Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread

[TigerLily]

Apparently Comrade Bernie's gang of useful idiots caused a ruckus tonight at the Nevada Democratic Convention. The story is just beginning to get on the internet.

I sympathize with these people being completely screwed and having the mass media talking about clouds or whatever the fuck instead of this. But since I detest Sanders and the typical Sanders supporter, I'm keking.

VQ. I'm nonplussed.    I thought we had reached rapprochement

[analog kid]

VQ. I'm nonplussed.    I thought we had reached rapprochement

He's clearly reached Trump euphoria.



Their repeating something about "making America great again" means The_Donald has breached their inner cortex.

[henge0stone]

The DNC is shocked that people are not blindly following party lines, smiling and getting along. They're shocked that people are starting to realize how rigged the system is.

[VtaGeezer]

The DNC is shocked that people are not blindly following party lines, smiling and getting along. They're shocked that people are starting to realize how rigged the system is.

I doubt it.  I think they're high-fiving that the machine still works.

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Now even the Democrats themselves are saying Sanders supporters are fucked up and violent.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nevada-democrats-accuse-sanders-campaign-of-inciting-violence-2016-5

The Nevada State Democratic Party (NSDP) isn't happy with the behavior of Bernie Sanders' supporters at Saturday's Democratic state convention.

Counsel for the NSDP sent a letter to the cochairs of the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee to lodge a formal complaint over the "conduct" of the senator's backers as well as his campaign staff at the convention, The Washington Post reported.

"We write to alert you to what we perceive as the [Sanders] Campaign's penchant for extra-parliamentary behaviorâ€"indeed, actual violenceâ€"in place of democratic conduct in a convention setting," the letter says, "and furthermore what we can only describe as their encouragement of, and complicity in, a very dangerous atmosphere that ended in chaos and physical threats to fellow Democrats."

The letter refers to the chaotic scene at the state's convention on Saturday, where Sanders supporters, who felt that the event had been rigged against them, repeatedly disrupted the proceedings by shouting over speakers. State Sen. Pat Spearman, a Democrat, reported seeing an elderly woman hit with a bottle.

Event security ultimately could not keep the event in order and had the attendees leave the space.

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Adding to the Sanders = Mental Retardation file...

If Sanders is denied the Presidency, We as a Nation must rise up in Open Revolution
https://www.change.org/p/entire-us-population-if-sanders-is-denied-the-presidency-we-as-a-nation-must-rise-up-and-open-revolution

Due to the obvious farce of Democracy that is Our Presidential Election, We have come to the undeniable conclusion that the Will of the People is no longer the driving force of the American Government. With the rampant voter suppression, fraud, and blatant disregard of their voters, BOTH the Republican and Democratic Party serve not the people of this Country, as they have sworn to do, but the Rich and Powerful. This leaves the American Citizens no choice but to engage in Open Revolt against the tyrannical oppression that has taken shape in the form of Citizens United, The Republican Party, The Democratic Party, Congress, the Supreme Court, President, and the ruling Oligarchy of Corporations and the unassailable Wealthy killing Our beloved freedoms and Civil Rights.
We have come to this realization and decision as a Last Resort, the question of whether Our Democracy is corrupt is no longer debatable. The Media ignores these treasonous acts at the behest of the Corporate Owners they themselves are beholden to. The reason for this decision is not because these acts have occurred, but because the confession of their occurrence does not alter the outcome of the Elections! Arizona will not see a revote, even though the Secretary of State CONFIRMED the widespread Voter Suppression and Party Purges. Will NY see a revote even though 162,000 voters were purged from ONE district and the firing of a BOE clerk has confirmed this, NO! In addition on the Democratic Primary side, there are many other reports of fraudulent ballot counting, voter purges, and voter suppression throughout NY and the entire Country as a whole! On the GOP side, whether you agree with Trump or no, the voters of the Republican Party have, without a shadow of doubt decided he should be the Republican Nominee; however, as of today (04/25/2016), we have learned that the RNC will most likely NOT allow him to become the Nominee. The Two Party System has shackled the American Political Process, and in doing so created a system that is a mockery of what Our Founding Fathers fought and died for. I do not think that ANY American could deny that if Our Founding Fathers were still alive, they would support this very revolt fighting for the very Democracy they once so ardently fought and bled for.
In conclusion, as a true American Patriot and Citizen, I believe the 2016 Presidential Elections have certified the fact that our Democracy is Dead. We have an irrevocable choice before Us, We can either continue to be oppressed and allow Senator Sanders Political Revolution to be quelled, dismissed, and illegally destroyed, or We can rise up and DEMAND Our Country back. Quoting Abraham Lincoln, "Government For the People, By the People, and Of the People shall not perish from this Earth"; however to Our shame, We have allowed it to perish from the once Great Nation that was The United States of America and it is apparent that the Powers that Be will not surrender it back willingly. I encourage all of Our Brothers and Sisters, of All race, creed, religion, and sexual orientation to Stand Together as One Voice, and although I desire nothing more than this revolution to be completely Non-Violent and Peaceful, should it come to an Open Revolution in the Streets, We believe that Democracy MUST be preserved and We ARE willing to lay down our most precious sacrifice that is Our Lives to ensure it to Ourselves and Our Posterity.

