Help me develop this theme: Even rich folk and corporations will do better under Bernie.

[grasswire]

The work force will be healthier and less stressed by debt and worry.

Infrastructure will begin to be repaired.

The work force will be better educated.

The economy will stabilize.

......

.....

.....

It's late and I must get sleep. But I think this is an argument worth exploring.

[Sherman A1]

1. My thoughts are

Medicare for all because it's simply cheaper all the way around, particularly for business.

A higher minimum wage puts more money into the hands of people that will spend it and create more business and more jobs that create more business and more jobs............

Fixing the student loan issue will allow the college educated individuals entering the workforce to go forward without a burdensome debt that will allow them to spend on things such as housing, cars and alike creating more jobs.

All I can do right now, gotta head to work.

[grasswire]

11. excellent nt

[waltben]

2. A few more.

Taxes for the very wealthy will be higher, but they'll be making more money.

Taxes for corporations will be healthy, but they'll have higher sales.

The work force will be healthier and VASTLY less stressed by debt and worry.

The middle-class will be reborn with increased purchasing power.

National focus will shift from conflicts and wars towards citizen well being.

[grasswire]

12. thanks and welcome to DU nt

[femmedem]

3. The rich will benefit from a president who isn't beholden to the fossil fuel industry

and will fight to keep oil in the ground where it belongs. He is endorsed by Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.

The poor will suffer disproportionately from global warming, but the rich will suffer too.

When asked to name our country's biggest threat in a debate last October, Sanders was the only candidate to name climate change.

Edited to add: here is an article which lays out the differences between Sanders' and Clinton's positions on climate change.

From the linked article: "...Their differences, though, are substantial: Sanders’ climate plan is much more comprehensive than Clinton’s and will reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a faster rate. He’s forcefully linked climate change and terrorism. He’s staunchly opposed to continued fossil fuel exploration on public lands and has vowed to ban fracking outright, a stance Clinton doesn’t share. His focus on ridding politics of corporate lobbyists is a swipe against Clinton, whose campaign has taken money from fossil fuel companies. On the flip side, unlike Clinton, Sanders wants to phase out nuclear energy, a position that many scientists and environmentalists increasingly don’t share, given the need to transition toward a zero carbon economy as quickly as possible..."

[grasswire]

13. good, and documentation too nt

[Donkees]

4. The Middle Balances the Two Extremes

...with a MAJORITY middle class, democracy works, and it works well. Why? Because the middle class tends to be educated and has just enough prosperity that members of that class can see themselves becoming rich some day, so they don’t punish the rich, and they have compassion for the poor, being that many of them came from poverty. The middle class stands between the two extremes, the poor and the rich, and you end up with a well functioning democracy.

Here Aristotle describes just that in his book Politics:

The best constitution is one controlled by a numerous middle class which stands between the rich and the poor. For those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it “easiest to obey the rule of reason” (Politics IV.11.1295b4–6). They are accordingly less apt than the rich or poor to act unjustly toward their fellow citizens.

Aristotle-Raphael
Raphael’s Aristotle from “The School of Athens,” fresco, 1510–1511, Apostolic Palace, Vatican
A constitution based on the middle class is the mean between the extremes of oligarchy (rule by the rich) and democracy (rule by the poor). “That the middle [constitution] is best is evident, for it is the freest from faction: where the middle class is numerous, there least occur factions and divisions among citizens” (IV.11.1296a7–9). The middle constitution is therefore both more stable and more just than oligarchy and democracy.

https://underground.net/aristotle-and-the-middle-class/

[grasswire]

14. thanks for the erudition. :-) nt

[Donkees]

20. Without a strong middle, the 2 polar extremes of narcissism dominate. No reply necessary :)

[Festivito]

5. Old: Rising tide lifts all boats.

Slightly higher taxes that do result in more personal wealth, more money freed to spend.

(BUT, the rich don't feel as rich when everyone makes more money. So, they oppose making more money -- even for themselves. "feelings come first&quot

[grasswire]

15. yesss, thanks nt

[Helen Borg]

6. Certainly, the French aristocrats would have done better!

Because, you know, we are headed that way. All those under 40 who are so indebted and so in favor of Bernie will not go away any time soon. In the meanwhile, all the 65+ who are currently voting for Clinton will fade way. Do the math.

[grasswire]

16. yes, demographics rule nt

[lostnfound]

7. Restore consumer spending. No pitchforks. Nt

[grasswire]

17. that's big -- the stability of the electorate cannot be ignored nt

[Snarkoleptic]

8. Two thing come to mind, pent-up consumer demand and the velocity of money.

Consumer spending (including healthcare) makes up 70% of GDP and much of this is driven by the middle class. Stagnant wages and income inequality have been increasing since the Reagan era, which acts as a damper on the velocity of money as the dollars are pulled out of circulation and (largely) stashed by the wealthy.

As the middle class continues to struggle, pent-up demand builds up and can only be released when funds are available. Example- I need around $12K worth of windows in my home, but replacing them is not an option at the moment as my 2nd career only pays around half what I made 10-years ago. Since 'he who pays the piper calls the tune', the wealthy and powerful have created a system that ensures nearly all new gains in income go to the top 1%. When Bernie tilts this so that we the people have a voice and a better share of our nation's wealth, the velocity of money will increase as pent-up demands are met by a financially and politically empowered population.

If only we have the courage to elect Bernie to unwind the corporatocracy and get money out of politics.

[grasswire]

18. the velocity of money

Never have thought of that concept.

[Snarkoleptic]

21. Here's a decent piece with more info-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity_of_money
To me this means we must eat the rich (reduce income inequality) to release their stored energy.

The velocity of money (also called the velocity of circulation of money) refers to how fast money passes from one holder to the next. It can refer to the income velocity of money, which is the frequency at which the average unit of currency is used to purchase newly domestically-produced goods and services within a given time period.[3] In other words, it is the number of times one dollar is spent to buy goods and services per unit of time.[3] Alternatively and less frequently, it can refer to the transactions velocity of money, which is the frequency with which the average unit of currency is used in any kind of transaction in which it changes possession—not only the purchase of newly produced goods, but also the purchase of financial assets and other items.

and

If, for example, in a very small economy, a farmer and a mechanic, with just $50 between them, buy new goods and services from each other in just three transactions over the course of a year

Farmer spends $50 on tractor repair from mechanic.
Mechanic buys $40 of corn from farmer.
Mechanic spends $10 on barn cats from farmer.

then $100 changed hands in the course of a year, even though there is only $50 in this little economy. That $100 level is possible because each dollar was spent on new goods and services an average of twice a year, which is to say that the velocity was 2/text{year}. Note that if the farmer bought a used tractor from the mechanic or made a gift to the mechanic, it would not go into the numerator of velocity because that transaction would not be part of this tiny economy's gross domestic product (GDP).

[Dont call me Shirley]

9. But the rich do not like competition, especially from the "lower classes".

[BernieforPres2016]

10. Here is a plutocrat explaining it to other plutocrats

[grasswire]

19. cautionary tale. thanks. nt