56
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

....And then they mostly couldn't be bothered to actually get college degrees despite how cheap they were, yet still ended up with good careers capable of supporting entire households with only one person working anyway.

Despite his cynicism, even Bernie manages to understate the problem here!

[-] wwaxwork@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Just throwing out there, this was one generation out of however many to the dawn of time that was able to do this. And they did it on the backs of the hundreds of thousands of people that fought, starved and died to get unions established. For the vast majority of history, if you could work you worked man, woman & child because if you didn't your family starved. Then people fought for generations to get unions established and they finally did it and one single generation got the advantages of it before the next generation decided they didn't need no stinking unions as they were working white collar jobs and here we are. We're not standing together so we're falling together.

[-] Smoothie_Criminal@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Hillary stole Bernie's nomination and robbed Americans of his presidency

[-] Tigbitties@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago
[-] kokoapadoa@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Because of America's dogshit election system, she won the popular vote.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I'd give anything to go back in time and see how that election goes differently with an Approval Vote.

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Hillary didn't rob him of it; the Democratic Party robbed him of it.

[-] Hypersapien@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It was the Democratic establishment and the corporate media that stole it. The biggest thing they fear is a candidate that puts the American people over corporate interests.

And then Biden did it 4 years later.

See the pattern? Combined with all the "left" side of democrats support for US imperialism.

Bernie and people like him ain't gonna change shit, not any more in the future that they did in a past decades. It's time to radicalise way beyond him and the lukewarm electoral socialdemocracy, the only thing that can change something for the better, and did in the past, is the organised working class.

[-] sadreality@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

Did she steal it tho?

The Bern caved, which was a cuck move.

I still support him but that was a clown mistake imho setting working and young people back a decade or so.

[-] AnonTwo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

As much as I hate to say it, Democrats would've just lost even harder if the vote was divided. He did the right thing at the time, the democrat party never would've backed down on Hillary back then.

That entire election was egos that overestimated how things would go.

[-] BornVolcano@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Image Transcription: Twitter Post


Bernie Sanders, @BernieSanders

The Boomer generation needed just 306 hours of minimum wage work to pay for four years of public college. Millennials need 4,459.

The economy today is rigged against working people and young people. This is what we are going to change.


^I'm a human volunteer transcribing posts in a format compatible with screen readers, for blind and visually impaired users!^

[-] QRay@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Can we keep the timestamp in when cropping a post from another website?

[-] NOPper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

7:29 AM · Apr 24, 2019 for the record.

[-] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago
[-] smac@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Sorry, Bernie's full of crap. He's deliberately twisting facts to misinform. He's using today's highest minimum wage to calculate paying tuition at levels of 50 years ago, and trying to imply that people only needed to work 306 hours THEN to pay for college tuition THEN. That's just not true.

When I was working during high school / college, minimum wage was $1.50 / hr. That works out to $459 for 4 years of college education. Tuition at public institutions in the mid '70's was $1210 / year nces.ed.gov That's $4840 for 4 years at a time when my comfortably middle-class father was earning ~ $25 K / year. It was cheaper, but not by as much as Bernie claims.

Also, public colleges have always been subsidized by the state. You'd also need to look at the level of subsidy between then and now and whether we're choosing to subsidize less.

[-] sadreality@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

Subsidy is about the same the most places... admin bloat though requires higher fees from students.

[-] RedClouds@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I guess my dads not A typical boomer, he openly emits that times were much easier for him. As this quote from Bernie implies, after taking to account inflation and everything around living your life, we work much harder and get much less than our parents or grandparents did.

Regarding getting off the gold standard, sure that might have some effect, and I'm not a finance major so I don't know all the details, but in the end, I think capitalists would have done whatever they needed to in order to suppress how much people make in compared to their productivity. Getting off of a standard was just the technique used at the time.

[-] vitucadrus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Try researching your masters degree in a Library using Microfiche. First reply here on Lemmy, just wanted to say "hello"

[-] mawkishdave@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yes something needs to change and I feel you are seeing the real panic of the right as more and more younger people can now vote and are just pissed as everything they are doing.

[-] hydro033@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

People have been saying this since the 60s. Lots of young people are still conservative and many areas are still solidly red. I don't see a massive blue wave that garners a supermajority happening anytime soon.

[-] Kept7963@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Actually, it looks like this time it might be true.

Source

Next is speculation on my part, but I imagine people are turning conservative more based on their wealth than their age. We saw a correlation between age and conservative sentiment because people tended to gather wealth as they got older.

But that link has been progressively eroded, so people are no longer switching. Essentially the conservatives are killing the golden goose in their incessant pursuit of consolidating wealth.

[-] hydro033@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, I have seen that point and also a paper discussing it, but I am a bit skeptical. It could potentially just delayed... which transitions well into your speculative point:

Next is speculation on my part, but I imagine people are turning conservative more based on their wealth than their age. We saw a correlation between age and conservative sentiment because people tended to gather wealth as they got older.

That is a very good point because inequality is killing wealth accumulation. It's a very good working hypothesis imo.

[-] Discoslugs@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Bernie sanders screaming into the wind yet again.

Bernie i love ya but nobody is gonna do the things you say.

They are way too reasonable.

[-] ItchySunItchyKnee@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Isn’t that kind of defeatist?

I don’t really have a horse in this race since I am not from the US.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It's more cynicism than defeatism. People from the United States have pushed for these kinds of common sense reforms for our entire lives and we still have nothing to show for it.

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago

I think the only solution to this problem is subsidies.

Subsidies knowledge works well around the world.

[-] aregularbeaneater@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I think subsidies got us here in the first place. When the government pays for stuff it drives prices up.

[-] Vino@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Not easier, simpler.

[-] HiddenTower@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

That is what we are going to change

Then do it! I feel like I've heard this for so long, from all the parties, and just nothing gets done.

[-] cjsolx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Do you realize who tweeted that? Because I feel like asking Bernie Sanders to just "do it" is very unfair. He's been fucking trying for the past decade.

[-] werds@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

I used to like Bernie , I think he talks a good game to get people in but can be counted on to take a dive.

[-] TrinityTek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Take a dive, as in concede after losing the primary and supporting the Democratic nominee? That's exactly what he said he would do all along. It's a requirement to run as a Democrat in the primary and Bernie is a man of his word.

[-] HiddenTower@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I'll agree he is trying, but it's so little, so slow, the whole legislature sucks at making progress.

[-] cjsolx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but again that's not on Bernie. If we had more Bernies things would be different, but he's literally trying to roll that rock up the mountain like goddamn Sisyphus by himself.

Idk. I just feel like your comment is ungrateful for his efforts. He's an old man who deserves a rest from all this futility, but I get the feeling that he won't stop trying to effect change until he dies or is too physically/mentally infirm to continue.

[-] FinalBoy1975@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

This is very smart of him to use generational terminology to engage with young voters. He's looking at trends on social media. Maybe it will work for him. His main obstacle is that most democrats are moderate and don't have a problem voting republican if they think the democrat is too far to the left. Maybe engaging with young voters in this way can help him get over that obstacle.

[-] nichos@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

College prices went sky high when the government started backing student loans, they should have never done that.

[-] blackbelt352@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Except the government has been backing student loans since the GI bill passed in 1944. College tuition started growing in the 80s and really took off on the 90s and 2000s. So of the government backed loans didn't cause skyrocketing tuition for almost 2 generations, why did it start when millennials were just being born?

this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
56 points (98.3% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9735 readers
468 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS