Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Political discussion here. Any reasonable opinion is welcome, but due to the sensitive nature of the topic area, please be nice and respectful to others. No flaming or trolling, please. And please keep political commentary out of the other board areas and confine it to this area. Thanks!
Ghost
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ghost »

Nodack wrote:I pick the candidate that I think will do the most good. I think all Republicans will do harm and Democrats less harm, so they get my vote. Between Hillary and Bernie, I like Bernie's views and ideas best. I will pull for him but, if I vote for Hillary it will be to ensure Republicans don't win, not because I like voting for a winner.
You made it two sentences before you contradicted yourself. Your pick the candidate you think will do the most good, then two sentences later you aren't sure you will vote for him. Rationalize it how you want, you might as well vote just to be on the winning side. Your philosophy is as damaging if you won't even vote for Bernie in the primary.

Sent from my Nexus 6 to annoy Superbone using Tapatalk

Ghost
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ghost »

If it comes down to trunp/Hilary, I'm voting Trump. Because sometimes the only way to fix things us to break them first.

Sent from my Nexus 6 to annoy Superbone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 8913
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Nodack »

Maybe contradictory to you Ghost, not to me. Voting for the person who will do the most good. Bernie isn't going to do much good if he isn't President. If it comes down to the election and Bernie is polling at 1% of the vote and I vote for him anyway because I think his ideas are best and Hillary losses by a hair I would be upset that I wasted a vote to help Republicans elect their guy. I think Hillary would do the most good in office rather than out.

My logic is sound in my mind and that's all I care about.

If it comes down to Trump and Hillary I will laugh out loud and still vote for Hillary because Trump is beyond out of touch with reality. If Trump loses to Hillary the Republican party will implode and start the impeachment process before she takes the oath. If Trump wins he will be a total unknown. There is no way he will make Republicans happy. His wall won't happen. The deficit will soar. He won't be able to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something terrific. If he truly is his own man then he won't care about making his Republican voters happy and will just d what he wants. My gut tells me he would be a moderate and surround himself with people that know a little bit about what a President is supposed to know. It might be Trump who gets impeached by the GOP after a year or so.
Last edited by Nodack on Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

Image
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

Image
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

[youtube][/youtube]
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

[youtube][/youtube]
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

Image
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/the-numb ... e-booming/

The Numbers Are In: After $15 Minimum Wage, Seattle’s Restaurants Are BOOMING

Conservatives are using small businesses as a talking point on why the minimum wage should not be raised to $15. Luckily, in enlightened Seattle, where the increase has already passed, the truth can dispel this factless rhetoric. Restaurant owners in the state, who originally feared that the wage hike would hurt their business are now strongly convinced that it made only a positive impact. This makes sense, as now more people have the money to eat!

This story, which originally ran in the Puget Sound Business Journal, titled: “Apocalypse Not: $15 and the cuts that never came.” Tom Douglas, a small business owner who feared that he would be negatively affected, and that a lion share of restaurants would have to close, is profiled now that the hike has had time to settle. “I don’t know that [a $15 minimum wage] would put us out of business, but I would say we lose maybe a quarter of the restaurants downtown.” His fears have no grounding in reality, as the article points out.

Since the wage hike passed on April 1st, dozens of new restaurants have opened—including some by Douglas himself. The King County section of Seattle has issued 5,227 permits for food service establishments in Seattle so far this year, which means this year will have more openings than last, which had 5,458 permits. This also means 2015 will beat 2013, with 5,415 issued that year.

Unlike most Conservatives, when presented with the facts, Douglas has acknowledged he was wrong. “Douglas has now changed his mind about the law, saying he was ‘naive’ to think that restaurants would raise pay on their own,” read the profile. In fact, he continues to open new eateries, unphased by the $15 approval. His employees are certainly feeling the difference. Dezi Bonow, a head chef at another Douglas owned establishment has praised the increase as it extends to “legitimiz[ing] cooking as a craft.”

This story serves as an accurate first hand example for what will happen if the new minimum wage is federally extended—there will be happier workers and owners will feel the positive effects as well. Americans need to set their labor at a livable wage—it is currently not. If you work a job 40 hours a week but are still below the poverty line, that is not your fault—that is the fault of the government that does not look out for your labor rights. This wage increase will mean a more equitable pay and thus more money in the hands of Americans, which is economically a very good thing. Small business owners are not going to go out of business, they will see the benefits of their workers being paid a living wage too.
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

I'd just like to give you all something to consider. After Justin Trudeau's landslide victory as the new Canadian PM, this could potentially be a huge boost for the Sanders campaign.

