• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Could Sen. Bernie Sanders Become President?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
mnewsham said:
The simple fact that your own personal finances dictates you receiving either of those is pretty damn sad.
Click to expand...

Last I checked everyone had free schooling through high school. What level of "free" education is sufficient? 2 year college? 4 year college? Graduate degrees? PhD?

Why should taxpayers foot the bill for you getting a degree in 15th century French poetry?
 
Bowfinger said:
It's funny, my son and I were talking about this a couple of days ago. He wondered how Republicans might attack Sanders if he actually got the nomination. I said all they needed was one word: "socialist." To a certain segment of low information voters, socialist is a synonym for evil, and there's no amount of rational, informed discussion that will ever change that.
Click to expand...

Hey, it is what it is, and it has nothing to do with "low information" voters. If someone is a racist, it is what it is, I won't vote for them regardless of what other drivel they spew or promises they make. Same thing for a socialist. When you start from a bad position (that socialism is the goal), everything else that follows is a failure.
 
PokerGuy said:
Last I checked everyone had free schooling through high school. What level of "free" education is sufficient? 2 year college? 4 year college? Graduate degrees? PhD?

Why should taxpayers foot the bill for you getting a degree in 15th century French poetry?
Click to expand...
French Poetry would be useless and hopefully if assisted by the government it would have the guidelines of a trade or STEM degree.

But right now as it stands we spend way more than we would on education in welfare. I'd rather teach them how to fish than give them fish. Then they would have the chance to pay the system back. As it stands now it's just 100% the middle class burden to take care of them.
 
PokerGuy said:
Lol, you are the one who said raising taxes will be a big boost to the economy. You are delusional. I haven't pushed anything.



Newsflash, increasing taxes on "the rich" -- even if done to extreme levels -- wouldn't amount to even a fraction of the money needed to pay for our government spending. Not even close, even if you taxed the income of "the rich" at 90%. More delusional thinking. It's just a red herring talking point for the lefties to get their gullible followers frothing at the mouth for class warfare, but it has no bearing on reality.



Where did the $5M threshold come from? Why not $1 million? Why not $250k? Is it just "whatever level is sufficiently more than I make so I can demand it be taken away from others?".



Someone apparently doesn't understand the difference between wealth and income.



You do realize that "the poor people" in fact aren't "taxed to the point they are living paycheck to paycheck", the poor generally don't pay income tax at all, and many even get credits back (ie, negative tax rates)?
Click to expand...

PokerGuy said:
Last I checked everyone had free schooling through high school. What level of "free" education is sufficient? 2 year college? 4 year college? Graduate degrees? PhD?

Why should taxpayers foot the bill for you getting a degree in 15th century French poetry?
Click to expand...

PokerGuy said:
I don't care when he thought it, anyone who espouses such drivel is an idiot.
Click to expand...

PokerGuy said:
Hey, it is what it is, and it has nothing to do with "low information" voters. If someone is a racist, it is what it is, I won't vote for them regardless of what other drivel they spew or promises they make. Same thing for a socialist. When you start from a bad position (that socialism is the goal), everything else that follows is a failure.
Click to expand...

I'd like to introduce you to my good friend multiquote.
 
PokerGuy said:
Hey, it is what it is, and it has nothing to do with "low information" voters. If someone is a racist, it is what it is, I won't vote for them regardless of what other drivel they spew or promises they make. Same thing for a socialist. When you start from a bad position (that socialism is the goal), everything else that follows is a failure.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with low information voters, simple folk who vote for or against someone based on labels instead of positions and qualifications. The "logic" you're promoting could just as easily be used to condemn all "conservative" or "liberal" candidates. It would be equally ignorant, especially since these same low information voters usually have, at best, only a faint clue what each of those labels actually mean.
 
PokerGuy said:
Last I checked everyone had free schooling through high school. What level of "free" education is sufficient? 2 year college? 4 year college? Graduate degrees? PhD?

Why should taxpayers foot the bill for you getting a degree in 15th century French poetry?
Click to expand...

Yes the socialist program of public education is one of the things that has helped us compete globally. I think Publicly funding education, trade school and college is a great idea. Unless of course you want to be a third world shit hole service economy.

Tax payers should foot the bill because it adds value to society overall to educate people.
 
PokerGuy said:
Hey, it is what it is, and it has nothing to do with "low information" voters. If someone is a racist, it is what it is, I won't vote for them regardless of what other drivel they spew or promises they make. Same thing for a socialist. When you start from a bad position (that socialism is the goal), everything else that follows is a failure.
Click to expand...

You have to understand the difference between complete socialism and social programs within a democratic republic.

The fact that you would reject potentially good ideas based on a label they can be associated with absent context is in fact a characteristic of a low information voter.
 
I've always looked at providing things such as education and medical care as an investment in the future. Any country that considers itself to be "modern" or "advanced" should make those two a priority. Sure, there is an up front cost that needs to be considered and dealt with, but the long term consequences of having a stupid and unhealthy society costs far more. Or maybe I'm just crazy for thinking that.
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
still waiting for pokerguy's non-loon candidate name
Click to expand...

