2016 Postmortem

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)

19. You have no clue on what you are talking about

Reply to DanTex (Reply #5)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 08:41 AM

Sep 2015

your links prove you don't

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

135 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sanders is willing to sacrifice growth for the sake of redistribution. [View all] DanTex Sep 2015 OP

So am I. nt LWolf Sep 2015 #1

Exactly. Growth, by definition, is an unsustainable concept. HappyPlace Sep 2015 #95

YES. nt LWolf Sep 2015 #122

#feelTheBern2016 newfie11 Sep 2015 #2

Neo liberal austerity garbage Ichingcarpenter Sep 2015 #3

I agree, Sanders should not be conceding garbage neo-liberal economic talking points DanTex Sep 2015 #5

You have no clue on what you are talking about Ichingcarpenter Sep 2015 #19

Umm, the links are by Stiglitz and Piketty. Do you consider them neo-liberal? DanTex Sep 2015 #22

He does, and supplies links. Also check my post because I do know what I'm talking about. PatrickforO Sep 2015 #130

Indeed...too many are now "wised up" about Wall Street and the Rest KoKo Sep 2015 #111

what growth? ibegurpard Sep 2015 #4

Can't put it any better than that. Thank you. djean111 Sep 2015 #7

+1000 Hydra Sep 2015 #41

...! KoKo Sep 2015 #113

/\_/\_This right here_/\_/\ Scuba Sep 2015 #119

I would recommend but for the editorial comment by the OP. morningfog Sep 2015 #6

+1 dorkzilla Sep 2015 #52

Self-pwned by your own OP marmar Sep 2015 #8

Create jobs by demonizing wealth. SonderWoman Sep 2015 #9

Have you even read your own sig ? TheFarS1de Sep 2015 #11

really? lol n/t retrowire Sep 2015 #12

Is that a Ronald Reagan quote? Armstead Sep 2015 #18

wow. nt m-lekktor Sep 2015 #64

5 minutes ago the talking point was that Sanders supporters are all 1%er elitists. Warren DeMontague Sep 2015 #96

yeah it's a bad looking growth though retrowire Sep 2015 #10

I get the feeling that some of your critics never bothered to read the material at the MADem Sep 2015 #13

The responses say a lot about the economic literacy level of Hillary bashers. DanTex Sep 2015 #15

Ain't that the truth...! MADem Sep 2015 #17

Battling for a share of an increasingly smaller economic pie... DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #37

Dan I gotta be honest with you Armstead Sep 2015 #24

You're a smart person too, which means you certainly are aware of the Hillary bashing going on here. DanTex Sep 2015 #30

She does make me want to throw my shoe -- as have many other Democrats over the last 30 years Armstead Sep 2015 #36

I don't buy the "both sides" thing in this case. There are a lot of asymmetries. DanTex Sep 2015 #40

It's all a matter of whose ox is being gored. I feel the same way you do from the other side. Armstead Sep 2015 #46

Not in this case. I've seen no threads accusing Sanders of being a racist. Can you link to one? DanTex Sep 2015 #48

Well, I'm going to agree to disagree Armstead Sep 2015 #49

I think most of the folks disagreeing with you here... Blus4u Sep 2015 #39

Yes, that is my take on this OP and replies, too. Hiraeth Sep 2015 #88

A one track mind is a burden to all. But I have reason to agree with BS on this: freshwest Sep 2015 #107

Well, one supposedly did ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2015 #26

Post removed Post removed Sep 2015 #63

What the ever loving fuck??? sufrommich Sep 2015 #66

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2015 #71

So glad it got a Hide. Cha Sep 2015 #134

Glad that racist dribble got a Hide. Cha Sep 2015 #133

Actually, wealth redistribution can help growth. It can produce more demand in an economy. mmonk Sep 2015 #14

Yes, that was my point. DanTex Sep 2015 #16

. mmonk Sep 2015 #21

Decreasing wealth inequality is the only way to lasting growth that won't come crashing down in RichVRichV Sep 2015 #87

+1 mmonk Sep 2015 #100

Rule Number One: Never trust economic arguments. Never. DetlefK Sep 2015 #20

Well, the problem is, you have to make economic policy somehow, so you have to trust something. DanTex Sep 2015 #23

Exactly. And we have plenty of examples through global history. mmonk Sep 2015 #27

And we've been trusting the wrong people and somethings for too long Armstead Sep 2015 #32

Hillary is not Bill. DanTex Sep 2015 #33

It's not a matter of "sacrificing" growth. It's what type of growth. Armstead Sep 2015 #38

It is in the way Bernie is phrasing it. DanTex Sep 2015 #44

Except Bernie isn't phrasing it that way. Scootaloo Sep 2015 #80

Clearly implying that he's willing to accept less growth in order to redistribute. DanTex Sep 2015 #84

Correct. Not, as you have insisted, that redistribution necessitates stymieing growth. Scootaloo Sep 2015 #89

WTF??? LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #60

Which do you disagree with? Obama more left than Bill, or Hillary more left than Obama? DanTex Sep 2015 #69

Socially or economically? LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #70

Both. DanTex Sep 2015 #75

So are you still clinging to the strawman that Bernie wants to sacrifice growth? LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #77

He came out and said that he was willing to see less growth. I'm not mischaracterizing it at all. DanTex Sep 2015 #82

