~ archived since 2018 ~

Goodbye Bernie. Not sure who to support. Cardi B explains to Sanders that she once struggled financially. She didn’t explain how she got by.

benderXX

August 13, 2019

32 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Goodbye Bernie. Not sure who to support. Cardi B explains to Sanders that she once struggled financially. She didn’t explain how she got by.
Author	benderXX
Upvotes	32
Comments	38
Date	August 13, 2019 10:59 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cq0xxk/goodbye_bernie_not_sure_who_to_support_cardi_b/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/goodbye-bernie-not-sure-who-to-support-cardi-b.1204859 https://theredarchive.com/post/1204859

Comments

[–]herefortheparty01 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]andejoh 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wrote Bernie off the moment he said he wanted to forgive student debt. We need to continue to fund the re-education comas.

What I support is government not making loans to students, but to schools. I propose keeping the same protections for government money that there are now (ie the loan the government gave the school can't be discharged in bankruptcy. They should also make the officers personally liable. support giving students the same protections as any consumer who takes out a loan (ie access to bankruptcy protection).

If government adopted this position, the cost of education would rise at the rate of inflation rather than 4 to 5 times the rate. Schools would no longer offer majors that don't earn enough money to repay the loans or would demand security, which would make the student more selective (in theory) with their choice of major.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]RagingHardBull 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rationalthought314 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The fact that of all the candidates CNN and MsNBC hate Bernie as well as the bitter HRC feminists makes him a better candidate on that alone on the Democrat side. He went on a Fox News townhall when the other candidates thought it beneath and he won applause from the crowd as well as making a good showing on Joe Rogan. His stance on women's issues is generally a practical one which should be MRA that is practical equality without the bashing of men overall or trite slogans like "the future is female." I find more women who support Bernie are not the shrill feminist or blue-pill men type who scream "misogyny!" simply because a male candidate dares to run against a female one or wags a finger during debate.

But anyway, not to turn this into politics, in regards to MRA I don't feel Bernie inspires that radical male-hating segment of leftist women mainly because they despise him.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]rationalthought314 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Becki_Minaj4 points 6 years ago* [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]RagingHardBull 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]RagingHardBull 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I meant "stepping up" as "men better step up and provide". That is the paradigm.

I agree about bloody revolution. I wonder why it isn't here yet. So many men harmed via divorce laws. Jailed due to child support. Jailed due to XYZ laws that are selectively enforced. What do they have to lose in the current system? They have no children (estranged even if they once did). They have no consistent supply of sex. Even if they do it's too dangerous to participate in. They receive no honors in society. Not thanks.

Really, what do men have to lose? When one is at the bottom of the food chain the worst that happens in revolution is they are still at the bottom. Better than 50% odds they aren't when it's all over.

I am sure it will come. Gov better hope it can keep the food flowing, the internet connected, and keep up the lie a bit longer that every year people aren't getting poorer.

The world is in a precarious situation, IMO.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I meant "stepping up" as "men better step up and provide". That is the paradigm.

The problem is we've seen this, for example with black households. In periods of recession/depression Democrats offered welfare to "Single Mothers" at higher rates than for those mothers who were married or with a partner, the result? Women chose the higher earner - the government and mass fatherlessness ensued.

Women have suckled the government teat and tastes the benefit of not having to work, the taste of effortlessly obtained wealth, the power of stealing from others while maintaining moral authority - that's not going away without extreme action.

I agree about bloody revolution. I wonder why it isn't here yet. So many men harmed via divorce laws. Jailed due to child support. Jailed due to XYZ laws that are selectively enforced. What do they have to fight for? They have no children (estranged even if they once did). They have no consistent supply of sex. Even if they do it's too dangerous to participate in. They receive no honors in society. Not thanks.

That's the most bizarre thing, like not even protests! There's nothing, it's like they've gone completely docile.

The world is in a precarious situation, IMO.

That hopefully turns out to be a good thing in the long run.

[–]RagingHardBull 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WikiTextBot 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Starve the beast

"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives to limit government spending by cutting taxes, in order to deprive the federal government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force it to reduce spending.

The term "the beast", in this context, refers to the United States Federal Government and the programs it funds, using mainly American taxpayer dollars, particularly social programs such as education, welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

On July 14, 1978, economist Alan Greenspan testified to the U.S. Finance Committee: "Let us remember that the basic purpose of any tax cut program in today's environment is to reduce the momentum of expenditure growth by restraining the amount of revenue available and trust that there is a political limit to deficit spending."Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GrantNexus 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RagingHardBull 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earth 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You just read what's in the DNC pamphlet and believe it don't you.

His actions do not match his words, he's more than willing to insult everyone who won't agree with him as "Mysoginistic" or the like. He'll happily push the wage gap and other feminist lies, and he only tries to hide it while on TV:

https://www.yang2020.com/policies/fight-for-equal-pay/

This is stupid. People should receive equal pay for doing equal work. While federal law requires this, we’re still far from achieving it in practice. There’s a lot of fuzziness around the $.80-to-the-dollar stat, especially once you take race as well as gender into account, but the simple fact remains that women—especially black, Hispanic, and Native American women—earn much less than their male coworkers.

The man is a coward, he's still your typical Man-hating lying leftist who pushes known falsehoods that harm men because he just doesn't fucking care.

Andrew Yang is a man-hating leftist feminist who will at the earliest opportunity show is true colors and spit in the fact of innocent young men in the name of enslaving them to take their earnings for women who don't pay taxes.

He is a socialist, he just doesn't want to admit it openly because it's knowingly unpopular. Andrew Yang wants to put in place massive taxes on young men in order for young women to live for free - as all socialists do. I cannot as a man, ever in good conscience, support a "Men are slaves, Women are owners" approach to economics. No self respecting man can say "I think my rampantly sexist government should take 80% of my income and give it to women who pay nothing in taxes". The government does not respect men, it doesn't care about men, it has no business taxing men until it changes it's ways.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link