What happens if Trudeau's platform provides concrete evidence a year from now that taxing the rich and rebuilding the infrastructure greatly improves the Canadian economy? Would American's be more willing then to elect a candidate with the same ideology?

Just some more fun facts...
https://www.ypulse.com/post/view/voting ... r-tomorrow

Voting Poll: Who Would Millennials Vote For Tomorrow?

If the presidential election were tomorrow, who would Millennials be voting for? We asked.

The Democratic presidential candidate debates are tomorrow, another milestone in the election calendar, and an indication that the efforts to win over voters, particularly young voters, are going to amp up significantly in the near future. Millennial media outlets like BuzzFeed and Funny or Die have already started taking on the election, gearing up for the political action to come with campaigns and plans to get their Millennial audience politically involved—and potentially influence them as well. If their interest in captured, they are potentially the most influential group of voters, and the candidate with their support has a significantly increased chance of winning the Presidency.

So we ran a quick poll asking Millennials, "If the election were tomorrow, who would you cast your vote for the U.S. Presidency?" This was an informal, non-scientific question asked of 580 of the members of our online research community, SurveyU.com, to get a quick directional indication of what their political preferences are right now. We'll be following up with a number of nationally representative and statistically accurate surveys covering election topics over the next year!"

Though he has not announced whether he will be running yet, we included Vice President Joe Biden in candidate list. (If CNN is saving him a podium, we can gauge what his odds would be in the race to the White House.)
Image
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

[youtube][/youtube]
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

What is a democratic socialist? Bernie Sanders tries to redefine the name.

When Sen. Bernie Sanders came to speak in Iowa a few months ago, Drake University student Ian Miller snagged a seat on the stage. It was a close-up look at a historic campaign: After decades where socialists were the enemy, a “democratic socialist” had come to town as a serious candidate for president.

What a moment, right?

Right?

“Remind me what a socialist is?” Miller said last week.

A friend, Nik Wasson, tried to explain: “A socialist is someone who believes the government needs to be involved in a lot of aspects of the economy, and social issues as well.”

“Okay,” said Miller, who was born in 1995. “Well, knowing what ‘democratic’ means — and now, knowing again what ‘socialist’ means,” he approved of the combination. “[Sanders] might want to see government have a heavier hand in certain policies,” he said, but “he wants everyone to have a say in it.”

Sanders’s remarkable success this year — in spite of his label as a socialist — is due to a mix of good politics and great timing.

Twenty-four years after the end of the Cold War, many Americans no longer associate socialism with fear or missiles — or with failure, food lines or empty Soviet supermarkets. A word that their elders saw as a slur had become a blank, open for Sanders to define.

And this year, Sanders (I-Vt.) has tried to define it with an eye toward a moderate audience.

He has called for huge growth in government regulation and spending. But he has stayed away from classic socialist ideas, like government takeovers of private industry. And, in his speeches, Sanders has talked about socialism in modest, solidly American terms: It’s nothing more than the pursuit of fairness in a country now rigged by the rich.

So far, it’s worked — but Sanders still hasn’t had to face an opponent determined to use socialism against him.

“What democratic socialism means to me,” Sanders said during a recent speech in New Hampshire, “is having a government which represents all people, rather than just the wealthiest people, which is most often the case right now in this country.”

Until recently, the word “socialist” occupied a special place in American politics: Along with “liar” and “hypocrite,” it was a rare insult so low-down that it couldn’t even be used on congressmen.

In 2011, for example, Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks (R) spoke the word on the House floor in 2011 — referring to Democrats as “socialist members.” There was a formal complaint, and Brooks retracted the word. In the Congressional Record, it was replaced by asterisks. “The *.*.* members of this body choose to spend money that we do not have,” Brooks said, officially.

Even now, socialists seem to be one of the most distrusted groups in American politics. In June, Gallup asked voters if they could vote for a socialist for president — if that socialist happened to be their own party’s nominee. Fifty percent said no. Gallup asked the same question about 10 other groups — Jews, Muslims, Mormons, evangelicals, gays, atheists and others — and socialists scored the worst.

