Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign megathread v2 (pg 77 - declares victory in Iowa)

[John Dule]

Can a Bernie supporter please explain the federal jobs guarantee to me? It sounds like a genuinely awful proposal.

No job? Job sucks? You can get a job with the federal government for $15/hour with healthcare benefits. Not sure what other details you're looking for.

What will I be doing at this job? Is it a worthy investment of taxpayer dollars? What skills are required? Why would anyone continue to work for under $15 anywhere else if they can just work for the government and make that amount? Where will these jobs be located? What if I don't like my new government job?

1. Who knows. There'll probably be lots of options, just as there are lots of types of federal jobs now.

2. Why wouldn't it be? It's people being employed, that's money being circulated back into the economy. Oh, wait you're one of those "supply-side" people aren't you?

3. Some people just hate gummint that much..

4. See 1. But I imagine wherever infrastructure needs serious upgrades would be a good start.

5. What, you can't just quit like any other job?

1) If we're mostly talking about infrastructure jobs, that doesn't do much for unemployed women, who are generally not very well-represented in the construction labor pool. I suppose there'd be a lot of clerical work opening up too. But a huge portion of mandatory spending in recent years has been on government pensions. Are we seriously going to add another enormous amount of debt to that expense just so we can say we have "full" employment?

2) Most current government jobs aren't a worthy investment of taxpayer dollars, and that's what things look like when the goal is to run the bureaucracy at least semi-efficiently. What happens when the goal suddenly becomes "Hire as many people as you can?" What's to stop the government from hiring four people (and paying their pensions) to do work that just one person could do on their own?

"The money will be circulated back" is meaningless. That has nothing to do with my question.

3) Really? So all the Mexican farm laborers working off-the-books down in the Central Valley will stay on the farms when they find out about this jobs guarantee, just because they "hate the government?" Yeah, that sounds plausible. What will actually happen is that every single undocumented immigrant working under the table will immediately apply for a job with the government.

4) See 1 again. But you also didn't answer my question of what kinds of skills will be required.

5) Okay, so you quit your guaranteed government job. Can you then re-apply for a different job? How much of a say do I have, as an applicant, in the type of job I'm going to get? Is it assigned to me or can I go around applying to different government jobs, do them poorly, get fired, and then re-apply for another one? Wait... can I even get fired if it's a guarantee?

[Donerail]

What will I be doing at this job?

Maybe you're one of the millions employed as part of the Green New Deal, maybe you're working in our new universal pre-K system, maybe you're a teaching aid or providing pre/afterschool care, maybe you're working in elder care, maybe you're a postal worker, maybe you're an artist, whatever you're interested in. So no, we're not mostly talking about infrastructure jobs.

What skills are required? Where will these jobs be located?

As illustrated above, there are a range of possible jobs that would be relevant in all communities.

Is it a worthy investment of taxpayer dollars?

Yes.

What if I don't like my new government job?

You can quit and get a job somewhere else. Your string of questions about the specific HR policies can be handled by an appropriate representative.

Why would anyone continue to work for under $15 anywhere else if they can just work for the government and make that amount?

Now you see the point

[Mr. Smith]

Can a Bernie supporter please explain the federal jobs guarantee to me? It sounds like a genuinely awful proposal.

No job? Job sucks? You can get a job with the federal government for $15/hour with healthcare benefits. Not sure what other details you're looking for.

What will I be doing at this job? Is it a worthy investment of taxpayer dollars? What skills are required? Why would anyone continue to work for under $15 anywhere else if they can just work for the government and make that amount? Where will these jobs be located? What if I don't like my new government job?

1. Who knows. There'll probably be lots of options, just as there are lots of types of federal jobs now.

2. Why wouldn't it be? It's people being employed, that's money being circulated back into the economy. Oh, wait you're one of those "supply-side" people aren't you?

3. Some people just hate gummint that much..

4. See 1. But I imagine wherever infrastructure needs serious upgrades would be a good start.

5. What, you can't just quit like any other job?

1) If we're mostly talking about infrastructure jobs, that doesn't do much for unemployed women, who are generally not very well-represented in the construction labor pool. I suppose there'd be a lot of clerical work opening up too. But a huge portion of mandatory spending in recent years has been on government pensions. Are we seriously going to add another enormous amount of debt to that expense just so we can say we have "full" employment?

2) Most current government jobs aren't a worthy investment of taxpayer dollars, and that's what things look like when the goal is to run the bureaucracy at least semi-efficiently. What happens when the goal suddenly becomes "Hire as many people as you can?" What's to stop the government from hiring four people (and paying their pensions) to do work that just one person could do on their own?

"The money will be circulated back" is meaningless. That has nothing to do with my question.

