Sanders: Our Economy Is Immoral
Wall Street bigs are going to have to pay their fair share, says Bernie Sanders.
The self-described socialist senator from Vermont wants to reverse the “massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1 percent.” The 90 percent top income tax rates America had during the 1950s might not be too high, he said.
He wants big Wall Street banks broken up. He’s willing to accept slower economic growth in return for what he’d consider a more equitable distribution of income.
“The issue we’re dealing with is actually the struggle to rebuild American democracy,” Sanders said in an interview at a Capitol Hill bistro. “Economically, over the last 40 years, we’ve seen a middle class in this country disappearing.
“Ninety-nine percent of all new income generated today goes to the top 1 percent. The top one-tenth of 1 percent owns as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. Does anybody think this is the kind of economy we should have. Do we think it’s moral?…
“These people are so greedy, they’re so out of touch with reality,” he said. “They think they own the world. … I’m sorry to have to tell them, they live in the United States, they benefit from the United States, we have kids who are hungry in this country. We have people who are working two, three, four jobs, who can’t send their kids to college.
“Sorry, you’re all going to have to pay your fair share of taxes,” he asserted.
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
21 responses to Sanders: Our Economy Is Immoral
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
mea_mark May 26th, 2015 at 11:04
This is the message the Democrats should be embracing if they really want to win.
allison1050 May 26th, 2015 at 11:31
I’m not willing to hold my breath on that but you’re right they should be but have lost their way.
crc3 May 26th, 2015 at 18:26
Dems are not nearly as lost as the Repulsives….
cecilia May 26th, 2015 at 22:35
I’ve been on Bernie’s side for years – and I’m not a “Democrat” or “liberal” (I’m American).
I’ve always believed the government is supposed to be FOR the people and BY the people….and right now it’s been taken over by the scum of the earth
tracey marie May 26th, 2015 at 11:32
Very good Bernie, keep pushing the country left, hard left.
OldLefty May 26th, 2015 at 11:45
Don’t ya love how David Brooks is always whining about morality (meaning poor people lack it), while people like Bernie and the Pope are as well?
It’s just that the Pope and Bernie are talking about a morality that makes people like David Brooks uncomfortable.
William May 26th, 2015 at 13:24
Oh ya think?
robert May 26th, 2015 at 16:23
so fox news calls bernie a Far left guy or a socialist ?
How about a REALIST
Terry "Death to Equality" Xu May 26th, 2015 at 16:50
but why is that immoral?
His assertion only makes sense if you assume that inequality is a bad thing
Inequality is the hallmark of civilization – the default being universal poverty
See Hong Kong for example: When thousands of poor people live cramped in a mega-apartment owned by a billionaire, that’s a sign your economy is functioning
robert May 26th, 2015 at 17:40
i was wondering why hong kong is over populated
crc3 May 26th, 2015 at 18:21
By looking at your avatar I’m assuming you are smoking tobacco which tells me your judgement is poor. So is your opinion on inequality…
mea_mark May 26th, 2015 at 19:08
I don’t care what he is smoking, his assessments all seem to be poor. He is consistent though.
robert May 26th, 2015 at 19:25
i see he’s able to change his name
mea_mark May 26th, 2015 at 20:22
I don’t see that. Who do you think he was? That is the only name associated with the ip he is using. It’s possible he’s playing complicated games. If you have info or a good supposition, throw it out there.
Anyone can change their name at any time, it’s not hard. Some things are hard to change though.
robert May 28th, 2015 at 03:08
all i know is he’s a weird dude
cecilia May 26th, 2015 at 22:32
well, aren’t you a delightful little piece of shít
frambley1 May 27th, 2015 at 02:21
Do you really want an explanation of the morality of ridiculous wealth, and your misuse of the word equality in this case? Or are you just stirring the pot?
BTW, this is not Hong Kong, this is US America, so some anecdote about HK is irrelevant.
Suzanne McFly May 26th, 2015 at 17:51
I am watching him announce his run and he is laying it down. There are so many soundbites that will be taken from this speech and Hillary will be shoved so far left she will have flames shooting from her butt.
greenfloyd May 27th, 2015 at 21:40
Oh dear! That sounds painful.
Turf is being staked out, the gulf on the liberal side is wide. But, so is the margin of error and Republicans remain clueless in 2015 America. Still, it’s nice to see old terms like “Populist” being dusted off and reasserted into the political lexicon. “Socialist” is an other matter altogether, even attaching “Independent” does not help soften the historical hardness or corruption of the word. While socialist structures are found in all modern governments, I don’t know if the word can ever be rehabilitated in America.
While it’s way too soon to tell, Senator Sanders and all other liberal challengers face navigating the Motivator vs Spoiler conflict we saw with Nader/Gore in 2000 and still burns in the hearts of many of us. That was very painful.
It’s also too soon to ask. However, I wonder what “Bernie” would do if faced with a similar scenario in 2016?
glennst010 May 28th, 2015 at 05:37
I don’t know much about Bernie, but I see a lot of people bandying the term “Socialist” about who don’t have a clue as to what Socialism is.
greenfloyd May 28th, 2015 at 23:21
I think your observation is correct. My impression of Sanders is that he’s something of a cross between Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, the Kennedy’s. He’s in the long tradition of East Coast Liberals who actually believe in Democracy, a “Square Deal,” the “New Deal,” and challenges all of us to “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,” John F. Kennedy. And perhaps, “Now is not the time for thinking small,” as the senator put it the other day.
However, there is one key distinction between Sanders and the old guard with old money, he’s not a wealthy man among his peers. According to http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/summary.php?CID=N00000528&year=2010 he ranked 85th in the Senate, “with an estimated net
worth* of $429,004 in 2010.” In 2013 the average Senator had a net worth of around $11,000,000, (The current salary (2015) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/congresspay.htm). So, he’s got populist cred based on over 40 years of consistent positions in politics. He’s the real deal, perhaps too real!?
Americans loved the Roosevelts and Kennedys not only for their leadership but perhaps even more for the great sacrifice men like FDR, JFK and his brother Robert made as independently wealthy men taking the side of the “little guy,” up to a point of balance between greed and need.