[Wonkblog: Eight questions about Bernie Sanders and democratic socialism]

Still, for Sanders, this has proven to be a ripe moment. One theory holds that President Obama may have helped pave the way.

“The public battle over Obama’s socialism has probably left a lot of his millennial supporters inclined to embrace the term on the theory that if Obama’s foes don’t like socialism, there must be something good about it,” said Stanley Kurtz, a conservative scholar whose book “Radical-in-Chief” argued that the president’s ideology had been informed by hard-left theorists.

Sanders doesn’t talk much about hard-left theories. He often tackles questions about socialism with a joke — which is only funny because times have actually changed.

“Does anyone here think I’m a strong adherent of the North Korean form of government? That I want all of you to be wearing similar-colored pajamas?” he says. The joke assumes that Sanders’s audiences no longer see old-style, Soviet socialism as a threat but as a weird foreign curiosity.

Indeed, some of them aren’t even that curious about it.

“Bernie is the one,” said Levi Vivanh, a freshman at Drake who’d seen another Sanders speech. “He gets to the point of what people want. He’s right about tuition costs.”

But Vivanh wasn’t sure what Sanders meant when he talked about his broader ideology. “Democratic socialist . . . I don’t really know what that means,” Vivanh said. “It sounds like he’s more focused on society. Is that what it means?”

Sanders has been in elected office for 34 years now. For that entire time, he has been arguing with people about whether the word “socialist” applies to him — and what he thinks socialism actually means.

In 1981, when Sanders ran for mayor of Burlington as a far-left independent, he was tagged as a socialist by his enemies. Sanders embraced the term, said his longtime friend Stanley “Huck” Gutman, partly as a way of showing his dislike for the two mainstream parties.

“The Democratic Party has too often been complicit in not serving the people who vote for the Democratic Party. I think the Democratic Party pays too much attention to Wall Street,” said Gutman, a poetry professor at the University of Vermont who has also worked as Sanders’s chief of staff in Congress. “I know Bernie certainly thinks so.”

As mayor, Sanders gave his small city a “foreign policy,” and it was decidedly leftist. He visited Nicaragua to meet Sandinista leaders. He spent his honeymoon on a goodwill trip to Burlington’s sister city in the Soviet Union.

He was elected to Congress, in 1990, and seemed to relish his role as a skunk at the two parties’ picnic.

“What do you think of socialism?” Sanders asked passersby outside the Capitol on his first day, according to a story in the Boston Globe. “What happens if we were in France? Does that panic you? Would you be afraid to go to France?”

But in the years since, Sanders has blurred the lines between himself and Democrats. First he joined their caucus in Congress. Now he’s running for president in their primary. And, when he talks about what a “democratic socialist” is, he does not emphasize that old opposition to the two-party system.

[Vermont’s official Socialists think Sanders has gone too far, joined the enemy]

In this campaign, in fact, some observers believe that Sanders is even wrong to call himself a “democratic socialist.”

That’s because there are official Democratic Socialists — both in other countries and in the United States — and they generally want something more aggressive than he does. The Democratic Socialists in the United States want a system where workers or the government own factories and other means of production. (This is different from a communist system, in which the government owns everything in the people’s name.)

Sanders doesn’t want that. Instead, what he wants is to take existing federal programs — many established by Democrats such as Franklin D. Roosevelt or Lyndon B. Johnson — and super-size them.

Right now, for instance, the federal government provides health insurance to seniors: Medicare. Sanders wants the government to start providing it to everybody, a national single-payer system that might cost something like $15 trillion.

For another current example, government — federal, state and local — pays for public school for every child who wants it. Sanders wants to expand that to both younger and older students. He would make preschool universal and make public college tuition-free. In the process, he’d be giving Washington unprecedented new levels of control over these sectors.

“He’s not a democratic socialist,” said William Galston, an expert on domestic politics at the Brookings Institution. “He’s a social democrat. Seriously.”

Social Democrats, a separate entity in the field guide to leftists, are generally more moderate. By those definitions, then, Sanders is actually making his own life harder, by mislabeling himself.

Still, socialism is the label he’s stuck with. Sanders’s friends worry about what’s coming: future attack ads aimed at that 50 percent of Americans who wouldn’t vote for a socialist at all.

So far, the toughest thing he’s faced was a mild rejoinder from Hillary Rodham Clinton at the first Democratic debate.