Waaaaahhhhhh, I didn't get my way and I attached myself to a con-man lame duck so now tens of thousands of people have to die.

Hey I have an idea... let's start a revolution with the weakest, dumbest segments of the population who abhor guns and who get triggered into going comatose at the mere thought of violence. Our army is going going to be the bottom of society who have no access to any of the important infrastructure or real reason to risk their lives other than hurt fee fees.

HEY GOVERNMENT TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!!!!! ...wait... we might want those in case Bernie loses... uhhhh...

:

[VtaGeezer]

Violence in Nevada!!  We should line up the Syrian and Iraqis to shout, wave their signs and fists and maybe lift a chair or two in the air in front of ISIS fighters. Surely they'd collapse in fear...a blubbering mass!

[albrecht]

I'll post this hear since Bernie claims to be all about the beleagured worker.
http://tinyurl.com/zazkdkw
Obama demands more people are paid overtime. Again, no vote or democratic process but by decree via his Dept of Labor. Of course he has no idea that businesses simply adapt to this hire costs by passing in on to their customers, cutting back hours and hiring more part-time help, or putting more people on salary than hourly wages.

[136 or 142]

I'll post this hear since Bernie claims to be all about the beleagured worker.
http://tinyurl.com/zazkdkw
Obama demands more people are paid overtime. Again, no vote or democratic process but by decree via his Dept of Labor. Of course he has no idea that businesses simply adapt to this hire costs by passing in on to their customers, cutting back hours and hiring more part-time help, or putting more people on salary than hourly wages.

Cutting back hours and hiring more people would likely cost far more for most businesses than paying the extra overtime.  Their ability to pass the increased costs on to their customers depends on the degree of competition in their industry and whether the products they sell are elastic or inelastic.

As I've argued to you previously, if a prior Congress gave the Department of Labor the discretion to decide who gets overtime pay, then what the Obama Administration did is part of the democratic process.

[VtaGeezer]

I'll post this hear since Bernie claims to be all about the beleagured worker.
http://tinyurl.com/zazkdkw
... businesses simply adapt to this hire costs by passing in on to their customers, cutting back hours and hiring more part-time help, or putting more people on salary than hourly wages.

Work 'em 'til they quit; there's always another mook who'll take a low paying job 'til he's wrung out until. eh?  That's how Mexico became such a economic titan.

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Emerging story, mass exodus of Bernie Supporters on social media. #BernieLostMe now has 22k tweets in the last hour or so.





Conspiracy theory that it's a Hillary plot and her internet warfare division (kek) is manipulating Twitter's algorithms.

[chefist]

Emerging story, mass exodus of Bernie Supporters on social media. #BernieLostMe now has 22k tweets in the last hour or so.





Conspiracy theory that it's a Hillary plot and her internet warfare division (kek) is manipulating Twitter's algorithms.

I could see that happening...

[Value Of Pi]

The DNC is shocked that people are not blindly following party lines, smiling and getting along. They're shocked that people are starting to realize how rigged the system is.

I'd say that the DNC is upset to see Democrats, particularly those attached to or involved with a campaign, throwing chairs and making threats. There's no great awakening going on here, just angry activists acting out in the name of the latest noble political cause (Yeah, it's a revolution, baby!). It happens periodically on the left and the right.

I'm sure Bernie is loving the chance to relive the most satisfying parts of his youth but he should know better than to encourage this kind of crap -- and there's no doubt that he's doing that.

[Zetaspeak]

Cutting back hours and hiring more people would likely cost far more for most businesses than paying the extra overtime.  Their ability to pass the increased costs on to their customers depends on the degree of competition in their industry and whether the products they sell are elastic or inelastic.

As I've argued to you previously, if a prior Congress gave the Department of Labor the discretion to decide who gets overtime pay, then what the Obama Administration did is part of the democratic process.

I am always confused when Conservatives claim that any raise of business tax will "cost the consumers" or raise in wages will cost the consumers. Isn't the free market pretty much selling something for as much as they can until it too much and turns the consumers off. If you sell something for $4 and find out that you can sell the same amount for $5 dollars. Guess what the business will put it to $5 no matter how low the tax bracket is because it means they can make more money.

