A friend asked me to comment on the picture and text above, so I thought I’d share my response as a blog post of my own. The upper half of the item lists five valid objections to Bernie Sanders’s socialist beliefs. The lower half purports to answer these five items on behalf of Sanders or one of his supporters. I say “purports to” because the answers are so lame they almost make me suspect that someone made this post specifically to show how ridiculous socialist “thinking” is. Then again, socialist “thinking” really is that ridiculous, so maybe someone foolish enough to believe it, would also be foolish enough to try to defend it in this way. Anyway, I’ll address the points one by one.
1) When Bernie says “Free” it doesn’t ACTUALLY mean “Free.”
1) I know how taxes work.
Yes, the socialists certainly do. What this means is that all that free stuff they covet is going to be as free to them as a street criminal’s next drug-trip is to him–after he mugs you to get the money to pay for it. In this case, they plan to use taxes to do the mugging. If you were feeling envious, and you wanted to take money away from the people who earn it, taxing is a lot safer than doing the mugging yourself. It can be done on a wholesale basis, and since the government does it for you, all it costs is your freedom. Some people might call that “free.” I wouldn’t.
2) You are NOT entitled to someone else’s money… Ever.
2) Tell that to my grandmother who lost her life savings, 401k, and home paying for my grandpa’s cancer treatments.
How convenient that we don’t know who concocted this story, and so we don’t know whether his grandpa really had cancer or why his grandparents didn’t have health insurance. You don’t suppose a socialist would make up a tear-jerker story in order to use our emotions to manipulate us, do you? Well, as a matter of fact, yes. Anyone who would steal from you will also lie to you. Lying and emotional manipulation are among the chief tactics of the socialists, since facts and logic don’t work out very well for them. There simply is no logical way to get from “I need this” to “I’m entitled to it.” It’s the responsibility of each person to make reasonable provisions within his means for future contingencies. People who are too poor to make adequate provisions, despite their best efforts, are certainly proper subjects for voluntary, private charity. If the Bernie supporter who wrote this has a GoFundMe account for his grandmother (with full verification of facts), I’d definitely like to know about it. But nothing in this story supports a claim that anybody is entitled to someone else’s money.
3) You CANNOT tax a nation into prosperity.
3) But you can fix the skewed tax rates, breaks, and loop holes that has [sic] shifted all the new wealth for the last 25 years into the top 1%, creating another 250 Billionaire’s [sic] whilst the middleclass burned.
Skewed tax rates? Why, yes, I’m glad he brought that up. The tax rates are skewed. They penalize the productive. This is called a “progressive” income tax, and it is very unjust. Why should someone who works harder, or longer hours, or who invested more time, effort, and money in getting training, have to pay a larger percentage of what he makes? That wasn’t the way God set it up for the people of Israel. He had everyone pay 10%, and of course that’s fair. Coincidentally, 10% happens to be exactly the rate that Ted Cruz is proposing for his new flat-tax system. Of course, his system will keep things like the standard deduction, personal exemption, and child tax credit, so a family of four wouldn’t pay any tax on their first $36,000 of income. But otherwise everyone would pay the same rate that God set up for the people of Israel. Do you suppose some of Bernie’s supporters would like to consider switching their allegiance to Ted Cruz to fix that skewed tax rate?
Well, that would nice, but I’m afraid it isn’t very likely. What they want is a tax system that is even more skewed, more unjust, and penalizes the productive even more. They have to do that in order to pay for all the free stuff they want to receive at somebody else’s expense (See point 1 above).
Breaks and loopholes? Yes! Ted Cruz’s Simple Flat Tax Plan will fix all of that.
“All the new wealth . . . last 25 years . . . top 1% . . . middleclass burned,” yadda, yadda, yadda. Horse feathers. Have I mentioned that a socialist will lie to you? Yes, I believe I did in point 2 above. Here is a case in point. It’s nonsense. The only thing that has been burning the middle class lately is Obama’s lousy economy, and that’s because of his socialist policies.
The writer complains of the creation of “another 250 Billionaire’s.” Billionaire’s what? And 250 of them, no less! Well, maybe he’s just a semi-literate socialist trying to say, “billionaires.” OK, and the problem with that would be . . . what? What do I care if we have a bunch of new billionaires? Maybe if they keep making more of them they’ll eventually get to me (That’s doubtful, but never mind). Billionaires do not keep their money in their mattresses. There are only two things they can do with it. They can spend it, which makes money for people like you and me (I wonder if they’d like to buy some history books), or they can invest it, which creates economic growth, which makes even more money for people like you and me. The more billionaires we have, the better.
4) The “Rich” are not responsible for your financial situation, YOU are.
4) They are not responsible for me, but they are responsible for the cost of my medications, mortgages, and other fundamental living expenses, which are now unaffordable to millions.
Here the Bernie booster’s statement contradicts itself. If the “rich” are responsible for the cost of his medications, mortgage, and other “fundamental living expenses,” then they’re responsible for him. He can’t consistently claim entitlement to have them pay for him without also making the somewhat embarrassing (apparently even for a socialist) claim that they are responsible for him. Obviously they are not, and they’re not responsible to pay for his meds (sounds like he’s taking something pretty strong), mortgage, smartphone, or pizza parties. He needs to put on his big-boy britches and go out and take care of himself and his family too (God help them), if he has one.
5) Socialism will DESTROY the innovation that made America great.
True, it will destroy that, along with the rest of the economy and what’s left of our freedom and our backbone and strength as a nation.
5) Socialism helped save America once. Ever heard of FDR?
This is another straight-up false statement. I almost don’t blame the Bernie boy so much for this one (almost) because so many historians have been teaching and writing that kind of nonsense for a long time. That’s because so many historians are socialists. The statement in the post is false in two ways. First, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal was not completely socialist–not the sort of program Bernie is talking about. Second, the New Deal was, on the other hand, far too similar to socialism in that it involved much government intervention in the economy. And it was disastrous for the country. The fact is that if Herbert Hoover had not gotten the government into the bailout business, the economy would have been well on the way to recovery by 1932. After Roosevelt won the election in that year he (along with a compliant Congress) imposed the New Deal. Far from saving America, the New Deal actually made the situation worse. It prolonged the Depression and made it deeper. The United States did not return to the prosperity it had known in the 1920s until the late ‘40s. It wasn’t the New Deal or World War II that brought the country out of the Depression. Rather it was a post-war Congress that finally stood up on its hind legs and said no to Harry Truman’s demands for even more government meddling with the economy. That was all the break the free market needed to put the country back on the road to prosperity. You can read about it here, here, here, and here, as well as in other good history books.
So, as you might have expected, the Sanders supporters’ objections are easily refuted. If only they would listen.