3) Really? So all the Mexican farm laborers working off-the-books down in the Central Valley will stay on the farms when they find out about this jobs guarantee, just because they "hate the government?" Yeah, that sounds plausible. What will actually happen is that every single undocumented immigrant working under the table will immediately apply for a job with the government.

4) See 1 again. But you also didn't answer my question of what kinds of skills will be required.

5) Okay, so you quit your guaranteed government job. Can you then re-apply for a different job? How much of a say do I have, as an applicant, in the type of job I'm going to get? Is it assigned to me or can I go around applying to different government jobs, do them poorly, get fired, and then re-apply for another one? Wait... can I even get fired if it's a guarantee?

1. Firstly, then this could be a good start to start promoting women on that side of the pool...if that's what someone wants to do. Secondly, who says it's all infrastructure. It's like sjoyce said, there're so many places where there could be jobs, especially with The Green New Deal.

2. Except that it isn't, increased purchasing power from the lowest rungs is per se about as good an investment of taxpayer dollars you can get. You get a lot more trading going on when you have more people being able to spend, you get much more infrastructure built too, and finally...fewer bills pile up too.

3. Not so much them [though I'm sure there might be some more conservative ones thinking like that], so much as the coal miners of West Virginia, the timber workers of Eastern Oregon, the oil workers in West Texas or Montana, and most Big Business workers...these are the types trained to distrust government to the hilt. They won't go for it because the Carol Millers and Trumps and Jim Justices will play to their fears to keep them from trying.

4. Because there're so many options and places, which could mean many skills,....I mean who seriously imagined in their Roarin' 20's minds imagined The Tennessee Valley Authority or the work that made CA-1 so iconic from Big Sur to Santa Barbara?

5. sjoyce already covered this one, I see no point in re-litigating that one

[John Dule]

1. Firstly, then this could be a good start to start promoting women on that side of the pool...if that's what someone wants to do. Secondly, who says it's all infrastructure. It's like sjoyce said, there're so many places where there could be jobs, especially with The Green New Deal.

2. Except that it isn't, increased purchasing power from the lowest rungs is per se about as good an investment of taxpayer dollars you can get. You get a lot more trading going on when you have more people being able to spend, you get much more infrastructure built too, and finally...fewer bills pile up too.

3. Not so much them [though I'm sure there might be some more conservative ones thinking like that], so much as the coal miners of West Virginia, the timber workers of Eastern Oregon, the oil workers in West Texas or Montana, and most Big Business workers...these are the types trained to distrust government to the hilt. They won't go for it because the Carol Millers and Trumps and Jim Justices will play to their fears to keep them from trying.

4. Because there're so many options and places, which could mean many skills,....I mean who seriously imagined in their Roarin' 20's minds imagined The Tennessee Valley Authority or the work that made CA-1 so iconic from Big Sur to Santa Barbara?

5. sjoyce already covered this one, I see no point in re-litigating that one

1. Oh, so in this instance the Green New Deal will be implemented too? In its entirety? So these workers are going to be going around retrofitting every building in America for maximum energy efficiency?

2. No. Money circulates; value gets destroyed. If you raise taxes on a grocery store, then redistribute that money to a consumer, and that consumer buys food from that store, the money didn't just "circulate." Value was consumed. """Circulating""" money through the economy has this effect on every single good and service. It removes value from the system. Increased purchasing power is good, but it needs to be backed by real value creation (a productive, meaningful job that contributes something worthwhile to society). Otherwise it's just redistribution, and you can do that without bothering to promise people jobs.

Also, can you address the issue of pensions? Government employees cost more than ever relative to private sector workers these days. Some estimates say that it takes four private sector workers to pay the salary, benefits, and pensions of one government worker. How will Sanders account for this imbalance (and the effect it will have on the debt) if there's suddenly a massive influx of government employees on the payroll?

3. Please answer the question. If a few million undocumented immigrants apply for government jobs, is President Sanders going to put them all on the government welfare salary teat too?

4. Bruh, again, please respond to what I'm asking. Should I just go read up on his policy page instead of doing this? Because I don't want to wade through all those platitudes just to find that he hasn't thought it through either. I want to know the kinds of skills required and whether or not the government will be putting people into training programs to acquire the necessary skills if they don't have them. If a homeless person with zero prospects, zero education, and zero skills were to walk into a government job bureau, what sort of task would they assign him to?

5. If it's all the same to you, I'd rather hear it from you, because he's not taking this seriously.

[Landslide Lyndon]

LOL

https://twitter.com/vincentdonofrio/status/1178729984627593216

https://twitter.com/vincentdonofrio/status/1178729988205338629

[GeneralMacArthur]

Geez it's such a cult.  It reminds me of scientology.  Going and begging L. Ron Hubbard, please stop punishing me, I am your #1 follower and true believer and always will be, you know my loyalty could never be questioned and my faith has never wavered, please I beg you call your followers off, or at least tell them to stop attacking my wife and children.

