MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Bernie Sanders: Don’t Need 23 Choices of Deodorant, 18 Choices of Sneakers When Kids Are Going Hungry

The Socialist running for president says he doesn't begrudge Hillary Clinton for the money she makes giving speeches.

US SenateUS SenateSen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who is running for the Democratic nomination for president, represents everything wrong with the populist redistributist left. Channeling his inner Hugo Chavez in an interview with CNBC, Sanders bemoaned the choice of deodorant and sneakers in this country, because children are starving. Via CNBC:

You can't just continue growth for the sake of growth in a world in which we are struggling with climate change and all kinds of environmental problems. All right? You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country. I don't think the media appreciates the kind of stress that ordinary Americans are working on.

Sanders, of course, is mistaken on the fundamentals. Economic growth is not a goal for the sake of itself—economic growth ignited by the freeing of markets has lifted more people out of poverty in the last century than any other force in history. Choices in the market contribute that improvement of the human condition—not just because 23 choices of deodorant mean more jobs than one choice of deodorant but because in a very real sense more choices mean more wealth. Bernie Sanders and those attracted to his economically illiterate, anti-capitalist rhetoric live in a world where working conditions haven't changed since the 19th century, where the United States is perpetually one tax or spending cut away from collapsing into Mad Max style chaos.

Sanders peddles in the brand of populism where the wealthy are openly villainized, but he's careful not to say he begrudges Hillary Clinton for pulling in six figures a speech (for her insight, of course, not her political connections). He may be hedging his comments because he sees Clinton as vastly better than any Republican alternative, or he may be hedging his comments because he career hopes are for a similar speaking circuit. Here's the relevant exchange from CNBC:

HARWOOD: It came out in disclosure forms the other day that Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, in the last 16 months, have made $30 million. What does that kind of money do to a politician's perspective on the struggles you were just talking about? Does it make it difficult for recipients of that kind of income to take on the system?

SANDERS: Well, theoretically, you could be a multibillionaire and, in fact, be very concerned about the issues of working people. Theoretically, that's true.

I think sometimes what can happen is that—it's not just the Clintons—when you hustle money like that, you don't sit in restaurants like this. You sit in restaurants where you're spending—I don't know what they spend—hundreds of dollars for dinner and so forth. That's the world that you're accustomed to, and that's the world view that you adopt. 

It's a world view popular in the Washington, D.C.-area, where 5 of the ten wealthiest counties in America sit. Government is big business, for politicians and for business. Sure, "theoretically" out-of-touch politicians like Sanders may be "very concerned about the issues of working people." But they also have an obligation not to be so ignorant, because their policies, however well-intentioned they say they are for working folk, are destroying opportunities for all people of all classes. But, for Sanders and the rest, it's a good hustle if you can keep it.

Sanders is expected to have a big, symbolic campaign event in Burlington this afternoon. Ben & Jerry's, the Vermont ice cream company owned by socialists who, naturally, are fans of Sanders, will participate, by handing out free ice cream. Let's hope they've limited it to one choice in order to supply Vermont's hungry children too, or something.

Photo Credit: Senate

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Mx. F. Stupidity, Jr.||

    Nobody needs _____________.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Socialism.

  • GILMORE||

    "The internet"

    Seriously, blow some millenial's mind with that.

    There was some hilarious story a year or two about a guy who - "Supersize Me"-style - made a social-experiment where he deprived himself of his smartphone and internet for.... *a month*.

    Because that's *privation*, man. 30 whole days!

    Eat your heart out, Survivor.

    The original article was published in Slate or Salon or something, but i think this is the same brave explorer of the unknown here

  • PapayaSF||

    Bernie Sanders.

  • ||

    A race bike when an unprofitable one-speed unisex hipster bicycle provided to you by the state is more than enough.

    Also, nobody needs a car when state buses are perfectly fine. You don't need a growing economy but you do need to keep government pensions going.

  • Brandybuck||

    Actually, I don't understand how hipsters can be on this guy's side. If 23 kinds of deodorant are too much, then there's no room for their all-natural, gluten-free, artisanal deodorant. You don't like lilac scented? Wait four years to vote dude the appointed the deodorant czar out of office. Then cross your fingers that the new one will allow your artisanal hops and patchoulli underarm stick on the market.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Ah, but they are SURE that their preferred choce will be the one selected. After all, nobody they know holds any other opinion....

  • Free Society||

    If 23 kinds of deodorant are too much, then there's no room for their all-natural, gluten-free, artisanal deodorant.

    No, in their mind there's no room for everyone else's non-natural, glutenated, mass produced deoderant. Socialists, no matter what rhetoric they use or how often they claim non-violence et cetera, they are tyrants to the last man.

  • wagnert in atlanta||

    Amazing how things converge. In royalist France, soap was a government monopoly, so there was only one kind of soap, and it was expensive. In addition, since lye was cheap and tallow was expensive, it was mostly lye. There was a reason why the public was called "the great unwashed."

  • sasob||

    As I understand it the aristocracy didn't smell very nice either at that time. But of course, they could afford to carry pomanders or perfumed sachets to mask the odors.

  • jmg09||

    "Sir, the peasants are revolting!"

    "You said it, they stink on ice!"

  • Jimothy||

    So what you're saying is, government soap, much like government itself, is full of lyes.

  • Charlotte Falcon||

    This. The left is totalitarian at its core.

  • ||

    Did Sanders say he was going to actually prohibit excessive varieties of deodorant? I don't think so. If you want to argue against him and his kind, you first need to understand their values, assumptions, and actual proposals, not caricatures and propagandistic misconceptions.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Nope. I don't want to understand subtle fascism.

  • Crazyotto||

    Now that is funny!

  • crufus||

    Nobody needs more than one candidate for office.

    Let the Republicans and Democrats divide the congress up fairly, and get rid of annoying, unnecessary Socialist candidates.

  • BDub||

    another hole in the head?

  • Pathogen||

    __Smug, sanctimonious pricks.. running for president on a platform of authority of needs___

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    A sharp poke in the eye

  • John C. Randolph||

    Pig-ignorant commie rat bastards in the congress.

    -jcr

  • Michael Price||

    to be told they don't need something that they want. We already know that.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    This much bitching about deodorants and sneakers.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Socialism requires a total inability to understand real-world economics. Supply and demand must be things the government controls, not common, uneducated folk.

  • sarcasmic||

    Well, if government doesn't control it, then who will? Greedy capitalist corporations? We can't allow that! We're already slaves to the corporations because they force us to work for them and to purchase products from them! What? You don't think they use force? Try to live without a job to buy food! You've got to eat or you will die! So you're forced to buy food! And you need a job to earn money, so you're forced to work! It's all force!

    That's why everything should be controlled by the government! Government is the people! Not the rich! So it's not force since it's us!

    Don't you understand? Everything libertarians think is voluntary is actually force, and everything libertarians think is force is actually voluntary!

  • Crazyotto||

    Wow the world is such a simpler place when a Socialist explains it. I like the part where you said "That's why everything should be controlled by the government! Government is the people! Not the rich! So it's not force since it's us!" The government currently is not "us" rather it is "them" When you have an oligarchy run by progressives there is never anyone but "them"
    Sanders is a joke and not authentic because he supportive of the Clinton money machine. Socialist live in a fantasy world where all you have to do is to give everyone the same amount of money, services, healthcare, education.. (just what they need). this will end greed and suffering.. Have fun at Wally World!

  • Riven||

    Well, if the government doesn't control it, then it's probably some kind of terrible, free-wheeling system we're not quite ready for, right?

  • Pro Libertate||

    I dunno, seems better than this other terrible system we have.

  • Akira||

    WILD WEST.

  • ||

    Well, theoretically, you could be a socialist and, in fact, be very concerned about economic realities. Theoretically, that's true.

  • Akira||

    Eh... I'm not even sure if that's true. The number one priority of most socialists is giving "the rich" a smackdown, whether they deserve it or not, whether it benefits anyone or not.

    What's the connection between diversity in deodorant choices and children starving? I don't know! But by god, Bernie Sanders either believes it, or sees a chance to woo some voters by professing belief in it, so he's going to pretend that Old Spice is prying food from children's mouths.

    Most hardcore "progressive" and openly socialist voters will vote for whoever appears to hate the corporations the most.

  • ThomasD||

    "The number one priority of most socialists is giving "the rich" a smackdown..."

    No, the number one priority of most socialists is gaining access to the levers of power in order to impose their vision on the greatest number of people possible. If that means promising a smackdown on the rich then so be it.

    But if you think that means stopping public universities from devoting upwards of half a million dollars of public monies towards a single speech from a former President/political crony (no doubt because the "educational value" makes it a bargain) you might want to think again.

    Cicero was right, there really are only three forms of government, and no matter what the proponents promise, socialism always ends up being a reversion to aristocracy.

    And far too many are just hunky dory with that.

  • thom||

    Supply and demand

    No - supply and need. A practical socialism is one in which the government assesses need and then oversees the production and distribution of goods that will supply those needs. Demand is irrelevant. Isn't the whole point kind of that people are greedy and demand all sorts of silly shit?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, but if you don't suppress demand, they'll use it in black markets.

  • Jimbo||

    I DEMAND we outlaw demand.

  • Crazyotto||

    You are saying that demand is a silly thing that can best be controlled by big Authoritative Government. A big father figure dictating need. Written by a true Socialist. Socialism is a cancer that sucks the life and will of individuals. Socialism is a type of slavery where as the masters in government control your housing, healthcare, your access to "demand", all aspects of your life. It is a sickness that is supported by equally sick people. Like the slave masters of old the government looks at people as children and chattel. You are sad and pathetic. And sick!

  • Jimothy||

    It seems your parody detector is broken.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    And that is the fundamental misunderstanding, right there. The idea that either supply OR demand will ever be substantially under the control of ANY State.

  • sarcasmic||

    Someone should buy Bernie a Trabant.

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    I don't know how much credibility we have talking shit about the Trabant anymore given the popularity of the Smart car.

  • UnCivilServant||

    The 'Smart' car provides at least one valuable service - I laugh whenever I see one.

  • BDub||

    two valuable services: the second being the choice not to buy one.

  • Crazyotto||

    Well said!

  • Suicidy||

    Nothing wrong with the Smart Car that a small block conversion couldn't cure.

  • perlhaqr||

    And some soviet era footwear.

  • perlhaqr||

    Things I have just learned: There is a brand of sneakers named "Soviet".

  • Sevo||

    They don't fit.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Two left shoes, that's why

  • ||

    Ugh. Remember how much fun the Ron Paul campaign was in 2007? Sack up for the opposite.

  • ||

    Not completely the opposite though. I'm already seeing his internet supporters using the worst of the Paultard "strategies." Also seen some actual former Paultards supporting him.

  • GILMORE||

    Yes.

    Lots of college-age kids are all gung-ho for Bernie the way they were for Ron Paul (but are not for Rand)

    Why? Because FUCK REALITY!! That's why!

    To be fair, I voted for Ross Perot. But for me, it was more like Dada Performance Art rather than any fundamental ideas about economics or politics. I just wanted to be the guy in the "Ross is the Boss" T-Shirt

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    DU is nuts for him.

    "Bernie is going to stick it to Wall St!"

    "Bernie will give us single payer!"

    "Bernie is going to shit dolla' bills to feed the homeless yo!"

  • Akira||

    "Bernie is going to strangle the Koch Brothers live on MSNBC!"

  • Suicidy||

    Kochtopus gonna get him..

  • ||

    I was the only kid in my 5th grade class who raised his hand when the teacher asked which of the three candidates we liked. It was humiliating. And probably a formative experience, now that I think about it.

  • ||

    Fuck. Raised his hand *for Ross Perot*.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Giving us eight years of Bill Clinton. Thanks a lot, Warty.

  • Paul.||

    I too was a 17%er.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I was ten. I didn't have an opinion.

  • Muzzle of Bees||

    I was in third grade and remember when a girl said in class that her parents were Perot supporters. We laughed. Of course, I had no idea why, other than that he was funny, old, short, and had big ears. Hell if I knew anything about policies, I just made her embarrassed for no reason. Of course, karma being a bitch and all, now my son'll get to be the weird kid supporting the candidate no one has even heard of.

  • ||

    I just heard on the radio the NDP are gaining steam nationally in Canada. A combo of anti-Harper and apathy to Trudeau is creating a perfect storm for left-wing buffoons to control an entire country.

    Very. Scary.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Don't believe everything you hear, press is desperate for proper horse race rather than three-way bullshit they got. Plus, their golden boy Trudeau seems to have sunk himself, so they need to switch over to Mulcair and start pumping him up in time for the election.

    Though, $15 min wage for federal workers? He's not even trying anymore.

  • ||

    Well Quebec (Federally) and Alberta (Provincially) voted for them so is it really a stretch?

  • Brandybuck||

    I hear all the left-wing buffoons are shitting their pants that the nation just might do a Great Britain and swing ever so slightly to the right.

  • ||

    If kids are going hungry in America, it is because their guardians are actively starving them. Or they don't have any adults they feel safe approaching.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    This is why the government needs to step in and take guardianship of all children.

  • Riven||

    On one hand... better them than me.

    On the other hand...

  • kinghiram91||

    You need to lose they idea that your children are yours. It takes a village to raise a child, after all.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Actually the line was "It takes a village to raze a child", they were worshippers of Moloch.

  • Governor Squid||

    If we're all supposed to raise everyone else's kids, why is it that I'm not allowed to smack the little sh!ts who make my evening commute such a bother?

  • Crazyotto||

    There you go... we get all the responsibility but none of the fun.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Can you think of a single government initiative liklier to end in complete disaster?

  • sarcasmic||

    There aren't any hungry children in America. That's why they had to change it from "hunger" to "food insecurity," which basically means the kid doesn't know what's for dinner. Not whether there will be dinner or not, but if it's chili or chicken.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Brings to mind Sowell's discovery that, when the federal government located the hungriest county in the nation (calculated by determining the highest percentage of people eligible for food stamps who did not apply for them), it turned out to be in ranching country where workers ate the beef and crops they raised.

    If any children are hungry in an era of subsidized school breakfasts, lunches, and food stamps where the average income is closing in on $50k, that's a failure of the state to fulfill the duties it monopolized for itself.

  • Libertarius||

    Guess 'ol Bernie failed to notice that the only place you see children starving is in socialist countries (both before and after their total economic collapse).

