Bernie Sanders Speech on Democratic Socialism & Economic Rights (6/12/19)

[storyteller]

He ran on expanding Obamacare against a progressive challenger.

I'm confused as to how that's relevant to my point. We can't say how far left the discussion can go if whenever the left tries to define their terminology, even people on their own side dilute and confuse the terminology. They set up a "Medicare for All" hearing and he wants them to not focus on Medicare for All...it's no wonder people are confused but that's also why I don't see a fair way to project "major catastrophes" just over injecting Social Democratic policies into the discussion (again, we have two solid examples in Bernie and Warren who both have advanced these policies and saw their profiles and success raise exponentially).

 

[Secure Da Bag]

I'm confused as to how that's relevant to my point. We can't say how far left the discussion can go if whenever the left tries to define their terminology, even people on their own side dilute and confuse the terminology. They set up a "Medicare for All" hearing and he wants them to not focus on Medicare for All...it's no wonder people are confused but that's also why I don't see a fair way to project "major catastrophes" just over injecting Social Democratic policies into the discussion (again, we have two solid examples in Bernie and Warren who both have advanced these policies and saw their profiles and success raise exponentially).

In short, POC. The Party of Clinton.

 

[Pressure]

I'm confused as to how that's relevant to my point. We can't say how far left the discussion can go if whenever the left tries to define their terminology, even people on their own side dilute and confuse the terminology. They set up a "Medicare for All" hearing and he wants them to not focus on Medicare for All...it's no wonder people are confused but that's also why I don't see a fair way to project "major catastrophes" just over injecting Social Democratic policies into the discussion (again, we have two solid examples in Bernie and Warren who both have advanced these policies and saw their profiles and success raise exponentially).

You said dem leadership is against Medicare for all, but as your article states:

• The hearing is only happening because Pelosi told them they have to have it
• Neal is an author of Obamacare and as a result wants to protect and expand his signature legislation he's been a part of

The hearing will take place. And Medicare for all will be discussed among other options. It's on its supporters to push their agenda and shift the window.

Jayapal, who does not sit on Ways and Means and was not at the meeting with Neal, said that she is confident the hearing will nevertheless be a boost to the effort. “I wasn’t in the room, but I would just say it is impossible to have a hearing on Medicare for All without saying those words,” she said. “I am confident that our Medicare for All supporters on the committee will talk about the policy and the bill completely. And I am 100% focused on the fact that this is a historic hearing in a major committee of record — something that has never happened before. We appreciate the chairman holding this Medicare for All hearing.”

 

[storyteller]

You said dem leadership is against Medicare for all, but as your article states:

I didn't say they're "against" it, I said "leadership refuses to put the effort in to inform" about it. Which is to say that when people are polled about Medicare for All, they don't have a shared definition for what that is. I don't necessarily assume leadership is against the legislation, I just don't think they're willing to put in the effort to differentiate the policies when the phrase itself is polling well. So they don't see value in figuring out what actual details poll well and what people either don't want or are misunderstanding when the term is used.

• The hearing is only happening because Pelosi told them they have to have it
• Neal is an author of Obamacare and as a result wants to protect and expand his signature legislation he's been a part of

I don't disagree with either of these. They just don't apply to my focal point here. I'm talking about injecting more open discussion on Social Democratic policies. I will say though, that the second point is indicative of the problem I see. Pelosi told them to have a hearing on Medicare for All; Neal's goal is to protect Obamacare though, which runs counter to making Medicare for All the actual focal point of the hearing. By diluting the discussion he's contributing to the confusion and that fits the goal of protecting Obamacare pretty well.

The hearing will take place. And Medicare for all will be discussed among other options. It's on its supporters to push their agenda and shift the window.

So an accurate description here would be that the "Medicare For All hearing" will discuss Medicare For All "among other options." Don't you think that leaves a decent chance for confusion if someone joins the hearing late or only catches clips? They're making it more difficult to clarify what M4A is by not allowing us to have a focused discussion on M4A, which is what Pelosi initially told them to do isn't it? That's exactly what I mean about the lack of effort to actually inform. Neal's interests appear to be contributing to the confusion here.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Because I don't think Socialism is the solution. I'm also not struggling under the current system.

Think these two things are related in any way?

 

[Pressure]

Think these two things are related in any way?

They absolutely are not. I grew up worse off than the guys who dap you. I've been locked up unlike you and the guys who dap you. I'm black from the south with a family who have fought for civil rights, unlike you and the people who dap you.

The fact is I don't believe any of you know what it means to actually struggle.

I dont disagree with you all when you say the system is rigged.

Where I do disagree is that corruption creates this environment and nothing about socialism makes it immune to corruption.

@88m3 gave you a thread on this very topic you all have avoided it like the Plague.



