me?

The answer is to impose taxes on huge corporations and their CEOs. Just as they should have imposed upon them. TAXES.

It is way past time that they stepped up and contributed to THIS COUNTRY, rather than their fiat-currency Wall-Street numbers and get away with cheating.

It makes me sick.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: undo

I'm aware of your points, hun.

That doesn't minimize Bernie's message for now.

I do have a problem trying to imagine that he's a puppet like the others...but, I understand how it could appear (and possibly be exactly) like that.

So - what is the end-game? He gets elected and then sells out to them????

I just think Bernie is too old to fall for that #. Too mature to buy into it. Unless there is a 'NWO Cabal PIstol' held to his head....which, I suppose, is possible.

honestly, i don't know if any politician is actually free of that because the gov is authoritarian. even if bernie is a really nice guy with the best of intentions, it's still intentions that will inevitably serve the authoritarian form of government. if you watch that whole video, you will understand what i'm saying.

a reply to: undo

Like I said - I do understand what you're saying.

I'm just choosing to give Bernie - and the American public - the benefit of the doubt. Whether I'm being duped or not is rather beside the point, actually. Even if Bernie is just a stooge who is dipping his toe in the water to see how people (REGULAR AMERICANS) feel -- at least it's out there. It's being talked about, and supported.

And I can't fault the guy for that.

a reply to: Boadicea

Let's not deny the corporate oligarchs the credit they deserve for destroying our economy. Many of those CEOs and their upper management belong in prison for right alongside the fed critters who aided and abetted their crimes....

Yes. This....^^^

Thanks Boadicea.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I think the fact that Xuen isn't in here proclaiming some Republican candidates savvy over Bernie, or contesting Bernie's message, or well, anything negative, is a good thing. Finally acknowledging there are acceptable politicians across party lines? Hopefully Hell is still burning down there...

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

If he is a stooge then I have to give TPTB credit, cause they sure played the waiting game with setting him up for this.

originally posted by: xuenchen
OK, so we know about these problem companies and we know about the tax system problems.

Now what's the solution start-to-finish?

Considering most other politicians would completely gloss over if not entirely ignore this reality, I think someone with authority speaking about it in the public light is probably step 1.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

If he is a stooge then I have to give TPTB credit, cause they sure played the waiting game with setting him up for this.

We will get the answer when its said and done. If Bernie loses and fades from the public light we know he was the real deal. Kind of like R Paul, even though he was a little drastic in some of his beliefs, he was probably the only candidate at the time genuine about "change".

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

i don't actually think you do. even if bernie is a really nice guy, he's going to be a really nice guy, presiding over an authoritarian government. if you watched/or even just listened to the video i linked, while typing on here, you might have a better idea of what it is i would like someone to address and explain how bernie is going to change that, because barring that, he's just going to be another really good con artist depriving people of their freedoms.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you addressing me?

The answer is to impose taxes on huge corporations and their CEOs. Just as they should have imposed upon them. TAXES.

It is way past time that they stepped up and contributed to THIS COUNTRY, rather than their fiat-currency Wall-Street numbers and get away with cheating.

It makes me sick.

The absence of a direct reply should tell you the questions are open to anybody.

Now, Bernie is exposing the "problem" of overseas tax havens right?

How does the U.S. end that loophole?

Just raising taxes won't stop the problem. In fact, taxes in general may have fueled the *corporations'/foreign governments'* involvement in the "loophole" complex to begin with.

a reply to: xuenchen

Difficult question, and the kind we need to be asking.

a reply to: undo

Ok, half way done. I think I've seen this before BTW, but will keep watching anyway as a refresher. Even though it's also kinda depressing the sh*t out of me and making me angry and concerned as well.

So basically what I'm getting out or this is Institutionalized Collectivism is bad and Individual Personal Freedom is good. I happen to agree with that too. So far so good.

It's a bad sign that what we have going on in this country is exactly the opposite of that as well. As an individual today you have exactly Zero influence or power. Well, maybe no zero but .0001 or something. That goes for legal matters, economic matters, even social issues. If you stand alone you may as well not bother standing at all because nobody is going to notice you anyway. However, if you're part of a collective be it law enforcement, government, corporate, educational, worker union, bank/wall st., etc. you will some degree of influence and protection. Oddly enough this is not what are constitution is supposed to be protecting.

So, while I understand what you mean by Anarchy being the only real choice, I disagree that it's an actual goal, although it might be the only cure left in fighting off the disease of tyranny we currently are in. At this point I would say what we need is "Freedom and Protection for the Individual People" while maintaining "Regulation and Restriction on Collectives".

With a system that has more freedom and liberty at the individual level and more regulation and restriction at the collective level it would constrict itself automatically as long as you keep the proper operation of the system in place. Sort of like a choke collar for dogs. The more they pull ahead the more it constricts around their throat. The only problem I'm not sure about would be the mechanism used for Restriction since it would require the necessary power to resist the pull forward but without ability to take over control itself and becoming the source of the pull forward.