  • The Elite Elite||

    I'd sure like to know where all these hungry children are in this country. (I think I remember some stupid ad on TV a while back claiming 1 in 5 or some such BS). Because whenever I see kids, starving is the LAST thing I think they are. More like they could use a little starving.

  • ||

    SANDERS: Well, theoretically, you could be a multibillionaire and, in fact, be very concerned about the issues of working people. Theoretically, that's true.

    Gosh Bernie, that's a generous admission of you: rich folks are *theoretically* capable of empathy. I'd love to hear more about how a large bank account disables the amygdala... in reality, of course.

  • Raven Nation||

    Perhaps he's angling for Warren Buffet's support?

  • Bush League||

    Can't upset his donors now. They're theoretically capable of giving him their money.

  • Crazyotto||

    Asking Bernie to speak about reality is like asking the Clintons to quit being so slimy. It cannot happen.

  • Ken Shultz||

    His job must be to make Hillary and Lie-awatha look good by way of comparison.

  • ||

    And I'm sure the Bernie, instead of living the good life as a US Senator, gives all his excess cash to hungry children.

    He does, right? You know, put his money where his mouth is? What's his net worth?

  • Raven Nation||

    86th in the senate in 2013 according to Open Secrets:

    http://tinyurl.com/Sanders-Net-Worth

  • Raven Nation||

    Oops, further detail: worth about $330k, mostly in mutual funds. Does have some pretty big debts on congressional and senate credit cards. Also collects a $5k pension from the city of Burlington every year.

  • ||

    I think Bernie, to his credit, probably practices what he preaches for the most part. More than his colleagues in Washington anyway. That's been my impression and what I've heard of him over the years.

  • Pulseguy||

    He's an idiot about money. Of course he practices what he preaches. His ideas don't work, that's why he is broke.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    And HE wants US to follow his lead? Now, that's funny!

  • Crazyotto||

    Very funny! Thank you for making me laugh.

  • DesigNate||

    His base pay as a senator is 174k(since 2007) and somehow his net worth is only 460k.

    Looking at that alone I would have to conclude that he is a complete and total fuck up and should never be allowed anywhere near the government's check book. Never mind what it says about his ability to play the fucking game that is DC.

    Oh, and good luck getting any of these democrat shitmongers to walk the walk when it comes to "income inequality" or doing their "patriotic duty" and paying their taxes.

  • american socialist||

    "Looking at that alone I would have to conclude that he is a complete and total fuck up "

    Yeah, and if he had a billion dollars in his pocket morons like you would be calling him a hypocrite. It's pretty funny that guys like you think that someone that has ~460k is someone to be looked down on. That's far more than most people have in their bank accounts-- which is, I suppose, part of sander's appeal.

  • EV||

    What about having lots of money disqualifies someone from being President?

  • american socialist||

    Nothing. Why would having 460k in the bank disqualify someone from being president?

  • Sevo||

    american socialist|5.26.15 @ 3:47PM|#
    "Nothing. Why would having 460k in the bank disqualify someone from being president?"

    Maybe because they lie and claim to be broke, shitstain? IOWs, they're hypocritical assholes like you?

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    He's poorer than I am, that's why. I don't respect someone who wants to rule over me but is too stupid to be material better off than I.

  • Slow-Rion||

    I can't believe I am going to reply-but if he earns a combined $234K per year and has for many years-as he has-his net worth should be higher. It means he doesn't know how to manage his money. And this is a person who might be in charge?

  • Pulseguy||

    He makes $174 k a year, and has for 8 years. Plus, I'm sure he gets a lot of perks with that; lots of free meals and airplane rides, etc. He should have much more than that.

    If he gives away $100k a year, then I'll let him off the hook. But, my guess is he is foolish with money, doesn't understand it, doesn't 'get' it in any way. He just equated too many brands of deodorant with poverty, while he is being sponsored by an ice cream company that prides itself on its new flavours. Of course he is broke. And he will do his best to make everyone else broke alongside him.

  • Brian||

    Maybe the starving children should eat free ice cream. Ice cream is food, you know, and we all need food.

  • Suicidy||

    His kind don't give away their own money. They steal from others and give that away instead. That is what passes for generosity in the minds o fcrestires like Sanders and AS.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Come on, the man is a self-professed Socialist. That leaves him no good possibilities. Either he males hay while the sun shines, which would make him a hippocrit, or he practices what he preaches, which would make him an imbecile. Those really are pretty much your options.

  • Michael Price||

    "It's pretty funny that guys like you think that someone that has ~460k is someone to be looked down on. "
    Sanders earned $174K which is $122K above the average HOUSEHOLD (not individual) level. So in 7 years he's saved less than 4 years of the excess money he gets over the average income. Not exactly impressive.

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    Hey idiot, he makes over 100,000 bucks a year doesn't that make him your enemy, "american socialist"? Technically he's rich and according to you all rich people "are duh debil."

  • soflarider||

    If you had a fat pension lined up would you save a bunch of money, or would you spend what you make and enjoy life?
    That said, at his age, he should have a lot higher net worth.

  • crab_apple||

    Maybe he has a "you can't take it when you go" attitude. Granted, with his views on policy, he should have amounted as much wealth as possible and then left it to the government to distribute to all the starving childrens.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Somebody should ask him if he wants to turn off all the Obamaphones--since some kids are going to be hungry at night.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    "I'm economically illiterate and I can prove it."

  • This Machine||

    Hey, Socialism's working out pretty well for the Venezuelans - they've got so much money, they're using it as toilet paper!

  • PBR Streetgang||

    Utopia achieved!

  • JW||

    Winner.

  • american socialist||

    Yeah, hyperinflation in South America has never existed before.

  • Sevo||

    american socialist|5.26.15 @ 3:43PM|#
    "Yeah, hyperinflation in South America has never existed before."

    Shitstain: Hey! Look over there!
    Did someone use you to wipe their ass? Is that the reason you're stained like that?

  • Migrant Log Picker||

    Dead thread-fucking AGAIN.....hmmmm.

  • Will4Freedom||

    I don't understand your statement. Are you saying it's okay because it happened before? Or It's not only socialists who can hyper-inflate their currency?

    Do you agree that hyperinflation is bad? Do you agree that it will do more harm to the poor and working class than it will to the rulers?

    If Socialist are "for the poor", you should be joining us in pointing out this tragedy, regardless of who started it.

  • Sevo||

    "If Socialist are "for the poor", you should be joining us in pointing out this tragedy, regardless of who started it."

    Shitstain bailed on his mortgage and stuck everyone else with it; who do you think he's "for"?

  • Suicidy||

    Socialism is for us, not him. It's never for the socialist.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    "I have paid absolutely NO attention to world economics and history during my lifetime, and I can prove it."

  • R C Dean||

    Perfectly consistent with socialism as practiced everywhere.

    The proles need to be micromanaged, even to the number of choices for toilet paper.

    The nomenklatura, though, is above all scrutiny.

  • ||

    Choices in the market contribute that improvement of the human condition—not just because 23 choices of deodorant mean more jobs than one choice of deodorant but because in a very real sense more choices mean more wealth.

    I agree that more choice of deodorant is a net benefit, but I think your logic for why is wrong.

