Category: socialism

Quit, Bernie Quit!

resultsApril26

Voting is done in Northeastern primaries and after tallying a number of votes Shillary Hillary has won four out five states with Bernie winning in Rhode Island by two delegates. I know that this might be hard for the Sandroids to believe, but Bernie had little chance of winning to begin with and is most certainly finished by now. But according to the aging socialists he’s going to take it out to the convention. Bernie has also blamed poor people for his failure. I’m not using hyperbole on that as Bernie actually told NBC’s Meet the Press “poor people don’t vote.” and “I mean, that’s just a fact,” Sanders continued. “That’s a sad reality of American society.

Bernie’s supporters need some serious help:

I'm sure that Bernie will find a path towards victory...
I’m sure that Bernie will find a path towards victory…

On the Republican side Trump won in every state and received almost every single delegate. Trump also has done what many pundits have said can’t be done and won a majority of the vote instead of just a plurality as he was doing before. As always, opinion polls can only tell you so much.

republicanApril 26

I was hoping for some Ted Cruz victories yet I would still gladly support Trump over the lying old hag and the aging communist. What an awesome election it’s been and I’m sure that it can only get better as it drags on.

Irina Alexandrovevskivich endorses Bernie!

Ms. Alexandrovevskivich endorses Bernie and you can too. Let’s listen to what this fine Party member has to say:

For reference, here’s where the deodorant comment comes from. Funny enough, one of the Sandroids commented that Bernie’s words have no meaning:

Rick_Russell

 

Discussions with Bernie Sanders supporters…

Today’s post is dedicated to my complex, intelligent, factually-based, and well-thought out debates with the Sandroid Bernout Army. I’m just kidding folks, there wasn’t a whole lot of critical thinking going on in the mind of the Sandroids. Only one of the people I asked questions of was somewhat reasonable. You’ve heard me talk of the folks over at Economic Illiterates for Bernie Sanders 2016 before and this is where most of the discussions took place at.

To start this off here’s a CNN that some Sandroids decided to spam the aforementioned page with.

CNN-Under Sanders, income and jobs would soar, economist says

In the CNN article a single economist by the name of Gerald Freidman claims that under Bernie’s plan the U.S. economy would:

Friedman, who believes in democratic socialism like the candidate, found that if Sanders became president — and was able to push his plan through Congress — median household income would be $82,200 by 2026, far higher than the $59,300 projected by the Congressional Budget Office.

In addition, poverty would plummet to a record low 6%, as opposed to the CBO’s forecast of 13.9%. The U.S. economy would grow by 5.3% per year, instead of 2.1%, and the nation’s $1.3 trillion deficit would turn into a large surplus by Sanders’ second term.

I’m fairly certain that most of the Bernie supporters didn’t get past this part (or the title for that matter) since right after that portion of the article was the following:

Other economists, however, feel that Friedman’s analysis is overly optimistic, saying it would be difficult to achieve that level of economic prosperity. Last week, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said Sanders’ plan to pay for health care would fall short by at least $3 trillion.”

I wonder where the $14.5 trillion is going to come from?

Sanders’ plan to pour $14.5 trillion into the economy — including spending on infrastructure and youth employment, increasing Social Security benefits, making college free and expanding health care and family leave — would juice GDP and productivity. (Friedman reduces the cost of Medicare-for-all to $10.7 trillion because he estimates the government would save $3.1 trillion by eliminating tax breaks for health insurance premiums.)

That’s right, tax increases on the wretched and vile “1%”, a 2.2% income tax on anyone making over $28,000 a year, a 6.2% payroll tax levied on the employer side, a tax on numerous financial transactions (purchase/sale of bonds, stocks, among many other things), and big increases on capital gains among numerous other fees. Brilliant, whatever could go wrong with this great plan?   (Hat-tip to We Are Capitalists)

12631405_493412637496950_2728163176610652916_n

Continuing on though:

‘Like the New Deal of the 1930s, Senator Sanders’ program is designed to do more than merely increase economic activity,’ Friedman writes. It will ‘promote a more just prosperity, broadly-based with a narrowing of economy inequality.’

FDR’s Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau Jr. admitted that New Deal policies were a complete and utter failure that didn’t restore employment, restore prosperity, or even end the Great Depression.

Many presidential hopefuls say their economic programs would boost growth. Donald Trump and Jeb Bush justify their big tax cuts by saying GDP would grow at a 4% rate. But their plans have been panned by experts as overly optimistic.

We won’t get 4% growth per year in the economy, but Bernie and his Bernouts will find a way to make the U.S. economy consistently grow at 5.3% every year.

Friedman, however, argues that Sanders’ plan would be more stimulative because it is pouring money into the economy, as opposed to cutting taxes. Several of Sanders’ proposals — such as spending $1 trillion on infrastructure — will happen in the first few years of his administration.

The thinking goes: This enhanced government spending would increase demand on businesses, who would then hire more workers to meet their needs. The increase in employment will prompt people to buy more, leading other businesses to hire.

‘If there is more spending, people will have more to do,’ Friedman said, noting that the share of the population with jobs could be restored to its 1999 level of more than 64%, up from its current 59.6% rate.

So if we take more money from citizens just to give it back to them later the economy will grow? Brilliant…

10610743_10207814491744006_389463997724232360_n       11261496_744850538953680_400639547207836214_n

At the end of the article we see the following:

Still, some experts question whether the effects would be that large.

Stimulating demand can boost a weak economy during a recession, but ‘it’s harder to accept as a long-run growth strategy,’ said William Gale, the former director of Brookings’ Economic Studies Program.

Also, it would be very difficult to achieve and maintain an economic growth rate of 5.3% per year after inflation. That target hasn’t been hit consistently since the 1960s, when technology was providing big advancements, the workforce was younger and there was increased demand for American products worldwide as other countries fully recovered from World War II.

‘The 5.3% number is a fantasy,’ said Jim Kessler, senior vice president at Third Way, a centrist think tank.

I feel like I’ve said something similar to this before about economic conditions in the 1950s and progressive ideas about the tax code.

Joe

Now that I’ve established what the Bernie trolls are citing as evidence of their ideas being correct, let’s look at how they respond to my arguments.

Here was the standard response I gave (i.e. copied and pasted) since the Sandroids kept citing the same article without reading it.

Sandroid Response

Some people never really responded…

JessicaPeck      MikeJoseph      JessicaPeck

Like I said at the beginning, there was one individual who was reasonable and not full of hate.

KaylaBubridge

Then there were the people who would disagree with what I had to say but offered no evidence of their own whilst calling me a liar. The logic that the Sandroids are using is simply amazing…

ChrisSloanes1    ChrisSloanes2    ChrisSloanes3

Concerning a discussion not related to the CNN article Mr. Joe Giansante provided some good entertainment. This postal worker appears to be going postal on me.

 

JoeGiasante    JoeGiasante1   JoeGiansante3

joetard

Mr. Tanous had some interesting logic as well; the “1%” are keeping Africa to perform sweatshop labor yet also stopping all economic development. I’m not certain how that works, especially when countries like South Africa are ruled by the socialists in the African National Congress and communist dictators rule Zimbabwe. What’s up with progressives and thinking that their opponents base everything off of Fox News?

TaylorJamesTanous    TaylorJamesTanous1    TaylorJamesTanous2

Then there was a woman by the name of Sally Sallernio who makes some wondrous claims yet is also unable to back them up.

jordan_lubbers jordan_lubbers_1 jordan_lubbers_2

She actually argued that facts don’t matter…

Sally_salltard_3 Sally_salltard_4

I know what Comrade Sally needs in her life, a lifetime subscription to Poor Me! magazine.

Poor_Me_Magazine_Issue_1

That’s all for now about my conversations with the Sandroid Bernout Army. As always, don’t be scared to share this information with your fiends, I mean friends.

 

 

 

Feeling the Bern, part four

Good evening comrades, it’s time for another round of glorious pictorial propaganda to celebrate Citizen Senator Sanders. The fun never stops at Economic Illiterates for Bernie Sanders 2016. After Bernie is inaugurated next year he will usher in a new era of utopia not seen since the Great Depression. Total government spending will go up from approximately 35% of GDP to double or raise to even greater heights and fully snuff out the private sector. The conversion of the United States of America to the United Socialist States of America will be complete and the last vestiges of capitalism will be purged from society. We will truly live in a paradise. Forward!

12647349_10153868462424787_5257769111101864588_n
This was produced by a genuine Bernie supporter! Isn’t it awesome?!

1937137_929600127129776_4986223959656059482_n  12615141_10156560450300374_5008849472153375364_o  12642523_10153233500536697_3320870184307534099_n  12642619_832889621115_7294484435066046573_n 12645135_10100444061444500_3388434319001976585_n  12670467_801234513315282_9049662932458246594_n 12670861_10153834128726425_4139315390278930385_n  12688281_10154126213763974_3603856737662163217_n 12705196_10154126214873974_5295509747422146737_n    Sanders-Cult  12670455_10207022002221521_1505578538064992712_n  12650794_10154126215273974_6619917434256219766_n  12651178_803914566380610_6190667262808849389_n 

For anyone who’s curious to the background behind the following photo: Washington Free Beacon-Bernie Sanders Condemns Existence of 23 Different Brands of Deodorant While Children Go Hungry

12540738_797499827022084_5414165091690548644_n

12670104_802806636491403_6227201768770297003_n12654314_1106730059347261_47000619306462022_n  12661983_10156720683495314_8491219007494682140_n

Are you feeling the Bern? Why not start with the U.S. Constitution?!

bernthecontstitution

As always, don’t be scared to share all of the media material that I have amassed here.

Are you feeling the Bern?

Feel the Bern, part Duo!

Feel the Bern, part three

Progressive thoughts on Socialist Insecurity

12246793_1067143936640804_6305886362138945129_n
Would progressives actually allow this?

Posted above is what a Facebook page called Americans against the Republican Party posted up about Socialist Insecurity. Based upon this meme you would almost think that progressives and fellow socialists actually believe in free choice instead of forcing fellow citizens to give up the majority of their income. Based upon how often the Democratic Party Presidential candidates talk about the 1%, taxing the rich, demanding that the Federal Government provide more, and their desire to turn the United States into a copy of Denmark I’m not certain I wouldn’t believe that though. Let’s take a look at some of the comments from the aforementioned Facebook page:

greed greed!

The comments are very revealing into what many progressives believe. The socialists are admitting that: they’re socialists, discuss why socialism is a good thing, think that the government will fix their problems, Rethuglicans are opposing the glorious coming of Next Tuesday™, and that progressives care about proles citizens. Don’t forget to talk about fighting for change some more either. Progressives care about you so much that they’ll take your income, give it to someone else, and then promise to pay you back with interest decades later. Obviously citizens can’t be trusted to save up their own money.

Are you ready for more Hope and Change comrade?
Are you ready for more Hope and Change comrade?

Plenty of people think that the Federal Government needs to provide even more for citizens and make things “free.” Going back to the Bernie Sanders’ article I linked to earlier:

Health care in Denmark is universal, free of charge and high in quality. Everybody is covered as a right of citizenship. The Danish health care system is popular, with patient satisfaction much higher than in the United States. In Denmark, every citizen can choose a doctor in their area. Prescription drugs are inexpensive.

It’s interesting that socialists will claim that anything a government provides is free. Danish taxes include: income taxes (not including municipal, and others) starting off at about 38% for anyone making over 40,000 DKK (∼$7000 US), a national Value Added Tax of 25%,a 180% sales taxes on automobiles (some boast about it since citizens’ are forced into obedience concerning climate change), $2,000 fees just to get a Driver License, gas taxes over $4/G, and numerous other fees. Such taxes hardly qualify anything provided in Denmark as being “free” and of no expense to taxpayers. But hey, taking 2/3 or more of a citizens income and and controlling them is a socialist’s wet dream right? Even when the extreme taxes are pointed out to progressives, they’ll still call government programs free. No matter what you use to prove that extensive social programs require extensive taxes, they’ll simply reply back that the rich aren’t paying their fair share…

illiteracyilliteracy1 illiteracy2 illiteracy3

Back to the initial thrust of this post though; no matter what progressives say about Social Security, not everyone pays into it. For quite a large number of people, including Ida May Fuller (more on her later), almost nothing was contributed to the “Trust Fund.” Let’s look at what Michael Lind had to write in the New York Times article “Social Security as a Ponzi? It’s a Bad Metaphor“:

Some critics of Social Security seem to equate it with a Ponzi scheme because the growth of payouts depends on growth of the number of future taxpayers, in the case of Social Security, or future investors, in the case of classic Ponzi schemes. By this definition, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme — and so are the private investment accounts that many conservatives propose as an alternative to Social Security. Whether the intermediary is the government or private money managers, in both cases the income of retirees will depend on money generated by the economic activity of succeeding generations in the work force. The main difference is that private investments are riskier than promises by the federal government of the United States to pay benefits to seniors who have paid payroll taxes all their lives.

The author just admitted that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. I do not advocate for forcing people to put money in private investment accounts either. I simply believe that citizens shouldn’t forcefully have 6.2% (up to $118,500) of their paycheck deducted, nor should employers have to give up their 6.2% either. I feel as if I can manage money better than central government managers, but progressives can’t let people have freedom. They have to take your money for your own good.

Social Security was partly pre-funded in 1983. This raised payroll taxes above immediate program costs in order to create a trust fund that lent money to the U.S. government, which must repay the trust fund as any other creditor would. Social Security will not become a pure pay-as-you-go system until 2036, according to the latest government estimates. Even then, there will be only a modest shortfall in benefits, which can be eliminated in advance by higher payroll taxes, permanent infusions of general revenue or other non-payroll taxes, or benefit reductions — or a combination of these reforms. A Social Security system funded purely by current taxes would no more be a Ponzi scheme than the U.S. military or the public school system.

So the Federal Government can take money out of it and promise to pay it back? Sounds promising. The estimates he posted up are also not correct. I can’t verify what he actually linked to, it is now dead. Taking a look at a report by the Office of the Inspector General for the Social Security Administration’s 2014 Disability Insurance Trust Fund Informational Report reveals the following:

The 2014 Trustees’ Annual Report has projected that the DI Trust Fund reserves will be depleted in the fourth quarter of 2016, and the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds would be depleted in 2033. Although the DI Trust Fund is estimated to be depleted in the fourth quarter of 2016, the Trustees have recommended that lawmakers address the projected Trust Fund shortfalls for the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds in a timely way to phase in necessary changes and give workers and beneficiaries time to adjust to them. Implementing changes soon would allow more generations to share in the needed revenue increases or reductions in scheduled benefits.

For anyone who’s curious, DI refers to the Disability Insurance Trust Fund and OASI is Old-Age and Survivors Insurance program. The DI “Trust Fund” runs out of money in a year and once the program payments are combined money will run low in 2033. Isn’t interesting how these estimates keep growing shorter? Moving down to page 3, the document illustrates perfectly how Social Security is a pyramid scheme:

Overall, OASDI costs will rise over the next 20 years as baby boomers retire and lower-birth-rate generations born after 1965 replace the population at working ages. The lower birth rates after 1965 caused a permanent shift in the population’s age distribution, with fewer workers supporting more retirees. Additionally, the baby boomer generation has moved from less disability-prone ages (25 to 44) to more disability prone ages (45 to 64). See Figure C–1 in Appendix C. This, along with other issues, has resulted in the flat projected number of workers per DI beneficiary for the future.

The last paragraph in Mr. Lind’s piece must have been a joke, right?

To paraphrase the late David Crockett — as a U.S. congressman from Tennessee, before he died in 1836 at the Alamo during the fight for the independence of Texas — Governor Perry’s claim that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme don’t make good sense. It don’t even make good nonsense.

Something doesn’t make sense anyway. The fine fact-checkers over at PolitiFact Florida have declared any claims that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme to be false. Let’s take a look at why:

The term originates with Charles Ponzi, a Boston swindler who conned investors out of millions in 1920 by promising returns of up to 100 percent in 90 days on investments in foreign postal coupons. After first-round investors harvested those profits, others flocked to Ponzi, unaware his ‘profits’ consisted of money paid in by other investors.

That strategy is unsustainable.

In contrast, Social Security is more like a ‘pay-as-you-go’ system transferring payroll tax payments by workers to retirees. A 2009 Social Security Administration online post stated: ‘The American Social Security system has been in continuous successful operation since 1935. Charles Ponzi’s scheme lasted barely 200 days.’