“We are not Denmark. I love Denmark. We are the United States of America,” Clinton said, after Sanders cited Denmark as an example of democratic socialism in action.

She didn’t even use the s-word. Yet.
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

User avatar
Cap
Posts: 8787
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:08 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Cap »

Ladmo wrote:I'd just like to give you all something to consider. After Justin Trudeau's landslide victory as the new Canadian PM, this could potentially be a huge boost for the Sanders campaign.

What happens if Trudeau's platform provides concrete evidence a year from now that taxing the rich and rebuilding the infrastructure greatly improves the Canadian economy? Would American's be more willing then to elect a candidate with the same ideology?
A year from now will be far too late to influence the Democratic Primary. Voting starts in just over two months.

Besides, most Americans get their understanding of economics from Ayn Rand novels and are immune to being influenced by any evidence that comes from the real world.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 8913
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Nodack »

And I think many Americans aren't willng to look at anything any other country does for guidance. Every other industrialized contry out there already has Univesal Health care and they pay half what we pay and yet we aren't willing to look at what they do as possible examples of what could work because this is the US and we do things our own way. The only time a Republican will look at other countries to use as examples is when they are trying to slam Universal Health care and say "Look at Greece. Do you want to end up like them?" They pick the country in the worst shape as an example of course.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

I don't think Hilary's win in the Primaries are the slam-dunk you think it is, Cap.
The youth vote comes out for Presidential elections, and they overwhelmingly support Sanders over Clinton.

Interestingly, Mitt Romney is now trying to take credit for ACA's success, believe it or not.
http://www.occupydemocrats.com/romney-f ... a-success/

Romney FINALLY Admits He Was Wrong, Obamacare A Success

Mitt Romney spent two-thirds of his presidential campaign fending off allegations that he was a “flip-flopper” and that he set up the founding model for Obamacare when he was governor of Massachusetts, then went on to disparage the program that he set up himself when the GOP voting base decided they didn’t want healthcare. On Friday, however, he finally admitted that he is responsible for Obamacare—and that the system is working better than he could have imagined.

Romney wrote the Boston Globe’s obituary for his friend Tom Stemberg, the founder of Staples. Stemberg was instrumental in getting Romney involved in healthcare, telling Romney, that “if he really wanted to help, he should give everyone access to health care,” something Romney had somehow not considered before in his duties as governor. Romney acknowledges that he feels this was the right move, and that it eventually led to the Affordable Care Act in place today.

“Without Tom pushing it, I don’t think we would have had Romneycare,” Romney said. “Without Romneycare, I don’t think we would have Obamacare. So, without Tom, a lot of people wouldn’t have health insurance.”

Romney agreeing that he supports Obamacare is enough of an ideological defection to earn the immediate hatred of his party, which really goes to show just how delusional and extreme the fringes of the Republican Party have become. Romney is a perfect example of the Republican politician who has no backbone, as he later tried to backtrack on via Facebook posts, but the damage has been done to his standing among his own peers. Nevertheless, it is a shame that a healthcare program that was very acceptable to conservatives when it came from Romney but is treated like vile heresy coming from Obama has caused so much division in our society. The very fact that they can assemble arguments against extending healthcare to millions of Americans proves they are not worthy of governance in the first place.
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

More on topic...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... t-offices/

Bernie Sanders has a pretty revolutionary idea to change America’s post offices

Americans don't spend nearly as much time at post offices as they used to, but that's not only because postcards are being replaced by Evites. For more than half a century, from 1911 until 1967, the Postal Service also served as a bank. Customers could walk down the street to the post office with their money and deposit it in a savings account there.

The system made sense back in those days, when the country was more sparsely populated and banks were harder to find, but post offices were everywhere. Over the past 50 years, though, the total number of bank branches in the United States increased from 16,000 to 83,000. What's more, people visit the bank less frequently these days, given the ubiquity of credit cards and direct deposit.

Still, there are still relatively few banks in many impoverished urban and rural neighborhoods, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, has a big idea for turning post offices back into banks. That's because he sees them as a place where the 68 million low-income Americans who currently rely on payday lenders and costly cash checking services could manage their affairs less expensively. (And banking might help the beleaguered Postal Service's bottom line as well.)

