I think Sanders is taking a very level headed approach contrary to what the MSM tells us. He is well aware that profits drive innovation; but, it should not be at the cost of egregiously high prices and big pharmaceutical companies devoting HALF (yes, half) their profits to marketing schemes and lobbying policies.
I mean, if you have bankers telling what laws to pass for or repealing those against their interests in a democracy (which, I assume all of us want, or not?), then things have clearly gone too far.
As for libertarianism... My qualms with it is that if we woke up to a libertarian country (assuming you and other readers are from the US, which isn't the case obviously; but, for sake of this argument we may assume that...) then any potential competition to the present powers that be (think Coca-Cola or... well you get the point, I hope) would face total annihilation from the unrestrained influence of such conglomerates. Anyway, my point is to get off my tangent is that the playing field isn't level and definitely not fair.
Is Sanders a solution to ALL the problems we face? No; but, then again arguing with his closest friend, Chomsky, is a hard thing to do and I mostly agree with most of the REASONED, not ideological (that needs more emphasis), ideas that Sanders proposes, and they aren't all that "radical" as the MSM says they are.
Every year some manufacturer adds something "special" just to gain customers. It's scary because this stuff causes neurodegeneration and excess oxidation of dopamine to DOPAC , which increases axidative stress on your mitochondria that could drastically increase your odds of having Parkinsons latter in life, and this isnt even mentioning the toll this stuff takes on your cardiovascular system along with having kidneys that feel like beans due to peripheral effects. I could go on; but, why bother?
I mean, if you have bankers telling what laws to pass for or repealing those against their interests in a democracy (which, I assume all of us want, or not?), then things have clearly gone too far.
As for libertarianism... My qualms with it is that if we woke up to a libertarian country (assuming you and other readers are from the US, which isn't the case obviously; but, for sake of this argument we may assume that...) then any potential competition to the present powers that be (think Coca-Cola or... well you get the point, I hope) would face total annihilation from the unrestrained influence of such conglomerates. Anyway, my point is to get off my tangent is that the playing field isn't level and definitely not fair.
Is Sanders a solution to ALL the problems we face? No; but, then again arguing with his closest friend, Chomsky, is a hard thing to do and I mostly agree with most of the REASONED, not ideological (that needs more emphasis), ideas that Sanders proposes, and they aren't all that "radical" as the MSM says they are.
Cheers.