    I doubt that the number of people employed making 23 different choices of deodorant is actually higher than it would be if there was just one choice, and I also don't think the added choice is really a meaningful source of wealth.

    The reason we have 23 choices of deodorant is, rather, because the market is engaged in a constant process of seeing an optimal, efficient means of producing deodorant. Those 23 choices are variations that involve different ingredients and production processes, and the ones that produce the best value for the money generally will be the ones consumers will adopt. Usually that will also mean the most efficient labor allocation, which means fewer workers, except to the extent that more workers make better deodorant. At the same time, people are ocnstantly inventing new improvements in materials and production processes so NEW choices enter the market. Deodorant is likely better and cheaper today in real dollars than it was 20 or 40 years ago. Something which owuldn't have happened if we had a single state-owned deodorant plant.

    And that leaves MORE resources, not fewer, to feed starving children.

  • ||

    So yes, we're richer today because we have 23 deodorant choices. But it's not the choices themselves that make us richer, it's that choices allow us to innovate and improve, and THAT process, that optimization-seeking nature of the market, makes us richer.
    If one day the market converged on a single optimal way of producing deodorant, we wouldn't be any poorer because we have fewer choices, we'd be richer for having found the optimal production process.

  • R C Dean||

    But it's not the choices themselves that make us richer,

    Actually, it is. All those choices mean you can maximize the value of what you spend on deodorant by getting exactly what you want.

  • ||

    Well, it's a plus, but it's a minor one in comparison to the optimizing effect that the market as a whole gets from allowing millions of consumers to choose among varying options with different price points and properties.

    The "optimum" might not be just one thing either, but an evolving selection with different price points. There could be like 3-4 optimum. However won;t be able to *find* them if we don't have multiple choices exploring the space of possibilities.

  • ThomasD||

    But given the population that 23 choices then sounds rather low.

    At least if your standard is "exactly." If it is "sort of" then 23 choices might be sufficient.

    Not that Sanders gives a fuck about exactly what the proles want, he's more of a "I'll tell them what is sufficient" for their "needs" sort of guy.

    And clearly, a crony like like Hillary needs mega millions and all the trappings that come with it.

  • Robert||

    No, spray deodorant was better 40 yrs. ago, when it was allowed to contain hexachlorophene as an active ingredient & Freon as propellant. Sneakers are a better buy, though, now that they're Chinese-made.

  • ||

    A fair point, although if it's really toxic then it might not be "better". Should be left to the market to decide that though. The freon as propellant issue is more difficult, because it requires some means to price in the costs of ozone depletion.

  • Robert||

    It's not clear hexachlorophene is that toxic. It was banned in toiletries after an accident in France in which babies were dusted with a concentration 20X the amount conventionally used. The CFC issue was never adequately resolved IMO either, because it was never shown that a significant amount of stratospheric Cl came from those gases as opposed to other sources, or that O3 depletion was causally or phenomenologically linked to halogen concentrations.

  • Robert||

    Hexachlorophene is still allowed in toiletries in the USA as a preservative, though.

  • ||

    The point is we need a way to accurately price in the true costs of CFCs in order for it to be reflected in the price of freon.
    Then we let the market decide. If freon "costs" a lot, then freon based products will be more expensive.

  • Robert||

    There is no way to determine a market price for damage from CFCs to the stratosphere, because there is no way for individuals to make exchanges to determine how much they value the stratosphere, or their share of it.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Those 23 choices are variations that involve different ingredients and production processes, and the ones that produce the best value for the money generally will be the ones consumers will adopt.

    Meh. Sort of. A big part of it is that preferences aren't homogenous. There are 23 choices of deodorant because not everyone likes the same smell. Tell you what, if Bernie Sanders will agree to use Axe grooming supplies for a year, maybe I'll take his prattlings seriously.

  • UnCivilServant||

    if Bernie Sanders will agree to use Axe grooming supplies for a year, maybe I'll take his prattlings seriously.

    what are the chances his olfactary abilities are already dead?

  • Xeones||

    Pretty sure Bernie only uses that rock crystal hippie shit that doesn't work.

  • ||

    "and the ones that produce the best value for the money generally will be the ones consumers will adopt"

    or the ones that have the coolest marketing plans

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    On the one hand, good for him for having the balls to openly admit what progressives try desperately to conceal: their unwavering belief that it is better for the poor to be poorer provided that the rich are less rich.

    And on the other, fuck him and his putrid, decrepit ideology that 100 million corpses proved the failure of during the 20th century. In a sane world he would be treated as seriously and with as much contempt as David Duke.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    their unwavering belief that it is better for the poor to be poorer provided that the rich are less rich.

    If I ever become dictator of Canada, clips from Margaret Thatcher's last Question Period will be mandatory before every hockey game!

  • R C Dean||

    their unwavering belief that it is better for the poor to be poorer provided that the wrong rich people are less rich.

    I have yet to see progressives calling for the "right" rich people (those that pay the danegeld to progs, or proggy politicians or cronies) to be leveled out with the trailer trash.

  • The Unnatural||

    Not that your greater point isn't valid, but Unilever bought Ben & Jerry's in 2001.

  • GILMORE||

    LOL

    That is too awesome.

    That the Greens/Lefties seem not to have caught on is just the kicker.

    Unilever.... (drum roll)... is the world's largest.... manufacturer of....

    ............ Deodorant

  • ||

    I just came from visiting the B & J factory in Vermont (hey, I have a 10 year-old who wanted to see it). During their video they mentioned at the end very quickly they were bought out by Unilever. I damn near almost burst out laughing in the room.

    Two lefties selling their prized product to a massive conglomerate is something too rich - excuse Cherry Garcia - to ignore. Alas, I don't think they made too much of it.

  • ||

    That is delicious. Pun intended.

  • Robert||

    And Unilever makes deodorant. But it's Uniroyal that makes sneakers, I think.

  • Robert||

    Hey, Uniroyal...world monarchy, eh? & 1 Lever to move the world!

  • PapayaSF||

    Does Unilever make levers?

  • Muzzle of Bees||

    Only one. That's why Bernie likes them.

  • ||

    Bernie, drive through some poor areas. Those kids are fat.

  • BuSab Agent||

    but but... food desert!

  • Robert||

    You left 1 s out of dessert.

  • thom||

    Food deserts are real. And in them you'll actually find people (most likely illegally) selling fresh produce out of the trunks of their cars. The demand is there - there are just barriers between suppliers and consumers.

  • Robert||

    I've noticed for yrs. in hi traffic (mostly automotive, but plenty ped & bike too) areas guys selling sugar cane & mangoes out of car trunks.

  • Akira||

    For what it's worth, though, the USDA "food desert" criteria is a bit screwy. Almost the entire southwest quadrant of my town is listed as a food desert, yet that same area contains a Kroger with a well-stocked produce section as well as a bustling downtown farmer's market during the summer months.

  • Crazyotto||

    If it is left to Socialists that barrier would remain the US Government

  • AlmightyJB||

    Deodorant is very high in calories

  • ||

    we certainly all get from Bernie according to his abilities.

  • OldMexican||

    You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country.


    I am glad to see that our cottage-industry Marxians haven't lost their penchant for the non-sequitur to put together their arguments. Well done!

    Sanders, of course, is mistaken on the fundamentals.