"What people are forced to do is go to payday lenders who charge outrageously high interest rates. You go to check-cashing places, which rip you off," Sanders said recently. "And, yes, I think that the Postal Service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it."

Postal banking is still a part of everyday life in many foreign countries, including the United Kingdom and France, and the U.S. postal inspector general issued a report endorsing the idea last year. The report argued the Postal Service should consider not only opening savings accounts again, but also expanding into short-term loans and debit cards as well.

Bricks and mortar
The inspector general also noted several reasons why the Postal Service might be able to help those on the margins of the American economy bank more cheaply. Start with payday lenders, whom Sanders and other proponents see as the villains in the dark tale of unconventional financial services.

Maintaining a large volume of customers at each storefront is crucial for payday lending, according to a study of the industry published by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. With more customers, lenders are able to defray the costs of keeping the lights on through lower interest rates. The most profitable payday lending branches have been open for a while and have established a base of customers in the neighborhood. The study found that on average, payday lending firms earn about nine cents on every dollar they loan.

The Postal Service already has locations all over the country, though, and everyone who walks in to buy stamps is a potential customer.

Another advantage is less tangible than bricks and mortar: trust, an invaluable resource for any financial institution. The Postal Service rates highly among government agencies in public opinion polls.

Perhaps above all, the Postal Service is an agency of the federal government. If borrowers failed to repay loans, the Treasury Department could seize their tax refunds at the end of the year, allowing post offices to limit their losses and offer more favorable interest rates than payday lenders.

Stiff rates
Those seizures would be part of another, more dour aspect of postal banking.

People have neighborly feelings about their local post office, and proponents argue that postal banking could protect the public from loan sharks. Yet as the inspector general's report makes clear, going to the Postal Service wouldn't exactly be like borrowing $20 from your grandma. In a hypothetical example considered in that report, the Postal Service offers loans at no less than 25 percent interest and seizes borrowers' money come April 15 if they don't pay up.

The inspector general argues that 25 percent interest is still far cheaper than the fees charged by payday lenders, typically equivalent to 400 percent at an annual rate or even more. It's hard to know whether Treasury's strong arm, combined with the Postal Service's existing infrastructure, could reduce costs enough to offer customers even that rate.

One way the Postal Service could control costs would be by lending only to borrowers who have a good chance of repaying, said Mehrsa Baradaran, a legal scholar at the University of Georgia who has long advocated for postal banking.

She said that if the Postal Service begins lending money to Americans, the program shouldn't depend on funding from taxpayers to remain solvent.

"We've got to honor market principles," Baradaran said. "We're not going to offer a subsidy here."

Some economists worry that because every borrower is potentially a voter as well, any public agency lending money will hesitate to deny loans for political reasons.

"We will always have higher rates of default here, because we don't have investors with their money at stake," said Robert DeYoung, an economist at the University of Kansas.

In any case, if the Postal Service were to underwrite loans, it wouldn't really be competing with payday lenders at all. Underwriting takes time. Many people patronize payday establishments because they need cash immediately, said Eva Wolkowitz, an associate at the Center for Financial Services Innovation, which studies financial products.

Instead, the postal loans (at least as described by the inspector general) would be more akin to installment loans -- another, more obscure type of short-term loan. Unlike a payday loan, installment loans are paid back in several increments, rather than in a lump sum. While there is a wide range of interest rates on installment loans, they generally cost less than payday loans.

Pawnshops and more
Besides installment and payday loans, there are all kinds of alternative credit available, which is another limitation of postal banking. For the most part, postal loans wouldn't offer consumers a real alternative to these other forms of credit.

Wolkowitz and her colleagues have estimated that Americans spent $103 billion on alternative financial services in 2013. Yet only about $15 billion of that amount was spent on the forms of credit comparable to the proposed postal loans. You can see the distribution of these loans in the chart below.

Image

"I don't think the post office would go into the business of operating a pawnshop or loaning out vehicles," Wolkowitz said.

Payments and savings
Much of retail banking has nothing to do with lending, though, and post offices could offer some of those other services.

The Postal Service could take advantage of existing networks established by other post offices abroad to help immigrants wire money cheaply to relatives at home. The agency could offer savings accounts, as it did in the past, along with basic debit cards to help customers manage their money safely and cheaply.