That's easy. As an example, as much as I despise her, Hillary is not a loon. She's a conniving manipulative liar that will do/say anything to get elected, but she's not a loon. Same for many of the other candidates.
 
Bowfinger said:
It has everything to do with low information voters, simple folk who vote for or against someone based on labels instead of positions and qualifications. The "logic" you're promoting could just as easily be used to condemn all "conservative" or "liberal" candidates. It would be equally ignorant, especially since these same low information voters usually have, at best, only a faint clue what each of those labels actually mean.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. He himself labels himself as an idiot...errr.... socialist, he's kind enough to provide the "here's your sign" label. I appreciate that.

As I said, if someone's a racist (especially one dumb enough to describe himself as such), I'm not going to lend a whole lot of credence to what they have to say. Same with socialist.
 
lotus503 said:
Yes the socialist program of public education is one of the things that has helped us compete globally. I think Publicly funding education, trade school and college is a great idea. Unless of course you want to be a third world sh*t hole service economy.

Tax payers should foot the bill because it adds value to society overall to educate people.
Click to expand...

Again, what level is correct? High school? 2 year college? 4 year college? Trade school? Masters program? PhD? And, how exactly did you come up with the definition of what the "correct" level of funding is for that free education? Do you have some sort of substantiation for your idea that someone getting a degree in 15th century French poetry adds enough value to society to merit the taxpayers footing the bill? Some sort of cost/benefit analysis? Or just your gut feeling.
 
PokerGuy said:
That's easy. As an example, as much as I despise her, Hillary is not a loon. She's a conniving manipulative liar that will do/say anything to get elected, but she's not a loon. Same for many of the other candidates.
Click to expand...

I notice you can't name a single GOP candidate that isn't a loon.
 
Franz316 said:
I've always looked at providing things such as education and medical care as an investment in the future. Any country that considers itself to be "modern" or "advanced" should make those two a priority. Sure, there is an up front cost that needs to be considered and dealt with, but the long term consequences of having a stupid and unhealthy society costs far more. Or maybe I'm just crazy for thinking that.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has argued that education and medical care are not important. The argument is in how to best achieve the goals. I haven't seen any cost benefit analysis to conclude that a useless degree provided for free by the taxpayer is an overall benefit to society.
 
I like Sanders more than Clinton, but a big challenge I think he'll have - if he makes it all that far to begin with - is his age. I believe that significantly hurt John McCain, who was a few years younger than Sanders will be in 2016. If elected, he would be the oldest president inaugurated by something like 6 years. People are going to be nervous about him dying in office, or being too incapacitated to rule effectively which could be even worse. It doesn't help that he very much looks his age, his campaign team should have already been working on making him look younger like they did McCain.

Clinton is pretty old too (I think would be tied with Reagen as oldest at inauguration?) but here being a woman works somewhat in her favor since women tend to live a little longer.
 
PokerGuy said:
Hey, I can name *any* gop candidate and you'd consider them a loon anyway, I figured I'd save you the trouble.
Click to expand...

How about if I promise not to criticize your choice? Hell, I won't even comment on it at all. I just want to see if you can do it.
 
PokerGuy said:
Again, what level is correct? High school? 2 year college? 4 year college? Trade school? Masters program? PhD? And, how exactly did you come up with the definition of what the "correct" level of funding is for that free education? Do you have some sort of substantiation for your idea that someone getting a degree in 15th century French poetry adds enough value to society to merit the taxpayers footing the bill? Some sort of cost/benefit analysis? Or just your gut feeling.
Click to expand...
No degrees in French Poetry

Trade or STEM fields only

Associates level minimum, 4 year max. No lifetime students

Do you want these people working and paying taxes also or do you want them to just keep getting the free handouts we give them now? Even if a libertarian gets into office it will be a hell of a long fight to take away welfare and that is if it could even happen, it simply won't.
 
TheSlamma said:
No degrees in French Poetry

Trade or STEM fields only

Associates level minimum, 4 year max. No lifetime students

Do you want these people working and paying taxes also or do you want them to just keep getting the free handouts we give them now? Even if a libertarian gets into office it will be a hell of a long fight to take away welfare and that is if it could even happen, it simply won't.
Click to expand...
Doctors? I think if we want to go universal healthcare route we need to pay for doctors' education.
 
TheSlamma said:
No degrees in French Poetry

Trade or STEM fields only

Associates level minimum, 4 year max. No lifetime students
Click to expand...

If you're going to evaluate aid based on how much it will help people contribute to the economy or enrich culture/society at large then a fair number of clunkers fall under STEM. And associates degrees are nearly useless to employers, sometimes even worse than nothing since it signals that the person made a more deliberated and concrete choice to not follow through with a "real" degree. Also, a big reason anyone gets associates degrees is it's all the cheap community colleges will offer, so if the government is funding better degrees that provides more incentive to get four years minimum.

A lot of useful fields can be significantly improved by graduate educations, so I'd say it's worth funding IF students show significant aptitude and potential. On the other hand, most of these useful grad programs already fund students through teaching and/or research.

dank69 said:
Doctors? I think if we want to go universal healthcare route we need to pay for doctors' education.
Click to expand...

Good insight. That could be a much better investment than paying the final costs. It'd also be great if the government can do anything to lower med school costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top