[GuerrillaUnReal]

I am always confused when Conservatives claim that any raise of business tax will "cost the consumers" or raise in wages will cost the consumers. Isn't the free market pretty much selling something for as much as they can until it too much and turns the consumers off. If you sell something for $4 and find out that you can sell the same amount for $5 dollars. Guess what the business will put it to $5 no matter how low the tax bracket is because it means they can make more money.

[albrecht]

I am always confused when Conservatives claim that any raise of business tax will "cost the consumers" or raise in wages will cost the consumers. Isn't the free market pretty much selling something for as much as they can until it too much and turns the consumers off. If you sell something for $4 and find out that you can sell the same amount for $5 dollars. Guess what the business will put it to $5 no matter how low the tax bracket is because it means they can make more money.

Sigh, there is no free market, really. Never has, or will be, though various times, systems, products, markets, might approach it to some degree but since information is not equal, real, or free, and the human element? But 123 will fill you in, I'm sure on the issue of prices and the basics.

[21st Century Man]

Sigh, there is no free market, really. Never has, or will be, though various times, systems, products, markets, might approach it to some degree but since information is not equal, real, or free, and the human element? But 123 will fill you in, I'm sure on the issue of prices and the basics.

Ding, ding, ding!!!

[136 or 142]

Sigh, there is no free market, really. Never has, or will be, though various times, systems, products, markets, might approach it to some degree but since information is not equal, real, or free, and the human element? But 123 will fill you in, I'm sure on the issue of prices and the basics.

That markets are imperfect does not invalidate anything that I wrote above.  Imperfect markets has no bearing on elasticity curves (not over a small segment of the curve in the short or medium term anyway) and it makes absolutely no difference on whether, given a rise in overtime costs, a firm would prefer to pay the increased wages or go through the added expense of hiring more part time workers.

Over the longer term elasticity curves can change for any number of reasons including changes in taste, changes in the availability of substitutes...

You are throwing out a general claim of 'imperfect markets' and hoping that it sticks in a specific situation.  This is the same thing establishment science claims believers in the paranormal do when those believers throw out 'quantum mechanics' as if, by itself, that term makes the claimed existence of paranormal phenomena real.

For one example, the good that comes closest to being perfectly inelastic which is the situation that Zetaspeak described is gasoline.  We know that when oil prices increased that gas prices increased significantly, and by, in many cases, more than could be explained by the increase in oil prices (there can be other factors such as a refinery shut down, though it seems every week some major refinery is being shut down for frequently no publicly given reason at all.)   We also know that the national gas station firms increased their profits significantly (though not necessarily the owners of the individual franchise outlets.)   So, certainly imperfect competition, but, in no way, did that alter the reality of price elasticity of demand curves.

I believe some of the national gas station retailers are vertically integrated with oil producers or suppliers, but I don't believe that is the case with all the retailers.

[136 or 142]

You seem to 'think' that simply posting some idiotic picture automatically makes you 'win' an argument. 

So, what was the result of this:
Did KFC keep the price increase and, if so, did they suffer a decrease in sales that reduced their profit?
Did other fast food outlets also increase their prices?  And if not, did they see profits increase due to the price rise from KFC?

Also, was this one KFC restaurant outlet, or a statewide or citywide response from KFC to a rise in the minimum wage?  If it was a price rise based on suggestion from the national KFC then it was likely a result of research they did (although even big businesses make bad decisions all the time,) If this was one outlet, it could very well be simply the franchise owner making a political response to the increase in the minimum wage and not caring about the decline in profit.

Finally, whether it was under the advice of the national KFC or a single outlet, it could be the executives of the company raising prices due to a variety of increases in their input costs and using the increase in the minimum wage as an excuse to justify their price increase to their customers.  As an excuse like that might sway the sympathy of some of their customers, this would be an attempt to alter their customers' normal preferences  and so shift KFC's price elasticity of demand curve.

Without knowing what the outcome or even the basic situation was, posting a picture proves nothing.  I'm sure your kindergarten teacher will be impressed that you used a picture in the correct situation though.

[albrecht]

That markets are imperfect does not invalidate anything that I wrote above.  Imperfect markets has no bearing on elasticity curves (not over a small segment of the curve in the short or medium term anyway) and it makes absolutely no difference on whether, given a rise in overtime costs, a firm would prefer to pay the increased wages or go through the added expense of hiring more part time workers.

Over the longer term elasticity curves can change for any number of reasons including changes in taste, changes in the availability of substitutes...