    Oh, I don't think so, Matt. Oh, no, no. I think the guy is a shyster, a con artist, like all Marxians. He knows perfectly well the fundamentals —he simply does not care.

    Economic growth is not a goal for the sake of itself—economic growth ignited by the freeing of markets has lifted more people out of poverty in the last century than any other force in history.


    Ok, the first thing is not necessarily explained by the second thing. It is only one result of economic growth.

    Economic growth is the result of free interactions between individuals. As more individuals get together to interact, the more economic growth you will have —doesn't matter if they interact by exchanging goods or services or just to talk about the weather. It is the fact that they're free to do so which spurs growth.

  • OldMexican||

    Sorry, Ed.

  • The Last American Hero||

    23 is too much? What's the optimal number Bernie? Who's to decide? You? Why not me? Why not a council of Top Men?

  • Robert||

    23 is the optimal #, by the Illuminati. But 18 is 1 too many ice creams.

  • fish||

    But 18 is 1 too many ice creams.

    CELEBRATE 31

    Baskin Robbins would like a moment of your time.....

  • bacchys||

    I'm all for that, provided I'm the top of the Top Men...

  • Ranselaer||

    I'd say 15 or 16, tops. Maybe 17. 18 if I'm in a really good mood. But THAT'S IT! No 19th to 23rd deodorant for any of you!

  • skunkman||

    Bernie: Talk, talk, talk.

    What a smug, cold, elitist, jerk. I think the Clintons hired him to run to make Hillary look good. The democrats are a mess.

  • Robert||

    Shit, I just realized something that's probably occurred to many of you a lot sooner: People support Hillary because they think that, effectively, they're going to get Bill as prez. & I just realized that's what's going to make it possible for her to get the nomination & maybe the gen'l election.

    I've been thinking for 2 yrs. that she was toast because I was thinking only about her. Even when Bill ran for POTUS, she said, elect him & you're also getting me. I hadn't considered that it works the other way around too.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I reckon the dumpy fat chicks are already lining up around the block to be white house interns.

    -jcr

  • Crazyotto||

    I think she likes them dark skinned and Muslim. Bill likes them fat and dumpy.

  • ||

    The Clintons have been consulting with Vince Gray

  • ThomasD||

    Sanders knows he's not a credible threat, as does everyone in the media.

    That just means the media will have no compunction against giving his every utterance a megaphone. Even if they are not true believers it will only serve to make Hillary appear the 'moderate' and anyone else a heartless bastard.

    And he thinks he can use it all to advance his leftist beliefs.

    Overton window stuff.

  • Paul.||

    I don't think the media appreciates the kind of stress that ordinary Americans are working on.

    Something tells me that I'm not an "ordinary American" in his view.

  • Paul.||

    I think sometimes what can happen is that—it's not just the Clintons—when you hustle money like that, you don't sit in restaurants like this. You sit in restaurants where you're spending—I don't know what they spend—hundreds of dollars for dinner and so forth. That's the world that you're accustomed to, and that's the world view that you adopt.

    Bernie say what?

  • Brochettaward||

    The real gem: "I don't know what they spend." Sanders doesn't know because he would never spend that much on a dinner. He wouldn't be caught dead there. I wonder how long it would take to find him eating at an overpriced gourmet restaurant and to snap a picture? Several hours.

  • Rebel Scum||

    Let's hope they've limited it to one choice in order to supply Vermont's hungry children too, or something.

    You're getting vanilla and you're gonna like it.

  • Paul.||

    Ben & Jerry's, the Vermont ice cream company owned by socialists who, naturally, are fans of Sanders, will participate, by handing out free ice cream. Let's hope they've limited it to one choice in order to supply Vermont's hungry children too, or something.

    What's funny is if you point out these glaring hypocrisies, you're met with eyerolling and non-responsive dismissals.

    I guess it was finally successfully brought home that the "Kayaktivists" which were protesting the arrival of the Shell Oil rig in the port of seattle were almost exclusively using boats made entirely of petrolium products.

    I say that the soft underbelly of glaring hypocrisy should be kicked hard and kicked often.

    I mean, I drove [to this weekend's flotilla protests] in a '76 Chevy pickup. It's not about blaming or shaming or telling people they can't live their lives. It's about telling Shell they can't lock us into this catastrophe anymore."
  • Sevo||

    BTW, B&J's was busted by Michael Fumento for using a supposed toxic material in their packaging after they press-released that they'd removed it from their products.
    No, it wasn't really toxic, but making hypocrites dance is always fun

  • JW||

    You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country.

    "New! From the Federal Government! Serf, for men and women.

    When all you need is to smell like the shit that you're already farming, this is the only deodorant you need."

  • block30||

    Thank ________ for you. That just made my day!

  • GlenchristLaw||

    I believe the term he's looking for is, "Commander-in-Chief of the Economy™"...

  • JW||

    I thought the name of the Destroyer was Gozer. Not Bernie.

  • Pro Libertate||

    As you may recall, one may choose the form of the Destroyer. We chose Bernie.

  • JW||

    But, I chose Emily Ratajkowski! Her destruction is much sexier!

  • JWW||

    Bernie is one the right track. If we try hard enough, maybe we could get down to 0 choices for toilet paper, like Venezuela.

  • ||

    Ben & Jerry's, the Vermont Anglo-Dutch ice cream company owned by socialists shareholders all over the world

    FIFY

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yeah, those good socialists sold out to the Man long ago. Strange how that keeps happening.

  • ||

    Well, theoretically, you could be a multibillionaire and, in fact, be very concerned about the issues of working people. Theoretically, that's true.

    I think sometimes what can happen is that—it's not just the Clintons—when you hustle money like that, you don't sit in restaurants like this. You sit in restaurants where you're spending—I don't know what they spend—hundreds of dollars for dinner and so forth. That's the world that you're accustomed to, and that's the world view that you adopt.

    I didn't understand a word of this.

  • JW||

    Don't you worry your pretty little head over this, sweetie. Top Men will take care of it.

  • ClassicLib-NeverProg||

    I think he's trying to avoid criticizing Clinton while still criticizing everyone in Clinton's tax bracket. This Bernie guy is a fucking retard, full stop, but more importantly, he's a politician like the rest of them. Which means he has to squirm and slide around questions that would have real political consequences. If this is our Hugo Chavez I'm fucking out.

  • ||

    God these people are ridiculous.

    Go comb your hair, Bernie.

  • bacchys||

    All men will be bald so we don't waste valuable resources on combs.

  • Wake up!||

    Just one of the many reasons I have proclaimed myself as THE ARBITER OF NEED (in perpetuity)

    I HAVE SPOKEN!

  • HenryC||

    One needs resources to feed the poor. What Sanders doesn't realize is that the capitalist system increases resources and thus makes it easier to feed the hungry kids.

  • PapayaSF||

    "Reduce the number of choices and the economy will be more efficient!" is such an old, idiotic argument. And of course, the same people then turn around and complain when "Too much power is concentrated in too few banks/media companies/computer companies!"

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Look, that only happens if you allow speculators, kulaks and wreckers to subvert the process! Nationalizing those few banks/companies/whatevers prevents the problem in first place.