Actual headline: The thing Bernie Sanders says about inequality that no other candidate will touch Hiraeth Sep 2015 #93

Poor choice of wording is "sacrifice". "Controlled growth" would be a better phrase, I think. Hiraeth Sep 2015 #90

Do you trust the "trickle-down-theory"? DetlefK Sep 2015 #34

No. DanTex Sep 2015 #35

Our leaders have trusted that if they take care of the wealthy the wealthy will in turn take care of Autumn Sep 2015 #42

False premise. RDANGELO Sep 2015 #25

Actually, that was the OP's point. N/t 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2015 #28

Which is why Bernie shouldn't be talking about sacrificing growth. DanTex Sep 2015 #31

Bernie is right. We shouldn’t worry so much about economic growth if that growth serves Autumn Sep 2015 #43

Except he's not. Sacrifice is your word, your imagery, your choice, Bernie is not saying any such Bluenorthwest Sep 2015 #59

+1,000 LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #61

The OP will not respond. Bluenorthwest Sep 2015 #62

I do believe there is a name for such an argument, where one misrepresenst the views LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #65

thank you. no wonder this thread is a hot mess. Hiraeth Sep 2015 #92

The words he used that seem to be invisible to you are Autumn Sep 2015 #114

Economic Growth Is Dead - Redistribution Is All That Is Left cantbeserious Sep 2015 #29

We need to start talking about reducing growth Hydra Sep 2015 #45

Context! drm604 Sep 2015 #47

Pish. Fawke Em Sep 2015 #50

Post removed Post removed Sep 2015 #51

This argument is disingenuous. nt. druidity33 Sep 2015 #53

Eeek! Bernie wants to take away our yachts!!! Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2015 #54

LMAO!!! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #121

I'm sooo tired of hearing kacekwl Sep 2015 #55

You mischaracterize, he does not say 'sacrifice growth' he says pursue healthy growth and equitable Bluenorthwest Sep 2015 #56

"Socialism! BOOGA WOOGGA!" LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #57

Sounds like boloney to me; elleng Sep 2015 #58

Did I accidentally stumble into Reaganomics Underground or something Cheese Sandwich Sep 2015 #67

Sort of LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #72

Good luck trying to win a presidential campaign arguing that we don't need growth. DanTex Sep 2015 #76

You are reinforcing an inaccurate portrayal Armstead Sep 2015 #78

"Healthy" growth rates in this case means "lower" growth rates. DanTex Sep 2015 #86

and they might Armstead Sep 2015 #91

Of course he is. That is his objective. djean111 Sep 2015 #101

yep. Hiraeth Sep 2015 #108

But he doesn't say that. You're totally making that up. arcane1 Sep 2015 #81

Except he's not talking about redistribution at the expense of growth. Scootaloo Sep 2015 #83

Apparently the drug war is great, too, it just needs more money. Warren DeMontague Sep 2015 #97

I believe that is a good thing, as current growth is not sustainable. Xyzse Sep 2015 #68

We ought to talk to the Pope about this. Ron Green Sep 2015 #73

When 99% of all new 'growth' goes to the top 1% AgingAmerican Sep 2015 #74

I'm glad he and I are in agreement. arcane1 Sep 2015 #79

Until balance is obtained the pendulum will make a wide arc. Simply put, Sanders is right. Hiraeth Sep 2015 #85

Conservatives claim it is a zero sum game -- it's not Armstead Sep 2015 #94

Fuck capitalism ... GeorgeGist Sep 2015 #98

And that is why I support him - TBF Sep 2015 #99

Sorry I'm late to this thread. Now please tell me what the fuck this is all about. HappyPlace Sep 2015 #102

damn, I had to look twice to make sure I wasn't on National Reviews m-lekktor Sep 2015 #103

Growth is a myth....redistribute now. bowens43 Sep 2015 #104

That works for me. Repugs are always talking "growth" whathehell Sep 2015 #105

Unfettered growth isn't always good; just look at cancer. n/t Avalux Sep 2015 #106

Unrec. n/t Admiral Loinpresser Sep 2015 #109

It is OK, Dan. We got this. Relax. Agony Sep 2015 #110

Unrec right wing tripe. PowerToThePeople Sep 2015 #112

Bingo! Scuba Sep 2015 #120

This is one of my many concerns with Bernie as our candidate. DCBob Sep 2015 #115

Yes, conservative Democrats who have the same views as the GOP Armstead Sep 2015 #116

It's getting harder to tell the difference between the two. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2015 #118

Because if we all have more, we participate in the economy, more. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2015 #117

This is rather close to a republican argument. kenfrequed Sep 2015 #123

Ironically, it's Bernie who is conceding the supply-side economics talking points here. DanTex Sep 2015 #125

You paraphrase poorly Armstead Sep 2015 #127

How wonderfully dishonest of you. kenfrequed Sep 2015 #128

unchecked growth is called cancer JackInGreen Sep 2015 #124

I rec'd the post for what Sanders said NowSam Sep 2015 #126

Ah, the new establishment meme! PatrickforO Sep 2015 #129

It's a losing strategy in the GE. Plain and simple. redstateblues Sep 2015 #131

Because I think that, long term, we need to change our economic model to one based on sustainability Agnosticsherbet Sep 2015 #132

In and of itself, "growth" only benefits the rich. Ken Burch Sep 2015 #135