"Hilarious."

Is it?

I mean, I don't think there is any question you would consider me wealthy...but Kylie Jenner would likely regard me as a pauper.

I just think that maybe you're so unambitious that you'll never reach the level of accomplishment that would provide the income you feel yourself entitled to. Which means that you'll only get what someone else gives you. And barring some sort of Bernie regime that provides you with financial support, you'll just be another poor.

It's uncommon, BTW. To be a poor. You've really got to not try at it.

#17

Dude, in my office space, there is all kinds of crazy talk. withdrawing and terminating influence efforts across the globe.

Some of it is already happening, but China and Russia are just waiting in the wings to fill the voids left in the developing world if the US withdraws from those places.

"You're a champion for income inequality, wealth hoarding, and greed."

I could care less about those things. I am a champion for individual freedom, and if individual freedom results in those things-and it will-I'm perfectly OK with it.

Because the alternative is a Bernie appointed left-wing version of Elon Musk who will create agencies to ensure that income inequality and wealth hoarding are terminated with prejudice.

"You're either wealthy and those policies benefit you. Or you're just a useful idiot for the wealthy."

Wealthy is a relative term, but I would hazard I would have far less money under a Berneeist regime. Most of us would. But we would be equally poor, and that's a step in the right direction, no?

Why should one person be permitted to be rich if everyone can't be rich. It's just...unfair.

As a side, Germany just had its elections. The conservative Unity party (CDU/CSU) won most of the votes. Third was the anti-immigration AfD.

Even the left-wing Bndnis Sahra Wagenknecht, a newer party headed by a former communist, derides the identity-based politics that are the foundation of progressivism in the US.

Hell, Germany has re-established check-points on its borders with other Schengen countries. AfD's hallmark was it's position on anti-immigration. Now it seems that most German parties, left or right, have followed suit.

"It's that the Democratic party finds them abhorrent enough to keep Bernie on a shelf for the rest of his life and doesn't come anywhere near the White House."

Berneeism resonates with a relatively small but extremely loud segment of the US population. For that reason, he and his like-minded supporters have influence within the Democratic party. But it's not a message that resonates with the majority of society. Which means he could never win a general election.

But we all know this.

"#7 Socialism. And btw, how did Bernie get so rich on a senator's salary?"

Technically, no. Socialism is a system where the workers own the means of production. Bernie, in some strange way, seems to expect that wealth creators will keep creating the wealth that he wants to take from them. Maybe? I can't say they won't. But it is irrational to think that the government would want to impose high taxes on individuals and not expect it to modify their behavior or decision calculus.

It's capitalism. Just capitalism where the government gets to control what happens with the profits.

"What are the specific "Berneeism" policies that you find abhorrent?"

It's in the article:

Healthcare is a human right and must be available to all regardless of income.

Every worker in America is entitled to earn a decent income. We must raise the minimum wage to a living wage and make it easier for workers to join unions.

We must have the best public educational system in the world, from childcare to vocational training, to graduate school " available to all.

We must address the housing crisis and build the millions of units of low-income and affordable housing that we desperately need.

We must create millions of good paying jobs as we lead the world in combating the existential threat of climate change.

We must abolish all forms of bigotry.

It's not that I have any issue with any of these things, provided that A) it occurs with the consent of the governed and B) it doesn't impose cost on one party to benefit another. If you want to see this written differently, review the National Socialist's 25 Point Program. It reads much the same. And for Bernie to implement these measures would almost certainly mean government gaining full control over healthcare, and wages, and education, and industry, as well as society writ-large.

As bad as trump is, his efforts would be insignificant compared to the changes Bernie would need to make in order to achieve his objectives.

"That's only because higher inflation is on the horizon."

You want inflation? What until the DOGE dividends start getting distributed.

My unique concern is that the dollar will begin to collapse as the US cedes it's position as global political and economic leader. It would be painful for anyone-USans enjoy a premium by the fact that their home currency is traded across the globe, but I could find myself in an untenable position very quickly considering the high cost of living where I am at in Germany.

Let's consider we are interested in 2 outcomes..

1. Peace
2. Prosperity

"Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer - not an easy answer but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.

We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace - and you can have it in the next second - surrender."

Ronald Reagan, October 27th, 1964.

I think it is equally applicable today...it's just not something that is tolerable in Republican circles.