[Beet]

This kind of begging, sniffling "I've always supported you" nonsense is not going to work. Faiz and Brie Brie are probably laughing at this guy. Playing hardball would be more effective.

[Zaybay]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

[Eraserhead]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

Atlas Forum is not going to be happy about this.

[Pyro]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

#SandersDropOut

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

#SandersDropOut

Impressive. Just like when President Jeb Bush raised $130 million last cycle and flattened his rivals for the nomination.

[Gracile]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

#SandersDropOut

Impressive. Just like when President Jeb Bush raised $130 million last cycle and flattened his rivals for the nomination.

The difference is Sanders' support is built on small-dollar donations, while Jeb! got most of that money from the wealthy GOP fundraising class.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1178972826792943623?s=19

#SandersDropOut

Impressive. Just like when President Jeb Bush raised $130 million last cycle and flattened his rivals for the nomination.

The difference is Sanders' support is built on small-dollar donations, while Jeb! got most of that money from the wealthy GOP fundraising class.

That’s a fair point. Sanders is an infinitely more grass-roots oriented candidate than Jeb. But Jeb also made efforts to unite the party behind him and to appeal to those outside his (rich establishment) base. He failed spectacularly at it, but tried. Sanders (or to a greater extent the people surrounding him) have done the opposite. And that’s why their losing momentum and support to Warren.

[McGovernForPrez]

It's easy for cult leaders to extract money from their followers. Doesn't mean they're popular.

[TWTown]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ5TW07ff2o
Amazing ad, I still think that "Vision" was the best video of his 2020 campaign though.

[Morning in Atlas]

Geez it's such a cult.  It reminds me of scientology.  Going and begging L. Ron Hubbard, please stop punishing me, I am your #1 follower and true believer and always will be, you know my loyalty could never be questioned and my faith has never wavered, please I beg you call your followers off, or at least tell them to stop attacking my wife and children.

You "coincidentally" leave out that Vincent D'Onofrio has no issue with Sanders himself. He has an issue with his zealots, obviously, but he doesn't extrapolate the few who harassed him over the entire support base.

Social media is a ****ed up place. I'm not gonna sit here and minimize his harassment, but you're clearly not spreading his message.

[ShamDam]

He’s been stagnant around 15% of the vote nationally for months now, and he probably needs to be pulling 25-30% to have a shot at the nomination. If you were advising him, what do you think would give him the best shot at achieving that?

And please don’t respond “nothing, he’s toast” or “drop out and endorse Warren!” Whether you like him or not, I really am interested in what everyone thinks his campaign could be doing better.

[TML]

He needs to take his gloves off and go after Biden more aggressively, and if Biden is no longer in the lead, he needs to direct his fire at Warren.

He also needs to be more skilled at dodging trap questions when necessary.

[Zaybay]

He needs to actually start spending his money on ads and field offices, especially in states like IA, NH, and NV. Seriously, he is basically sitting on a large fortune right now, and currently has one of the lower burn-rates of the 2020 field. Throwing a couple million into Iowa is sure to be a worthy investment.

It seems like he's starting to realize this, considering the rather large amount of IA ads he just recently bought, but I would personally advise increasing the budget for canvassers and field operations, not buying a temporary boost with television ads.

[Heebie Jeebie]

He needs to undermine Biden's perceived "electability."  He needs to make inroads with black voters.  A recent article on 538 ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-do-black-democrats-usually-prefer-establishment-candidates/ ) suggested ways to do that:

Align with black candidates or non-black candidates with strong ties to black voters and leaders

Aggressively court black leaders for endorsements

Directly address black voters’ concerns that more liberal candidates have a greater chance of losing races to Republicans

And target black voters under 45 and those with college degrees, who might be less inclined to vote for establishment candidates.

[Kung Fu Kenny]

Drop out and endorse Liz

[Inmate Trump]

His time is up, frankly.

He did well in 2016 because he was basically the ONLY rival to Hillary.  Now, there's so many candidates--it's hard for any of them to get ahead--plus some of those candidates are more attractive to his 2016 base.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I don't think anything will work, but I second the notion that if he's serious about winning he has to become aggressive with his rivals.

[Gracile]

Not sure what this is all about-

https://twitter.com/MediumBuying/status/1179403871229267974

It's kind of disappointing that his campaign is doing this when he has plenty of cash to flood the airwaves Iowa. Could they be waiting to go on air at a later date?

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1179405115272421378