It’s different from a Ponzi scheme because it’s lasted thus far. It’s different because rather than my own money coming back to me it’s going to someone else. What sound logic. Continuing on:

Mitchell Zuckoff, a Boston University journalism professor who has written a book on Ponzi, noted three critical dissimilarities between Social Security and a Ponzi scheme. We will summarize Zuckoff’s comments from an earlier fact-check:

• ‘First, in the case of Social Security, no one is being misled,’ Zuckoff wrote in a January 2009 article in Fortune. ‘Social Security is exactly what it claims to be: A mandatory transfer payment system under which current workers are taxed on their incomes to pay benefits, with no promises of huge returns.’

• Second, he wrote, ‘A Ponzi scheme is unsustainable because the number of potential investors is eventually exhausted.’ While Social Security faces a huge burden due to retiring Baby Boomers, it can be and has been tweaked, and ‘the government could change benefit formulas or take other steps, like increasing taxes, to keep the system from failing.’

• Third, Zuckoff wrote, ‘Social Security is morally the polar opposite of a Ponzi scheme. … At the height of the Great Depression, our society (see ‘Social’) resolved to create a safety net (see ‘Security’) in the form of a social insurance policy that would pay modest benefits to retirees, the disabled and the survivors of deceased workers. By design, that means a certain amount of wealth transfer, with richer workers subsidizing poorer ones. That might rankle, but it’s not fraud.’

I see why Social Security has lasted for decades now. You pay into the system or you get to go to prison for tax evasion. The journalism professor wrote that there’s no huge returns, even though the Democratic Presidential candidates keep claiming that they’re going to have the Federal Government give out more “free” stuff. It’s not fraud because you don’t have a choice. Yet more sound logic.

12049738_761297503975650_5162165167884333271_n 12219545_10153150648706472_408308069280998254_n

In PolitiFact’s own article they essentially admit that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that forces you to pay rather than going out of business.

Michael Tanner, an expert on Social Security at the libertarian Cato Institute says that Social Security and Ponzi schemes share some characteristics — for example, in the early stages there is a huge windfall while those later on get smaller returns.

However, Ponzi didn’t have the power of the federal government.

‘In the end the Ponzi scheme collapses and can’t make people continue to give him money, but Social Security can always force people to pay,’ Tanner said. ‘In theory Social Security can always go out and raise taxes to keep benefits flowing.’

PolitiFact still rates the claim that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme as being false though:

Curbelo said that Social Security and Medicare are ‘a Ponzi scheme.’

A Ponzi scheme is by definition an illegal crime and an unsustainable set-up that crashes very quickly. Social Security and Medicare, which have been around for decades, are not criminal schemes.

Both programs face the massive challenge of fewer workers paying for the benefits of current retirees, and budget experts say Congress could make changes to make them more sustainable in the future — though many politicians are reluctant to gamble with the support of current senior voters.

Curbelo raises a legitimate point about the need for reform, but that’s entirely different than calling these programs ‘Ponzi schemes.’

We rate this claim False.

Social Security is legal because FDR did everything possible to circumvent the Constitution and pack the Supreme Court. Social Security is legal because you don’t have a choice. Progressives have some interesting ideas on freedom and what is illegal.

Earlier in the article I mentioned Ida May Fuller, the first recipient of a monthly Social Security check. Ms. Fuller paid a grand total of $22.54 into Social Security and received $22,888.92 in benefits. There’s really not much that I can to say to anyone that thinks such a system is sustainable. She multiplied her contribution a thousand times over; what a fine investment! The SSA  seems to be gloating over how much money Ms. Fuller received. I guess we’ll just keep kicking the debt can down the road for now. As always, share this post with your friends and comment.

th

 

 

 

 

Look at all that President Obama has accomplished

Good evening comrades, today’s post will go over all the wonderful deeds and accomplishments that President Obama has achieved for the United Socialist States of America. Our current piece of pictorial propaganda comes from the fine folks at Occupy Communists Democrats:

12193389_10156234818655327_1440978989817912249_n

When looking at the Unemployment rate, please don’t take into account that the Labor Force Participation Rate has also dropped. Like all good Party members, the folks at Occupy Communists don’t properly represent the data (or cite their sources). Taking a quick look at some Bureau of Labor Statistics data puts some insight into how the Unemployment Rate has dropped.

participation_trend
Take note of the constant downward trend during all of President Obama’s tenure.