And I don't think you all realize how much corruption plays a part into

 

[Pressure]

I didn't say they're "against" it, I said "leadership refuses to put the effort in to inform" about it. Which is to say that when people are polled about Medicare for All, they don't have a shared definition for what that is. I don't necessarily assume leadership is against the legislation, I just don't think they're willing to put in the effort to differentiate the policies when the phrase itself is polling well. So they don't see value in figuring out what actual details poll well and what people either don't want or are misunderstanding when the term is used.


I don't disagree with either of these. They just don't apply to my focal point here. I'm talking about injecting more open discussion on Social Democratic policies. I will say though, that the second point is indicative of the problem I see. Pelosi told them to have a hearing on Medicare for All; Neal's goal is to protect Obamacare though, which runs counter to making Medicare for All the actual focal point of the hearing. By diluting the discussion he's contributing to the confusion and that fits the goal of protecting Obamacare pretty well.


So an accurate description here would be that the "Medicare For All hearing" will discuss Medicare For All "among other options." Don't you think that leaves a decent chance for confusion if someone joins the hearing late or only catches clips? They're making it more difficult to clarify what M4A is by not allowing us to have a focused discussion on M4A, which is what Pelosi initially told them to do isn't it? That's exactly what I mean about the lack of effort to actually inform. Neal's interests appear to be contributing to the confusion here.

Medicare for all isn't the only plan, which is the sanders plan, to provide universal healthcare. If that is the goal it should be discussed. Period.

I'm not even going to entertain this any further because you and other diehard Bernie guys criticized Warren for suggesting there are other paths to universal healthcare in this country besides Medicare for all.

Either you're for the open exchange of ideas for a common goal or you're not.

Period.

 

[wtfyomom]

What’s your definition of socialism?

i prefer the worker coop type of socialism, which bernie isnt even really promoting, hes promoting more the social democracy type, though he has mentioned worker owned business recently. but i just like that he uses the word. it shouldnt be a scare word anymore.

 

[wtfyomom]

Medicare for all isn't the only plan, which is the sanders plan, to provide universal healthcare. If that is the goal it should be discussed. Period.

I'm not even going to entertain this any further because you and other diehard Bernie guys criticized Warren for suggesting there are other paths to universal healthcare in this country besides Medicare for all.

Either you're for the open exchange of ideas for a common goal or you're not.

Period.

only because she might not be for single payer. i dont care if its bernies specific bill as long as its single payer not public option or worse

 

[Pressure]

only because she might not be for single payer. i dont care if its bernies specific bill as long as its single payer not public option or worse

Her goal is affordable universal health care.

No matter how you slice is someone is going to pay more to cover the populace.

And I mean actually pay, not just be billed.

 

[storyteller]

Medicare for all isn't the only plan, which is the sanders plan, to provide universal healthcare. If that is the goal it should be discussed. Period.

I'm not even going to entertain this any further because you and other diehard Bernie guys criticized Warren for suggesting there are other paths to universal healthcare in this country besides Medicare for all.

Either you're for the open exchange of ideas for a common goal or you're not.

Period.

I've donated more money to Warren than Bernie and haven't criticized Warren beyond pointing out some of the more grounded critiques on her foreign policy coming from the left. You've gotten so far off the point you're just making shyt up. Let's simplify the points I've laid out, that you don't seem to be able to catch while a Sanders related policy is involved.

- The American people can't differentiate between M4A and other UHC plans.
- Claiming to hold a hearing on M4A while emphasizing alternative UHC plans instead of M4A only contributes to that confusion.

Ideas can be exchanged openly but you need clarity for that exchange to have any actual utility. Polling makes it very clear that the Democrats are confused on this specific issue. Whether you want to think it's by accident or purposeful, Democratic leadership has failed to inform their constituents on the differences among the UHC plans Period.

Which brings me back to the original discussion we were having. There's no real evidence that discussing Social Democratic policies (a phrase I chose because it encompasses both Sanders' and Warren's policies) will lead to "major catastrophes" like you asserted before. The reason UHC plans are now all being dubbed M4A is to piggyback on the the popularity of that term and nothing else. It's a rhetorical game that contributes to the confusion of the majority of Americans on what policy does what.

Warren and Sanders are examples of Social Democratic approaches to policy being successful when clarified to the American people.

 

[Secure Da Bag]

- The American people can't differentiate between M4A and other UHC plans.
- Claiming to hold a hearing on M4A while emphasizing alternative UHC plans instead of M4A only contributes to that confusion.

There should be a hearing on M4A alone. Then another hearing on UHC where you compare M4A, OC, public options, etc.

 

[afterlife2009]

M4A will be one of the hardest struggles in legislative history.

It's not a thing that can only be passed by sitting at a roundtable with business leaders and politicians to find "the most efficient plan"

it's about rallying millions of people and pressing the issue

 

[Secure Da Bag]

I know Bernie Sanders uses MLK as a foundation of his economic message. So I think this entire video should be listened to and embraced by Bernie supporters.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

I dont disagree with you all when you say the system is rigged.

Where I do disagree is that corruption creates this environment and nothing about socialism makes it immune to corruption.

A better system that has flaws is still a better system.