  • Crazyotto||

    Nationalizing the banks? Are all Leftists,Socialists and Progressives born stupid or do you work really hard at it. Since you are posting on a Libertarian blog I would imagine showing you the fallacy of your argument would do little to rectify your diminishing mental capacity.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Bernie should ask Ben and Jerry if we really need countless pints of pricey half cookie dough, half fudge brownie ice cream while children are starving in this country.

  • Swampfox von Bladestorm||

    Pleeeeease Democrats nominate this freak show!

  • ||

    Just close your eyes and picture the reaction if Bernie becomes Chavez, when all but one gubmint-made deodorant are taken off the shelves.

    Hint: "When I voted for Bernie, I didn't realize it would be my deodorant that would be taken away!!"

  • R C Dean||

    "If you like your deodorant, you can keep your deodorant."

  • ClassicLib-NeverProg||

    I'd rather live as an illegal immigrant among the Canucks than live in Bernie's Republic of America.

  • EV||

    Fuck him.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    No fucking way. YOU fuck him. :)

  • ||

    Ole Bernie just doesn't seem to get it that many of those "hungry " children are the reason there are so many different styles and price levels of tennis shoes.

    What's with the Dems running an old white man for Prez anyway ?

    I thought old white men were all evil ?

  • Xeones||

    Nothing says "progress" like an angry elderly white man!

  • Crazyotto||

    You missed the obvious. He is Jewish and better yet he is a self loathing Jew. Which is like a two-fer. If your a Jew and hate Israel (or should I say an occupying Israel) then you are as much in demand as a Black, Hispanic, Gay, Female or atheist. The only thing better is a Self loathing, gay atheist Jew. White Male straight Christians are of course the devil incarnate.

  • ||

    "(choice of) 18 different pairs of sneakers"

    Had he said you don't need 18 pairs of sneakers, then he would have had a better case. Even then, it's none of his damn business. But him being a Marxist-socialist, he's gonna make it his damn business because he determined what YOU need!

    There are how many sneaker companies out there from Converse to Saucony to Asics to New Balance to Reebok to Nike to whatever?

    18 choices is low. Someone hasn't been in the market since 1959.

    For people into, you know, running and hiking, choice (and more of them) is KEY.

    Unreal how these presumptuous left-wingers think.

  • Ron||

    could you imagine one choice of footwear. would it be steel toed boots for everyone or just tenis shoes for everyone, neither will do all the jobs people need their shoes to do. So yes choice is a good thing in fact a requirement.

  • Duelles||

    As Walter Williams has pointed out, in the most economically depressed communities you will see nice cars, sneakers, TV s, clothes, etc. people make choices. They will not choose Bernie. I guess the cows in VT must have the vote.

  • Duelles||

    As Walter Williams has pointed out, in the most economically depressed communities you will see nice cars, sneakers, TV s, clothes, etc. people make choices. They will not choose Bernie. I guess the cows in VT must have the vote.

  • american socialist||

    "the 19th century, where the United States is perpetually one tax or spending cut away from collapsing into Mad Max style chaos."

    You mean like when we had mass concentrations of wealth in the hands of the rich, essentially no labor union representation, and pockets of third world poverty alongside guilded, out-of-touch tech billionaires who are openly contemptuous of homeless people or the fact that they have to actually walk on a street where someone may ask them for a quarter?

    I personally am glad that programs like social security, rural electrification, the national park system, etc. we're abandoned in 1934 and condemned as the fascist socialist failures they really were. The fact that old and sick people are getting pensions makes me so mad I just want to vomit on the next octogenarian moocher I see.

  • Xeones||

    Cool story, bro.

  • R C Dean||

    You mean like when we had mass concentrations of wealth in the hands of the rich,

    Kinda like today's one-percenters?

    essentially no labor union representation,

    Kinda like the crashing percentage of private sector workers who join unions?

    and pockets of third world poverty alongside guilded, out-of-touch tech billionaires who are openly contemptuous of homeless people or the fact that they have to actually walk on a street where someone may ask them for a quarter?

    Kinda like San Francisco, today?

  • ||

    If the progs back in the day argued like they do today while jumping on false premises then...well...fuck this shit.

  • Sevo||

    american socialist|5.26.15 @ 3:37PM|#
    "[...]I personally am glad that programs like social security, rural electrification, the national park system, etc. we're abandoned in 1934 and condemned as the fascist socialist failures they really were. The fact that old and sick people are getting pensions makes me so mad I just want to vomit on the next octogenarian moocher I see."

    Your slimy attempts at sarc only prove how stupid you are.
    Now, please go to Venezuela; they need something to wipe their asses there since socialism has denied them basic necessities.
    You'll do just fine; instead of licking mass-murderer ass, you can lick prole ass.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Wait a minute here - those octogenarians believe they've paid into the system and are only getting what they put in. Nothing more.

    So - are you wrong or are they wrong?

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Do you believe in Santa Claus too? I bet you do.

  • Asok Asus||

    Bernie's correct of course: if there were only 12 brands of deodorant, only half as many children would be hungry, and in point of fact, if all but one brand were eliminated, child hunger would be nearly eradicated.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    You forgot the ending: "And they all lived happily ever after".

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    It's about time we had an American politician sticking up for the poor.

    So we're going to take the wealth wasted on deodorant (because everyone should use speed stick sport and be happy about it!) and comfortable shoes (who needs choices in footwear?) and toilet paper (single ply is sufficient) and cheese (cheddar is the people's dairy) and wine (Welch's with bread yeast and no more!) and then send it all to Jeff Sach's programs in Africa, right?

    Surely if we're going to feed the hungry by stripping the wealthy of their riches, we should feed the hungriest people in the world, not just those who are eligible to vote in the US? And by "wealthy," we mean the richest 10% of people in the world, or basically every American with so much as a minimum wage job. So all American wealth goes to Africa to feed the hungry and care for the poor.

    Right Bernie?

  • geo1113||

    All children under 16 years old are now...16 years old!

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Forced altruism?

    Sorry, man. I am a selfish, cut throat bitch and I aim to stay that way.

    By any means necessary.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    "Ben & Jerry's, the Vermont ice cream company owned by socialists"

    Yes, that's not how socialism works.

  • Brian||

    I say, go for it.

    I'm kind of tired listening to democrats explain to me how capitalist they are, while they act as though they are not.

    They should go ahead, endorse an overt socialist/communist, and stop pretending.

    To thine own self be true, etc.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Yep.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    23 chromosomes are too much! Bernie and his ilk are always doing their damnedest to reduce those numbers.

  • John Galt||

    One chromosome per person is more than enough when "kids are starving."

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    You need two. X or Y

  • jorgeborges||

    Ed, for the love of God learn to construct a sentence. You're fucking up my favorite website.

  • guitargeek||

    ...and the two examples of American excess he uses are deodorant and sneakers? Who the hell is this guy?

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    The best Washington DC has to offer.

    You want statism? You got it, baby!

  • Marlin_Man||

    FYI Ben & Jerry's sold out to Unilever a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION....ahem....cough.... years ago.

  • Duelles||

    I own some UL and wish they stop handing out free product. All the hippie, socialists buy it anyway. Not much PR left in freebies.

  • John Galt||

    After another look, Bernie Sanders really does resemble Matt Welch in looks. ..Bernie Welch.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Low blow!

  • PaulW||

    I need to remind my wife to stop buying me Ben and Jerrys.

