2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumpmorlan1
(2,096 posts)I feel sorry for you if this is what you believe.
dchill
(42,660 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Response to Post removed (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
emsimon33
(3,128 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,270 posts)And be sure to give Ann Coulter a big one on the cheek tonite.
woodsprite
(12,582 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,270 posts)that there is an asshole missing.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)It does have lots of words though, and that's nice.
What series of events has led you to a place in your life where you believe Bernie Sanders is a bad person, and unrestricted capitalism and nuclear energy (among other things) are good ideas?
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)Everything I wrote is fact based. Sanders isn't a bad person, he's a good person, but I'm pretty fed up with all the ludicrous attacks against Hillary that are also in effect attacks against her supporters. The fact is it's easy to frame Sanders just as negatively as Sanders supporters frame Hillary.
Nowhere did I advocate unrestricted capitalism, and certainly both Hillary and Sanders plans to raise taxes on the wealthy are positive. As far as nuclear energy goes, it needs to be safe, but it is low carbon so makes a lot of sense as a way of getting away from goal and other atmosphere damaging pollutants while we develop better alternatives.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
Broward
(1,976 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)Autumn
(48,962 posts)called Butt Paste you can put on that.
Response to Post removed (Original post)
Post removed
Eric J in MN
(35,639 posts)NT
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)understand that Asia will be the fastest growing market in the next 50 years. He wants to play on people's fears and go backward. The problem being, you can't go back, only forward.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)You should be ashamed.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)
vJohn Poet
(2,510 posts)"a Republican, a liar, corrupt, cackling, and so on" as you say.
Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)'Dirty' Industries: Just between you and me, shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging MORE migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [Least Developed Countries]? I can think of three reasons:
1) The measurements of the costs of health impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality. From this point of view a given amount of health impairing pollution should be done in the country with the lowest cost, which will be the country with the lowest wages. I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that.
2) The costs of pollution are likely to be non-linear as the initial increments of pollution probably have very low cost. I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted, their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City. Only the lamentable facts that so much pollution is generated by non-tradable industries (transport, electrical generation) and that the unit transport costs of solid waste are so high prevent world welfare enhancing trade in air pollution and waste.
3) The demand for a clean environment for aesthetic and health reasons is likely to have very high income elasticity. The concern over an agent that causes a one in a million change in the odds of prostrate[sic] cancer is obviously going to be much higher in a country where people survive to get prostrate[sic] cancer than in a country where under 5 mortality is 200 per thousand. Also, much of the concern over industrial atmosphere discharge is about visibility impairing particulates. These discharges may have very little direct health impact. Clearly trade in goods that embody aesthetic pollution concerns could be welfare enhancing. While production is mobile the consumption of pretty air is a non-tradable.
The problem with the arguments against all of these proposals for more pollution in LDCs (intrinsic rights to certain goods, moral reasons, social concerns, lack of adequate markets, etc.) could be turned around and used more or less effectively against every Bank proposal for liberalization.
and some here are under the delusion that the TPP with allow workers in Vietnam to form a union.
BootinUp
(51,325 posts)and other issues that he probably sees as divisive and preventing Dems from building a bigger coalition. Problem is, Dems are not going to suddenly stop being the champions on these issues and we shouldn't.
I agree in general and for many of the reasons you state, that Sanders would not be good as our party leader. Rather I see him as someone who hopefully makes us better by being a voice for those that feel unrepresented.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)DOMA, claiming the sanctified superiority of straight people in the eyes of God. Her rhetoric was a wall against progress and over the years it became increasingly impossible to endure. Still I had a pretty good view of her until she preached that vile sermon praising Ronald Reagan as an AIDS activist when he was in fact guilty of criminal inaction while tens of thousands of Americans died. She is either pandering to right wingers or she's ignorant of basic history.
So this crap you pull exploiting gay people to bash Bernie is very very hard to look at. It makes me loathe your candidate and her cohort. I hated Reagan. Hillary and Co adore Reagan.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)not a one actually.
Though thanks for the laugh.
Philly-Union-Man
(79 posts)Unless, of course, war, corruption, inequality and fighting for the good of the rich are in your wheelhouse.
In that case, you might indeed find this great man to be less than.
Urchin
(248 posts)It's unfair to give jobs to Americans because we should be giving those jobs to people in other countries and let Americans become homeless?
Lunacy.