There would be competition, though. The basic debit cards known in the industry as reloadable prepaid cards are quickly becoming popular. Many of them allow customers to cash their paychecks without a fee and offer protection from overdraft charges. The cards are issued by major banks and retailers. Some charge nominal monthly fees. Others, such as the Bluebird card issued by Wal-Mart and American Express, don't.

If any entity can match the Postal Service for bricks and mortar, it's likely Wal-Mart. And Mike Moebs, the founder of the economic research firm Moebs Services in Lake Forest, Ill., asked whether the Postal Service had the technological know-how to administer the cards effectively.

"They're still dealing with paper," he said.

A public institution
The debate about postal banking raises big questions. Some people probably doubt that the Postal Service can offer financial services more efficiently and cheaply than the private sectors. Others might feel that the government should ensure that everyone can take part in the modern economy, and that without savings accounts and debit cards, you really can't.

Emperors and kings have minted coins for millennia, recognizing the benefits of a neutral, reliable and widely available mode of payment. Maybe it's the responsibility of the U.S. government today to issue inexpensive plastic money alongside hard currency.

"Sure, we can outsource the needs of the poor to Wal-Mart," said Baradaran of the University of Georgia. "I'd rather see the post office get this revenue."

Revenue is one reason the American Postal Workers Union has advocated for the idea in contract negotiations with the federal government. At the same time, Mark Dimondstein, the union's president, argued that the post office has been an important part of civic life in American towns for centuries, and postal banking would help sustain that tradition.

"The post office will be fulfilling its mission, in an ever deeper way, of binding the people together," he said. Postal banking "just makes the entire public institution that much more vibrant and that much more vital."
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

[video][/video]
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

http://reverbpress.com/politics/wiu-moc ... nders-gop/

Trouble For The GOP: Incredibly Accurate Mock Election Reveals Sanders Win

Everyone by now knows that polls this early in the election season are about as accurate as the lottery numbers within a fortune cookie. But one notable exception to the early numbers has been held every election season since 1975. One year before the actual election, Western Illinois University has held its own mock election, with the results having a solid track record of accuracy in predicting the final outcome of the presidential elections.

From 1975 when the mock election showed Carter winning, out to 2007 when it showed a first term senator from Illinois named Barack Obama heading to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the WIU mock election has been a strong indicator of trends in national politics. What this year’s mock election shows, if past history holds up, that there is a shakeup of the major parties underway.

The mock election delivered a Sanders vs Bush fight, after both candidates dominated in their parties primaries. In addition, Lex Green came out of nowhere to enter the fray for the Libertarian Party while Jill Stein made yet another run under the Green Party banner. The stage was set for the mock election, and nobody could have predicted that outcome, with Sanders coming out on top with 404 electoral votes.

But the real story in this mock election is in the fine details. As in 2008, the Republican party had no solid frontrunner, with Bush winning not by mandate, but because he survived to the end. On the Democratic side however, an early pattern is established, with Bernie Sanders handily crushing his opposition.

WIU mock election may predict the collapse of the Republican Party.

This lack of enthusiasm for the candidates demonstrates a genuine problem for the Republican party, and the final result in the WIU mock election demonstrates that, with over 10% of the votes going from the Republican column to the Libertarian. As a result, states which have been solidly Republican since the late 60’s swung blue, with Sanders carrying huge swaths of traditionally GOP states handily. Another oddity is the effect in Lex Green’s home state of Illinois, which went to the Republicans in this result as did Maryland. Pennsylvania was evenly split, and could not be called.

If the WIU mock election holds true to history, we may be witnessing the final breakup and collapse of the Republican Party, with the Libertarian Party ascendant to take its place. If the results are even close to what WIU students found, the recriminations among the RNC leadership will be incredible to witness

The WIU mock election is a political science exercise, and should be considered a tool by the parties as well the candidates for developing their strategies. We have a full year to see how accurate, or not, the results are. There is plenty of time for corrections to be made, problems addressed, and candidates to rally.

It is not over, after all, until the last vote is counted.

http://wiumpe.com/
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

Ladmo
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Ladmo »

Very charming piece on Bernie Sanders.

[youtube][/youtube]
Forcing me to conform to your beliefs is an exercise in futility.
You deal with you, because you can't stop me from being me.

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 21683
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Sanders plan would save at least $5 Trillion

Post by Mori Chu »

"Western Illinois University mock election may predict the collapse of the Republican Party."

:roll:

Post Reply