  • John Galt||

    Way back when Ben and Jerry's was still owned by Ben and Jerry at least one study stated that by EPA standards Ben and Jerry's ice creams contained unsafe levels of dioxins. Of course as a couple of hard core progs they'd be certain to receive a free pass even if their product was pure dioxin.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Why would she? There are a veritable plethora of choices out there - at least, until Bernie gets his grimy hands on a new reg to 'fix that ice cream problem'

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Socialists have never seen the need for deodorant.

  • John Galt||

    ...or common sense.

  • Win Bear||

    I think Bernie is not a crook; he's an honest fool.

    Of course, being an honest fool is likely worse, since crooks can so easily manipulate him, and since he lacks even a sense of self-preservation.

  • Len Bias||

    I think we need to start using the Somalia straw man on Socialists, eg: 'Somalia doesn't have so many of those icky consumerist choices, and look how well your Socialist paradise is working out there.'

  • Win Bear||

    Anarchy actually seems to be working better for Somalia than communism.

  • Empress Trudy||

    I remember when we would carry our net bags everywhere and get on any line we saw. It didn't matter what it was for or even if we knew what it was for. We might be able to get something for our worthless rubles and even better, get something we could sell on the black market or barter for something we really needed.

  • Free Society||

    I wonder if Bernie has a preference for one deoderant over another. And if he does, he ought to be sent to a reeducation camp.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Just how many choices of deodorant do you propose then, Bernie?

    Because - theoretically, even if there was only one deodorant, there would still be 'starving children in the world'. No one I know buys 23 different brands of deodorant and uses them all every day. They use one of the 23 brands, but they use it every day.

  • geo1113||

    I need more than one brand. If I use one continuously, it eventually loses its effectiveness.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    That's what happens when you don't shower daily, stinky.

  • geo1113||

    I do shower daily!!!

  • Cloudbuster||

    Is "daily" the name of your dog?

  • geo1113||

    I have no dog but if I did I would have spelled it Daily.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    And still, no satisfaction. Perhaps you should bathe nightly .. . err bathe Knightly . . .

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Now, if those damn deodorant companies would manufacturer 23 ways of "drool and spittle reduction", Bernie wouldn't be so harsh.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Soviet Supermarket for Everybody!
    Vote Sanders!

  • Mudhen||

    I think the media is just giving him airtime to spew his version of crazy so people won't think Hillary seems so bad after all. Wouldn't be surprised to find out she was bankrolling him.

  • Bill Adams||

    Where does he get that official photo retouched? You'd think a socialist would be happy to look like Dr. Zorba and disdain to look like Louis Rukeyser. But no.

  • Cloudbuster||

    I just don't get it, sometimes. Sanders has been an adult longer than I've been alive. Once upon a time, way back when, he attended a good college (University of Chicago). He worked some real jobs ("carpenter, filmmaker, writer, and researcher, as well as other occupations" -- Wikipedia), and he's been in politics since 1971.

    How can a man possibly go that long, live all that life, be the ranking Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, but understand absolutely nothing about how the world works and how wealth is created?

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    He understands you need re-education. Pack your bags. Sans shoes and deodorant.

    He doesn't like back talk when all he wants is those kids fed.

    So, enjoy your stay at Camp Sanders.

  • JBSparks||

    Would you rather the American worker were busy producing shovels and brooms or luxury items like, more than adequate selections? Let's make the shovels and leave luxury goods to our foreign competitors, right Bernie?

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Would that worker be as happy as a witch in that broom factory? I saw it on TV - and that was one happy witch, Comrade.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    The Colonel ranted: "If we didn't have 23 different choices of deodorants - y'all would be buying more of my chicken! And there would be no starving children in the world! So - quit buying deodorant - dammit! Buy my chicken!"

  • DFG||

    Clearly the government must reallocate some of the workers from People's Deodorant Factory #121 to the People's Glorious Outlet for Childhood Nutrition and Exercise #413. Problem solved. It's so much easier when you leave into the experts.

  • DFG||

    "...leave it to the experts."

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    Bernie Sanders is bat-shit crazy. I now know what "bat-shit crazy" means.

  • rudehost||

    Looking at his picture why do I get the feeling that while he believes kids don't need 18 kinds of sneakers he does believe 6 year old boys need a few glasses of wine and some tylenol pm?

  • Spaceno42||

    Bernie, look we need more choices. I mean look at Vermont. They elected you. I'm sure if they had more choices...ok not so sure but hopefully they would have chosen someone else.

    Also Bernie, if you had more choices I'm sure you could have chosen a better picture than your creepy one.

    What do I know though? I have deodorants.

  • Duelles||

    A few people in the USA are socialists for all of us. Fiscal conservatives for their money and libertarians on social issues. I consider some of each party to be despotic in thinking we all "should" be or act in particular ways.

  • BambiB||

    Maybe if "children are starving", their parents should stop having so damned many children?

  • Duelles||

    He thinks a 91% tax rate will solve economic woes.mhe forgets that we were the only economy working and we lost 250K men in WWII so, of course, there was full employment, etc. He has no sense of economic context or complexity. He is, in a word, a simpleton.

  • DFG||

    What an amazing country this America, where you have childhood obesity, one of your worst problems that government must do something about, and children starving which government must also do something about. Obviously the solution is for the government to force the fat kids to give some of their food to the starving children. Win Win!

  • Johnimo||

    Surely we can get by with just one type of feminine hygiene product, right? And all those clothing choices women require. Wouldn't just a full burka be sufficient?

  • microsrfr||

    CEO's like their customers rich and their workers poor. Unfortunately for us all, their customers are their workers. The ongoing information technology revolution is enabling CEO's to increase profits by reducing labor cost through automation and outsourcing. The resulting glut of labor further depresses wages. The result of wage-starved demand for goods and services is an attempt to supplement flagging wages with rapidly increasing personal credit followed by economic collapse. Take a look at the Levin Report from Bard College to see the tens of trillions of dollars the Fed had to throw around to keep our economy from collapsing in 2008.

    According to Picketty, we currently have here in the U.S. the highest income inequality anywhere in the world at any time in recorded history. A collapse will drastically reduce the wealth of the super-rich much as it did in the 1930 to 1960 period through economic collapse, destruction by wars, followed by high inflation to retire war debt. It is in all our best interest to find a way to restore non-managerial worker wages back to a healthy 50% of GDP. There are three ways to accomplish this:

    Tax and redistribute

    Strengthen unions

    Cap corporate ratio of profit to payroll

    I far prefer the latter -- see www.middlerising.com

  • Migrant Log Picker||

    If you happen espouse anything related to Bard, you deserve the beatdown you are getting.

  • Bodica Slayer of Drones||

    " . . . according to Picketty . . . " There's your problem, cupcake.

  • microsrfr||

    Per usual, nobody will listen to reason or face facts until the bottom drops out. When it hit the fan in 1933 due to rapid mechanization, EVERYONE agreed to take some planks from the Socialist Party and implement them ASAP in order to save the Union. That's how we got a 40 hour work week, stronger unions and social security as well as massive federal infrastructure spending.

    Everyone, that is except those who tried to put a private army together and take dictatorship control of the U.S. with a coup.

    Information technology is an exponentially developing force that is destroying jobs. Pay the piper now or much more dearly later.