You are throwing out a general claim of 'imperfect markets' and hoping that it sticks in a specific situation.  This is the same thing establishment science claims believers in the paranormal do when those believers throw out 'quantum mechanics' as if, by itself, that term makes the claimed existence of paranormal phenomena real.

For one example, the good that comes closest to being perfectly inelastic which is the situation that Zetaspeak described is gasoline.  We know that when oil prices increased that gas prices increased significantly, and by, in many cases, more than could be explained by the increase in oil prices (there can be other factors such as a refinery shut down, though it seems every week some major refinery is being shut down for frequently no publicly given reason at all.)   We also know that the national gas station firms increased their profits significantly (though not necessarily the owners of the individual franchise outlets.)   So, certainly imperfect competition, but, in no way, did that alter the reality of price elasticity of demand curves.

I believe some of the national gas station retailers are vertically integrated with oil producers or suppliers, but I don't believe that is the case with all the retailers.

I'm sure you can explain why the price of a quart of 10W-30 at a local auto supply store seems to be priced the same, despite brand (assuming "same" quality) and doesn't fluctuate in price as much does the gallon of gasoline does on an (depending on the delivery) almost daily, or at least weekly, basis at the gas station. Or why diesel, suddenly over the past years, is more expensive than gasoline (government, demand combo?) Both cracked from the same hydrocarbons and some of those on lower on the chain so should be cheaper.

[136 or 142]

I'm sure you can explain why the price of a quart of 10W-30 at a local auto supply store seems to be priced the same, despite brand (assuming "same" quality) and doesn't fluctuate in price as much does the gallon of gasoline does on an (depending on the delivery) almost daily, or at least weekly, basis at the gas station. Or why diesel, suddenly over the past years, is more expensive than gasoline (government, demand combo?) Both cracked from the same hydrocarbons and some of those on lower on the chain so should be cheaper.

I don't know anything about the price of 10W-30. In general, except when there is supplier ability and consumer expectation, suppliers usually regarding changing prices as a last step.  There are fairly significant costs to changing list prices.  However, again that is a general condition and you asked about a specific that I don't know the answer to.  It could be the reason though.  Given that the price of oil tends to fluctuate there may be a reasoning by suppliers that the fluctuations will even out over time, so the price doesn't have to be changed.  Completely an educated guess on my part.

In regards to diesel prices, the evidence seems to be basic supply and demand. 
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/07/18/us-diesel-vehicle-sales-up-25-percent/

I don't know what 'clean-diesel' is, but there was a large increase in diesel vehicle sales in 2014 (and I believe for a few years prior to that) but likely not a corresponding increase in diesel gasoline supply or in gas stations that (also) sell diesel fuel.  There is usually a time lag.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1094908_fewer-gas-stations-but-more-diesel-pumps-as-diesel-sales-rise

http://www.trurodaily.com/News/Local/2015-01-09/article-4001987/Supply-and-demand-factor-keeping-diesel,-furnace-oil-higher-than-gasoline-during-winter-months/1
"Yet another factor, Collins said, is that a lot of the crude oil coming on stream today is from fracking operations, which produces a lighter form of crude that does not yield as much diesel."

With the collapse in sales of diesel vehicles I would expect to see diesel gasoline prices decline relative to 'regular' gasoline prices if it hasn't already occurred.
http://www2.nrcan.gc.ca/eneene/sources/pripri/prices_byyear_e.cfm?ProductID=5

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/223503-diesel-passenger-car-sales-go-on-life-support-just-222-sold-in-january

If in the case of gasoline, you are suggesting that a free market doesn't exist due to collusion between oil/gasoline sellers somewhere/everywhere through the process, you should be aware that monopoly cartels, illegal or otherwise, can only exist when what they sell is inelastic.

Sources of monopoly power
No substitute goods: A monopoly sells a good for which there is no close substitute. The absence of substitutes makes the demand for the good relatively inelastic enabling monopolies to extract positive profits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

I'd prefer a better source than wiki, but I think in this case it's good enough.

So, oil/gasoline prices weren't part of the original discussion anyway, and your claim of conspiracy cartels (if that is what you were claiming) actually just further proves my point.

[VtaGeezer]

Here's how the NV state chairwoman made the Sanders supporters in NV go ballistic; while they're trying to get a roll call vote on the voice vote delegate count, she adjourns the convention...in 20 seconds.  "WTF was THAT!!".  No one saw this on CNN or MSNBC.


https://youtu.be/6swm3l19knc

[Juan]

In some ways it's 1968 again.  In that year, at the Democratic convention, they used voice votes to throw out several legally elected state delegations and to replace them with more leftist ones.

[136 or 142]

Here's how the NV state chairwoman made the Sanders supporters in NV go ballistic; while they're trying to get a roll call vote on the voice vote delegate count, she adjourns the convention...in 20 seconds.  "WTF was THAT!!".  No one saw this on CNN or MSNBC.

I don't doubt any of that.  But, Hillary Clinton won the Nevada Caucus, so, I suppose what the Sanders' supporters were trying to do was legal, but if Hillary Clinton had tried to claim a majority of the delegates in a state that she lost to Bernie Sanders, the Sanders people would no doubt go ballistic (and rightfully so.)

I think what this shows is the need to do away with all delegates being selected by either caucus or convention and to move to a system where all states finance primaries, even if that requires federal help.

Delegates Allocated: 40/43
Delegates
Winner H. Clinton   52.6%   6,309   24
B. Sanders   47.3%   5,668   16
Uncommitted   0.1%   8   
Other   0.0%   0   


I think as part of a compromise on this, the Hillary Clinton delegates should also agree to eliminate the 'super delegates.'  Personally I'd also like to see the closed primaries eliminated, but I can see how that would be very contentious and there are valid arguments on both sides of that debate, in my opinion. 

[VtaGeezer]

In some ways it's 1968 again.  In that year, at the Democratic convention, they used voice votes to throw out several legally elected state delegations and to replace them with more leftist ones.

Philly is two hours by ground from millions of Bernistas.  I think the DNC is gonna wish they had booked it in Guam.

[GuerrillaUnReal]

You seem to 'think' that simply posting some idiotic picture automatically makes you 'win' an argument. 

So, what was the result of this:
Did KFC keep the price increase and, if so, did they suffer a decrease in sales that reduced their profit?
Did other fast food outlets also increase their prices?  And if not, did they see profits increase due to the price rise from KFC?

Also, was this one KFC restaurant outlet, or a statewide or citywide response from KFC to a rise in the minimum wage?  If it was a price rise based on suggestion from the national KFC then it was likely a result of research they did (although even big businesses make bad decisions all the time,) If this was one outlet, it could very well be simply the franchise owner making a political response to the increase in the minimum wage and not caring about the decline in profit.

Finally, whether it was under the advice of the national KFC or a single outlet, it could be the executives of the company raising prices due to a variety of increases in their input costs and using the increase in the minimum wage as an excuse to justify their price increase to their customers.  As an excuse like that might sway the sympathy of some of their customers, this would be an attempt to alter their customers' normal preferences  and so shift KFC's price elasticity of demand curve.

Without knowing what the outcome or even the basic situation was, posting a picture proves nothing.  I'm sure your kindergarten teacher will be impressed that you used a picture in the correct situation though.

I use pictures when apt because it makes the point without having to waste peoples' time with several paragraphs of bullshit. How you cannot understand the pic I posted is beyond me. Also how you don't understand basic economics is amusing.

[136 or 142]

I use pictures when apt because it makes the point without having to waste peoples' time with several paragraphs of bullshit. How you cannot understand the pic I posted is beyond me. Also how you don't understand basic economics is amusing.

Right, we already know the only thing you understand is how to rape and murder your mother.

I would note that you couldn't actually answer any of my questions, but your not worth my time. (I realize the contradiction.)

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Right, we already know the only thing you understand is how to rape and murder your mother.

I would note that you couldn't actually answer any of my questions, but you're not worth my time. (I realize the contradiction.)

It's not my fault you can't understand or my responsibility to explain a simple picture to you.

[136 or 142]

It's not my fault you can't understand or my responsibility to explain a simple picture to you.

The problem is that your picture is so simple that it doesn't answer any of the questions that I asked above.  It's not my fault you can't understand the importance of my questions.  Seriously, is the idea that, if a couple weeks after putting that up the KFC Franchise had to lower their prices again because they lost half their customers too complicated for you to understand?

[GuerrillaUnReal]

The problem is that your picture is so simple that it doesn't answer any of the questions that I asked above.  It's not my fault you can't understand the importance of my questions.  Seriously, is the idea that, if a couple weeks after putting that up the KFC Franchise had to lower their prices again because they lost half their customers too complicated for you to understand?

How is it possible that you're too stupid understand the picture is of a KFC franchise raising it's prices by 20% as a response to a local raising of the minimum wage? This is exactly what the sign in the picture is literally telling you.

All your questions are mindless irrelevance because you cannot grasp what this picture is literally telling you in two sentences worth of words. Yet with your multiple paragraphs of confoozelment at two basic sentences, no one else in this thread seems to have trouble comprehending this except for you.

A friendly reminder, the point of trolling is to make other people look stupid.