I selelected the years of 2000-2015 from the BLS to generate the graph; you can adjust the years as you see fit. SeriesReport-20151122232319_878ef9

I thought that proud progressive like the ones at Time Magazine claimed that President Obama had nothing to do with gasoline prices and oil imports? But of course, those evil oil companies drilling for oil in the U.S. must be because President Obama demanded it. Didn’t Obama Administration officials want gas prices to go up to $10 per gallon like it is in Europe to force proles citizens to give up their cars? I also thought that President Obama recently rejected the Keystone XL pipeline citing “national interest” as his reasoning? I guess that we’ll keep using trains and oil tankers to import oil that we are using from Canada. Makes total sense and is much safer than using a pipeline…

s-1 c-1

Never forget comrades, Dear Leader has nothing to do with gas prices unless they are cheap...
Never forget comrades, Dear Leader has nothing to do with gas prices unless they are cheap…

The teen pregnancy statistic is really interesting and insightful. President Obama is most certainly responsible for ensuring that teenagers have less sex and/or use birth control more often. Don’t look at the Health and Human Services Department’s description of the data though:

In 2013, there were 26.5 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 15-19, or 273,105 babies born to females in this age group.[1] Nearly eighty-nine percent of these births occurred outside of marriage.[1] The 2013 teen birth rate indicates a  decline of ten percent from 2012 when the birth rate was 29.4 per 1,000.[1] The teen birth rate has declined almost continuously over the past 20 years. In 1991, the U.S. teen birth rate was 61.8 births for every 1,000 adolescent females, compared with 26.5 births for every 1,000 adolescent females in 2013. Still, the U.S. teen birth rate is higher than that of many other developed countries, including Canada and the United Kingdom.[2]” (emphasis added)

teenbirthsgraph2011
I guess that President Obama is responsible for a twenty year trend?!

If you look down the article a little further you see that it’s Southern states that have the highest teen pregnancy rates. But before comrades use this as evidence that the dumb, gun and religion clinging, xenophobic, KKKonservatives and Rethuglicans are hypocrites let’s take a look at some state data. In this case, I’ll use Texas.

Let's accuse the racist white folks of hypocrisy without looking at the data...
Let’s accuse the racist white folks of hypocrisy without looking at the data more closely…

Of all teen pregnancies in Texas, only 21% are from Non-Hispanic, White mothers. I know that I don’t have to look this statistic up, but more than 21% of Texas is made up of those evil white people.

Texas1
We can still blame whitey for this…

Texas2

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action surely is a great diplomatic achievement courtesy of John Kerry. Just as Iran honored the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty they will also another piece of paper in which provisions expire after ten to fifteen years anyway. Do not look at how Iran’s Uranium stockpile continues to grow. You should also ignore how Iran is testing ICBM’s in violation of a U.N. treaty that they are already party to. To quote Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan, Iran’s Defense Minister:

To follow our defense programs, we don’t ask permission from anyone,

I think that such language is pretty clear, but when you’re a proud progressive words mean whatever you want them to. I suppose that all of those “Death to America” chants are also just meant for domestic consumption and have no real meaning.

The GDP growth only goes over a single quarter of the Obama Administration and ignore all the others. It’s amazing what you can do with numbers when you ignore all the ones that are inconvenient. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis U.S. GDP growth has been low or negative for many quarters during President Obama’s tenure, but reading that data is thoughtcrimeAny reports that Obama Administration GDP growth estimates have been way too high are also completely and totally false. Flag your own lying eyes. It’s amazing what you can do with some Common Core math.

goodgrowth GDP

Concerning the Dow Jones Industrial Average, since when did followers of the Church of Socialism want the wretched “1%” and big corporations to make a bunch of money? I mean the Dow Jones represents just 30 of those evil and large corporations and not the “working class” right? I suppose that the Federal Reserve using trillions in quantitative easing to inflate the economy counts as real growth right? What the Federal Reserve is doing is totally different from what Zimbabwe did to itself. It’s really interesting to look at Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Reports to get an idea of whether there has been real economic growth or not.

selectrate balancesheet compensation

As always, don’t be shy and share this post with your friends.