  • DarkHelmet||

    Actually, taking some planks from the socialist platform is how we turned a garden variety business slump into the most severe and long-lasting depression in US history. Those were some pretty toxic planks.

  • Sevo||

    I certainly hope that those with the mental capability you've shown do not get paid anyone's 'minimum wage' other than zero.
    You deserve no more.

  • Jonathon||

    Is Sanders trying to claim that free market competition, which provides consumers with multiple choices by employing people to produce those choices with a wide price range results in more poverty?
    As population increases, employment needs increase, and growth should be a result of more people earning and spending their earnings and NOT a result of government redistributing the earnings of those employed as the means of providing support for those who have no earnings or inadequate earnings to support their needs and wants. Charity, freely provided as a choice by the people who have earned what they give, should be the only means available to those who are NOT incapacitated physically or mentally. It is the duty of government, at each level, to promote the general welfare of the United States by providing an environment which provides employment opportunities to exist adequate to sustain the needs of the population.

  • Russell||

    The more diversified climate models become , the broader the spectrum of deodorant ibngredients needed to deal with theit temperature projections

    Only the pusilanimous would link Sanders' temperature preferences to campaign contributions from Big Zirconium

  • wyattlily77||

    before I saw the check that said $8458 , I didn't believe that...my... mom in-law woz like they say trully erning money in there spare time from there labtop. . there mums best friend has been doing this for only 6 months and as of now cleard the loans on there home and got a great McLaren F1 . view it
    ............... www.Profit-Review.com

  • Rockabilly||

    The progressive communist claims to be pro-choice but forces their communism on all

  • Inigo M.||

    Sounds like Bernie has come up with a clever scheme to win an endorsement from a rival candidate on the other side... If Ben and Jerry hand out ice cream to Bernie's supporters, Chris Christie won't be able to resist the temptation. (Has he ever resisted ANY food temptation?)

    But, then again, Christie is a statist/socialist anyway, so free ice cream will just be icing on his central planning cake.

  • AlgerHiss||

    Forget Sanders.

    It is the absolute garbage, hideous population of Vermont that elects him.

    If you willingly live in Vermont, what a pitiful piece of human debris you are.

  • ||

    Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super... I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I've ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h..... ✹✹✹✹✹✹ www.netcash9.com

  • Duelles||

    We don't need so many choices for anything in our lives. Choices make the world richer, monetarily and culturally. Bernie is a drag on human development. Bernie! Run for office, lose, go away disgraced.

  • crab_apple||

    In Bernie Sanders America, You Eat Deodorant!

  • DarkHelmet||

    If it is correct that Bernie Sanders' net worth is about $330,000 then he alone has more wealth than the bottom 22 million households in America -- combined!

    Which is about as meaningful as all those crappy 'inequality' statistics he and his fellow travelers throw around. Because the fact of the matter is this: the bottom quintile of households in the U.S. have negative net worth. Therefore anyone with positive net worth -- even $1 more in assets than liabilities -- is worth more than the bottom 22 million households combined.

    Mr. Sanders' knowledge of economics could fit inside a thimble. With enough room left over for a thimbleful of bile.

  • Crazyotto||

    I love the photo of Bernie. He looks like a squirrel that just ate a can of almonds. He does make the Democrat presidential landscape much funnier. My god without him we are left with the wicked witch of Arkansas, She who dances with truth, and Mark "yawn" O'Malley.

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    And that, folks, is why I fucking hate statists of all stripes, especially the ones in power. At least the everyday people statist can claim ignorance but these politicians? Nope. I think they know their policies are destructive, it isn't being "well intentioned" when you have all the data at your fingertips. Bernie Sanders is a control freak and Ben and Jerry's became successful through the "evil capitalist system", fuck them, the hypocrites.

  • macsnafu||

    Will Bernie tell Ben and Jerry's that they don't need 50 different flavors of ice cream, frozen yogurt, etc?

  • Barney||

    Not to worry, Bernie. Hardly anyone will have any choice about anything before long. It's all over except the cryin'.

  • Country John||

    Uh, Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream is not owned by hippy socialists. Ben and Jerry cashed out a decade ago and have cheerfully subsidized the teeming Vermont Left ever since. The new owners, Unilever Inc. of London and Amsterdam, agreed to spend a chunk of their profits for B&J's "Social Improvement " (or some such) Fund, or to the Ben & Jerry's Foundation.
    Meanwhile the Lefties here waged a War Against Obesity in order to extend the sales tax to "sugary beverages", to raise more money for social spending. They succeeded, and while they were at it they found that they needed even more money to keep the Great Engine of Progress stumbling forward, so they also extended the tax to artificially sweetened beverages that people drink to avoid sugary obesity.
    Throughout all of this Ben and Jerry's corporate owners are aggressively marketing expensive premium ice cream with lots of sugar and 14% butterfat, with a special effort to make ice cream addicts out of innocent children.

  • johnsmith||

    Clearly there are going to be some people who are unaffected at this time by the corrupt tyrannical government that is so infested by the filthy rich. They will gladly keep things the way they are. Even though they are too stupid to realize that they are enablers for the same people who are going to slit their throats in the near future. Things are NOT WELL in this world. And they cannot and will not be fixed by Republicans or Democrats. Because neither have any power.

    Bernie Sanders himself said that even he as President could not do anything without a GRASS ROOTS MOVEMENT BY THE PEOPLE. This is a man ready to hand the power back to us. Anyone who cannot see or accept that is a traitor to the USA.

    And for those idiots who didn't understand his remark about deodorants. He is making the point that the last thing we need in this country is a bunch of unnecessary JUNK which is a waste of time, energy, resources. In the county I live in, there is never any progress and little improvements. When a new business opens, its always ANOTHER burger joint, bank, gas station, or auto parts store. More of the same. We see the same crap all over America.

    if you people cannot see that Bernie Sanders is a serious minded American, and not some politician, then its obvious that you are either evil minded or just stupid.

  • Frankjasper1||

    So you are against having all those choices of deodorant. Sounds like you just contradicted yourself. Whats wrong with those businesses as obviously people would like that? What should it be instead?

    Not sure if serious

  • Ecreegan||

    I must have tried twenty different kinds of chapstick before I found one that stayed on and didn't make the sides of my mouth break out. Why does Sanders think he has a right to condemn the variety that let me find a product which works for my skin?

    We're a big country. A condition that affects every thousandth person has three hundred thousand sufferers. This means there will be a lot of people with idiosyncratic requirements and preferences for each and every product out there.

    Besides, the idea that reducing competition increases efficiency clearly fails the reality test.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "You don't necessarily need to live 74 years when children are hungry in this country."

  • buybuydandavis||

    " To work – on a blank check held by every creature born, by men whom you’ll never see, whose needs you’ll never know, whose ability or laziness or sloppiness or fraud you have no way to learn and no right to question – just to work and work and work – and leave it up to the Ivys and the Geralds of the world to decide whose stomach will consume the effort, the dreams and the days of your life. And this is the moral law to accept? This – a moral ideal?"

  • MaleMatters||

    Excellent commentary, Ed, but as you know all too well, Sanders will pay no attention at all. He knows how Obama secured two terms:

    "Why Barack Obama Won Twice" http://relevantmatters.wordpre.....won-twice/

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online