Of course, all the other candidates do read these classics and want to apply the principles within to USA policy...NOT. Donald will tear down the current regime, but in a practical/effective manner...at least in comparison to the others...Bernie wants to give give give...a lot more debt it sounds like. Donald doesn't compare to our Founding Fathers (no one does), but in comparison he's the closest to it. Why are so many people who are older, established, and possibly wiser (from age and experience) in support of him? It seems its all kids (students) that want the Bern. Were you smarter in college than you are now?
well now that we have been sentenced to the dungeon and are no longer discussing why an independent investor like Warren Buffet would consider himself a supporter of the democrat party, I must inform you piezoe you just don't get it. Many of the Trump Supporters have been feeling it for a long time and he is the first one to get on tv and say it and this is just their first foray into politics. This is the first time they ever thought that maybe their vote may matter. You can have your Greek classics. I'll take civic education everytime (same thing.) otherwise "Being stupid is mainstream!" Do you really want to stand by that quote? Do a little math on it and it means you think most people are stupid.
ETcallhome-sorry for helping to sabotage your thread. I have often wondered about Warren Buffet and his liberal support...same goes for George Soros. Why would such capitalists not be to the right? Is it a profit thing or an emotional thing? Is there a different "type" of business cycle under each party? As rich as they both are, I believe it's more of an emotional thing. There seems to be a certain amount of guilt for being so rich...just look at most of Hollywood. I've read material about why people pick, or stick with a particular political party...mostly because its been in the family for long time. Look at how many people vote their party no matter who it is!
The Republicans have created a Nation of Takers with their entitlement spending sprees: Maybe the U.S. Needs More Entitlement Spending The book, “A Nation of Takers,” was free of partisan rancor -- Eberstadt pointed out that entitlement spending had grown much faster under Republican presidents than Democrats since 1960 -- and full of indisputable facts. As you can probably tell from the title, though, Eberstadt was taking a stand. Americans, he argued, even once famously self-reliant American men, had become alarmingly comfortable with accepting government aid. --------------- --------------- Greenspan has also said this in the past: Alan Greenspan Just Called Out Republicans For Exploding Entitlement Spending . --------------- --------------- Chart of interest: If I can find it, there is also another chart with all the corporate welfare Republicans like to hand out. Republicans sure have transformed 'murica into a Nation of Takers! What needs to be done is to vote all Republicans out of office and get 'muricans back to work and stop freeloading off hard working taxpayers!
If this is true, we have all the republicans year after year saying they want to cut spending on entitlements, but actually do the opposite. At the same time, the liberal democrats say year after year they want to increase entitlement spending, but actually don't do that either. So in theory...we all need to switch parties? We must be the dumbest population on earth! There must be more context to this story...very biased possibly.
As I look further at this chart, it appears that a democratic senate and house mostly dominated during repub. presidents in office...except George W's term...which of course he had to fund a war on terror...and what about those checks he sent out to every American that works...is this a part of it?
The man is just living his life. He isn't telling other people what to eat. He invests in existing brands with franchise value. That is pretty much his thing. Now, if you want to tax vices, which include junk food, at a higher rate all the way up the food chain (so to speak), then I'm all for it. But that's a different conversation.