Has Bernie ever said that he was against a market economy? I'm sorry bud but you're way too simple

Posed in a very simple manner by a simple person.

What Bernie said in that quote is basically what 100s of politicians of numerous different stripes have said. You must be one of the most gullible people around. If you don't vote for people based on that, you're not going to have no one to vote for

My only disagreement is the TSA isn't a waste of time and money. It's a waste of money and time

So prisons in america are Crime facultys

I'm waiting for a car and a subsidy loan 😊

Hmmm. I always thought the government regulations came about BECAUSE of gas shortages, not the other way around. Learn something new every day.

Myth 1: You say only "wealthy men" over 25 could vote. This is not an accurate assessment. To vote, it was required that a man's taxes be equivalent to or greater than the common price of 3 days' labour which, iirc, roughly ~60% of men over 25 qualified for. Myth 2: Yep, pretty accurate. Myth 3: Ok, a few things to unpack here. So you are correct that the Third Estate members who started the French Revolution were upper class bourgeoisie. However, most of the key developments up until 1793 were brought about by peasants and mob action. For example, the August Decrees were a result of feudal riots and the Storming of the Bastille. The National Guard and Paris Commune were responses to armed mobs rising in Paris in response to the supposed 'royalist conspiracy' to overthrow the NA. Then, later down the line, it was the working-class sans-culottes who brought about the collapse of the constitutional monarchy experiment and made France a republic, by besieging King Louis in the Tuileries in June 1792, and then successfully in August 1792. Then in 1793, it was the sans culottes who enabled Robespierres dominance and subsequent reign of terror by bringing about the expulsion of the Girondins from the Convention. So, in summary, the upper classes started the revolution, but it was the working classes who drove the key developments and shaped it into what it became. Also, in regard to how it started, the Third Estate WANTED new taxes, or at least a fairer tax system. Louis was actually mostly on the side of the reformists. The estates-general had been brought about by Louis' failed attempts to force reforms through parliament, and the subsequent breakdown of government that required immediate change. The Third Estates' decision to break away was mostly because the First and Second Estate were making it impossible for reforms to be achieved, and Louis was not really present at the EG to fight for the Third Estate because he was too busy caring for his dying son.

God this is a dangerous and bad idea

This is absolute garage. No real history, just an opportunity for a self righteous woman to throw around heavy words. Try cracking the spine on a history book next time.

I fucking hate the way she talks

Thanks, it helped!

L

And the English Canada wonder why Quebec wanted to separate... Thank you for this video maybe people will get a better idea of history of Canada

Ocrapcare is a disaster

I hope you create a video that goes into more depth about this topic

My husband SSD just went down $600 thank you Biden crime family

I love how everyone liked the video despite being the kind of dumb arse who voted for their own selfish whims the entire time.

It's a very Manichean vision. It's not that simple. Yes, it was a censal system. On the other hand, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens. Decree that men are born free and equal in law. It is true that most of the great revolutionaries came from bourgeois backgrounds. But it is worth pointing out that the revolution had a popular side. Without the support of the Parisian masses, in particular the "sans culottes" and the workers' sections, nothing would have been possible. It is important to look at the different political currents within the revolution itself. From 1789-1793 we can describe the government as intellectual bourgeois liberals. But from 1793 to 1796 the government was much more focused on the people.

Or they do shady stuff at 3am and get the FBI to suppress news stories relevant to their election

Idiots

We need it back as government is out of control.

There was also zero trade deficit under the gold standard. This added to the GDP and thus the creation of wealth. The reason the US was running out of gold in the late 60’s was the low productivity of the US economy thanks to the unions, and government spending on the Viet Nam war and the so-called great society. We are all much poorer now as a result.

Question: To Whom are we in debt? The bondholders? What are bonds? Interest-bearing savings certificates. Where is this money now? In the economy. So if we pay all the national debt back, we have no economy in that currency. The Wienmar mark was exchanged for the land rent mark. Also, the Wirmaer Republic purposely inflated away the currency to try to get out of the reparations of WW1 by exclaiming; we're broke! France moved in on the industrial Ruhr valley to claim 'product'. Thus, there was the rise of authoritarianism to fill the void, as warned by Keynes. Japan has no inflation due to the money being saved by many who remember the 1990s; when currency is saved, it is retracted from circulation and has no value to the economy as it's not exchanged for products or services. If the Japanese savers all decided to buy land or a specific type of car if that could not be supplied in enough volume, the product/land would inflate; only then would a retraction of surplus money be required either by interest rates (neoliberal policy and regressive) or targeted taxation (Keynsian and progressive).

1 50, MMT does not say you can print as much money as you want without consequence. The restriction is the availability of resources, i.e., labour power and natural free resources in/on the ground. If these are in short supply, relative to the issued available currency, then you get inflation relative to the resource, the infinite being money, the finite being the resource. That is a terrible misquote off the bat. The reality is that it's not money as a fiat currency ( just digital numbers by decree) but a resource that determines a country's wealth.

It's hard to accuse someone else of putting the lives of solidiers in danger more than their employer. The data leaks coming out of DOD don't have any of the care or concern Snowden showed in handling information.

8 years later, and this statement of eliminating jobs on a count of a higher minimum wage is accurate.

Without price an item still has value. In its utility. This does not remove the problems brought up in the video but it does hold water. The more utility a decision offers the better a decision it is. Balancing these is harder without pricing but it is possible through prolonged thoughts and considerations.

Republic, not a democracy