12278865_422832827921550_4644439739053117008_n

 

 

 

Feel the Bern, part three

Good evening comrades, it’s time to post more Party information and Truth on why Kommissar Bernie Sanders would be a great President of the coming United Socialist States of America (U.S.S.A). I will use many fine pieces of pictorial propaganda explain why Sanders is a fine Communist, I mean Democratic Party candidate. The wonderful folks at Economic Illiterates for Bernie Sanders 2016 have produced and Photoshopped many fine pictures and photographs. If you have a chance, you should pay patronage to their fine page. Let’s not dawdle any longer though, it’s time to see what you’ve been patiently awaiting. Enjoy!

 

12038607_427592297432542_160160998373813002_o12187908_764228390349228_2142762680098903258_n12079547_10204085245366018_6745435839845716313_n12243488_769055146533219_7552963879085079560_n12189004_10208060028684402_2691016260162994435_n12239867_1192850000741864_7516719369227766157_nBernie-Winners-copy

12042834_10206698989126342_3966493449740243648_n
Are you ready for the Socialist version of charity?

 

12141718_10153617980890610_7286761760024516042_n12219493_10153145122506472_3320879778572543011_nBernies-Free-Range-Dems-copy12243165_10154367412722782_8361544932074251864_n

 

12002444_1497281667253015_76186968420997306_o
I’ve been told by proud Party members that Bernie Sanders and his campaign don’t sell T-shirts…

shirtburn

bernie_shirt
Those Party members are true comrades who either aren’t able to use search engines, or willfully deny the Kurrent Truth for the Greater Good.
12063404_3900878633458_5371819611672332235_n
Is Communist Man Bernie’s favorite hero?
12043082_10206345052038704_1604411443540342526_n
Or is it perhaps, glorious Comrade Stalin?
12115949_895890326980_2823475806041322782_n
Are you ready for more Hope and Change comrade?
12109212_10101957320266634_8969746246945595539_n
Are you ready for the Socialist version of charity?
12190898_762816970490370_5529758425660035561_n
Are you ready to time travel to the era that Cuba is in?
11987121_743890502383017_3552519507080524887_n
Are you ready for the Socialist version of charity?

 

As always, don’t be shy. Share these wonderful photos and this amazing blog with your friends.

Keynesians don’t always spend your money…

Though when Keynesians do spend your money, kiss it all goodbye. Today’s post is dedicated to the glory of John Manyard Keynes’ economic beliefs. Once this capitalism thing is destroyed we will all be able to live in Utopia.

I know that I’ve already covered how People’s Economist Paul Krugman things that massive debt spending and war are good for the economy, but let’s cover that point from something other than his space alien invasion idea, shall we?

Here are some of Krugman’s thoughts about the effects 9/11 would have on the economy:

krugman911.1 krugman911

Nothing says economic prosperity like war, right? It’s as good as massive debt spending!

tumblr_mbsdmeSTbU1qcznab krugtard1.1  B2vYycKIEAAmpdI

Then there’s this interesting tidbit from John Manyard Keynes himself as written in The Economic Consequences of Peace. This quote starts on page 235:

Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become “profiteers,” who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds [236] and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.

Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”

It’s amazing that the same man believed in massive state spending and other command economy methods of raising the aggregate demand.

keynesian-economics-600x435  11998985_10153415083954279_8537637148524341890_n

800px-U.S._Federal_Reserve_-_Treasury_and_Mortgage-Backed_Securities_Held tumblr_m5ack4lBXx1r8o2two1_500

keynesian-economics-spending-your-money

The Greek tragedy never ends… somehow

It seems as if no one really cares about Greece much these days. The Greeks held their bailout referendum, the Greek bluff was called, and then the Greek government quickly caved on accepting E.U. terms for another €86 billion bailout. I suppose that the recent problems in China (a 30% drop in one month) were among many of the things more important than some socialists racking up too much debt and possibly not being able to retire at 58 anymore (or 45 for preferred Party groups). I wonder how many more bailouts the Greeks will accept and how much longer the default can will be kicked down the road?

new-democracy-party-supporters-attend-their-closing-election-rally-in-omonia-square-in-central-athens-greece-september-17-2015-reutersmichalis-karagiannis

I’m really not certain why so many Greeks think that they are entitled to money from other E.U. member states. Former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis called the deal “a new Versailles Treaty“. This is about the worst possible analogy that the communist could have come up with. Whose fault is it that the Greeks lied about their finances to fulfill Maastricht treaty obligations and adopt the Euro? If Greek socialists are so intent on not paying back any money, keeping their generous perks, and independence from the E.U., why not adopt drachma again? They can be like the Workers’ Paradise of Zimbabwe and enjoy 231,000,000% interest rates. It will be glorious!

4800
Look at this proud Party member. She’s happy that socialism has brought 25% unemployment rates to Greece.

Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras was victorious in his re-election bid with about 35.5% of the vote. The Syriza splinter group, Popular Unity, got about 2.8% of the vote. Since Popular Unity received less than 3% of the vote, they’re not even able to enter Parliament. The Guardian article that I’m getting this information from is pretty hilarious. One of the better statements was this gem: “Tsipras’s win in January marked the first time the radical left assumed governance in a country“. Was the Panhellenic Socialist Movement, which ruled the country for decades, not a socialist party? The New Democracy Party, which received 28% of the vote, is considered a “centre-right” party by The Guardian. Funny enough, the Wikipedia article calls the New Democracy Party a “liberal-conservative” party, as if the progressive concept of social justice is compatible with free markets and liberty. I suppose that if your not an overt socialist in Greece you must be right-winger.

Here stands the victorious socialist...
Here stands the victorious socialist…

What’s in store for the Third Hellenic Republic? When will we find out? When will other countries give up on giving Greece more money? Will the Greeks finally dump excessive state intervention and socialism? Will another idiot start a CrowdFund campaign for the Greek government? Only time will tell…

Hey kid? Wanna light your money on fire?
Hey kid! Wanna light your money on fire?

Bonus Round: Did you know that it’s illegal not to vote in Greek elections?

Greek_elections_abstention_rates

Feel the Bern, part Duo!

OK comrades, the fine Kommissars over at Economic Illiterates for Bernie Sanders 2016 have come up with some more Party propaganda to enjoy and spread amongst your progressive friends. But don’t be afraid to share them with your Neo-Kulak friends like: KKKonservatives, Losertarians, and RepubliKKKans who don’t believe in Communism Socialism. Don’t be afraid, any who oppose the will of the Party will be purged in the coming Cultural Revolution. Have fun proles citizens!

10397976_10156011845240054_1598615481461175038_n 10610743_10207814491744006_389463997724232360_n 11052371_10206650109483493_795029041611889994_n 11052474_745486495556751_4611187463513079564_n11898607_733909276714473_8492404869297429971_n 11202113_10207798831351899_3649249235494055846_n 11261496_744850538953680_400639547207836214_n 11821151_1480669688895942_701473441_n 11825906_732080893563978_1570402142084585481_n 11885359_733520483420019_701280292284202732_n12004696_745718525533548_6865262922263919053_nOn-Oldern-Pond-copy11902529_10203551757114957_983678609569661696_n11924906_10154181110577908_2468400777572495783_n11953130_743288029109931_4341885137372721528_n11958072_741438619294872_4122757708553641696_o11986335_10153587956738476_1943014972503764337_n11987135_742088772563190_2920664281034866924_n12020009_494413740720231_3534983451143198093_n20150810_20454119642727178_90a328d4b1_Bernie-Sanders-335x200Bernie-copy

I put some pictures up from actual Bernie Sanders’ supporters. Don’t lie, you couldn’t tell the difference between reality and satire. Remember, we don’t need freedom. What we need as proles citizens is central government control of the economy to ensure that all citizen’s needs are met just like in: Detroit, Zimbabwe, Rhode Island, or Venezuela. Once the government controls political speech and spending, all will be fair in our elections. Indeed, it will be a true progressive utopia. Let’s close this post out with an actual debate with a Bernie supporter:

roman

Forward!