B. Sooth-Sanders

Bernie Sanders; that nice man with thick-rimmed glasses, wispy cotton hair and is seen in front of podiums around the states speaking word things and trying to gather support to back his presidential campaign. Did you also know he is also a soothsayer? Well, he doesn't say he is one, no, but his track record would make a clairvoyant look bad in contrast.

A fierce campaigner for civil liberties, against corporate greed and unfairness, Bernie is right about a lot of things.

Here's a brief list of his predictions, and when they actually did come to pass:

Panama papers (2016, predicted in 2011)

The internet tells of of the most recent of those predictions, with the issue of the Panama papers scandal. In 2011, Sanders stood up before the house and listed facts and figures about off-shore tax-evasion; in particular, Panama. He was objecting to the 'Panama free-trade agreement'.

He noted that Panama’s entire economic output at the time was so low that the pact seemed unlikely to benefit American workers. The real reason for the agreement, Sanders argued, is that "Panama is a world leader when it comes to allowing wealthy Americans and large corporations to evade taxes."

Bernie goes on to say:

"A tax haven ... has one of three characteristics: It has no income tax or a very low-rate income tax; it has bank secrecy laws; and it has a history of non-cooperation with other countries on exchanging information about tax matters. Panama has all three of those. ... They’re probably the worst."

The Agreement was passed the next year, of which, lead to the situation today which has outraged the public.

---

1st Gulf War - Invasion of Kuwait to drive the Iraqi's out (1991):

Virtually all of Bernie's predictions in the middle-east have come to pass, and they all come from the first of all those bad decisions - the gulf war.

Like father, like son, (1st bush candidacy led to 2nd bush candidacy) some of the most irrational of wars came from the same family, and it is virtually a sure thing that because of these conflicts we now have ISIS in Syria, and millions of refugees without homes walking between countries gates as they are cast aside.

Bernie Sanders 1991:

“I believe that in the long run, the actions unleashed last night [about the decision to go to war] will go strongly against our interests in the middle-east. Clearly the United States and Allies will win this war, but the death and destruction caused, will, in my opinion, not be forgotten by the people of the poor people of the third world and the people of the middle east in particular. I fear that one day we will regret that decision and that we are in fact laying the groundwork for more and more wars for years to come.”

Instability in the middle east after the invasion (2014-now predicted in 2002):

In 2002, before the vote that give Bush unilateral power and unlimited funds to wage his oil war, Bernie Sanders spoke before the House:

"...Mr. Speaker, the front page of The Washington Post today reported that all relevant U.S. intelligence agencies now say despite what we have heard from the White House that “Saddam Hussein is unlikely to initiate a chemical or biological attack against the United States.'' Even more importantly, our intelligence agencies say that should Saddam conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he might at that point launch a chemical or biological counterattack. In other words, there is more danger of an attack on the United States if we launch a precipitous invasion.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the President feels, despite what our intelligence agencies are saying, that it is so important to pass a resolution of this magnitude this week and why it is necessary to go forward without the support of the United Nations and our major allies including those who are fighting side by side with us in the war on terrorism."

Bernie sanders then went on to state his opposition to the bill to provide the president with powers to fund the law, by stating how ill the funds would be used and redirected from those in most need, where pensions disappear, poverty is increasing, healthcare is decreasing and civil liberties are weakening, and where people work harder and longer for less.

Sanders was against it for these reasons:

1. There would be immense needless death on both sides during the conflict.

2. That it will be extremely expensive, and at a time where national debt was at $6 trillion.

3. The follow-up consequences, Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country? Will moderate governments in the region who have large Islamic fundamentalist populations be overthrown and replaced by extremists? Will the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority be exacerbated? And these are just a few of the questions that remain unanswered.

This is what he proposed:

In my view, the U.S. must work with the United Nations to make certain within clearly defined timelines that the U.N. inspectors are allowed to do their jobs. These inspectors should undertake an unfettered search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and destroy them when found, pursuant to past U.N. resolutions. If Iraq resists inspection and elimination of stockpiled weapons, we should stand ready to assist the U.N. in forcing compliance.

Bernie Sanders predicted the instability and terror the U.S. would wreak on the Middle East if we spread a hunt for a terrorist in Afghanistan to a country that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

---

Bank crisis - 2007/2008 crash (predicted in 1999):

In 1999, Bernie spoke on the floor of the House, opposing the legislation that would repeal the FDR-era people-protection laws known as Glass-Steagall:

“This legislation… will do more harm than good. It will lead to… taxpayer exposure to potential losses should a financial conglomerate fail. It will lead to more mega-mergers... and further concentration of economic power in this country.

This bill is…, however, good for big banks… It is time for the Congress to stand up for the consumers. The big banks are doing fine— let’s protect the consumers. Let’s vote no on this legislation."

The House passed the bill 362-57 over Sanders’ objections.

In 2000, a year later, Bernie grilled Alan Greenspan, then-Federal Reserve Chairman, about what was being done to the economy by all the unregulated, greedy financial players growing huge amounts of unstable wealth, to which Greenspan evaded direct questions in a very dreary manner. Greenspan is so boring to listen to, issues when on the stand get sunk under the weight of the evasion of the issue and the tone of the response.

Bernie ends poses this question:

“What happens if they fail? Who in God’s name is going to bail them out?”

Greenspan told him that, “We do not believe that...[if] a substantial institution fails, that they should be bailed out.”

But, in 2007, those institutions failed— just as Bernie suspected. And they got bailed out— just as Greenspan denied.

The bailout cost the US, not to mention the various other bailouts which affected the rest of the world, and its effects are still stinging the pockets of the public. Sadly, it is the gift that keeps on giving to the very banks that drove the economy over a cliff – and took trillions in housing wealth, retirement funds, and millions of jobs with it.

“...$21bn is no bargain. It's a hefty sum for a government we're constantly told is broke – and needs to cut everything from air traffic controllers to Medicare, from meals for needy seniors to public defenders and housing aid. Broke – but somehow able to front $700bn for reckless, wildly mismanaged banks.”

Bernie Sanders saw the 2007 Crash coming. He looked ahead and predicted the looming disaster, eight years before it happened.

Today, his stance comes with the plan to break up the big banks, something that has put previous presidents in a dangerous path. He was worried in 1999 and 2000, his fears came true in 2007, and now, in 2015, he understands and is trying to get the American people to understand how desperately we need to break up the banks. JFK, Andrew Jackson, James Garfield, Lincoln and of course Roosevelt knew the dangers of large banks in control of a countries wealth (three of which were assassinated in office, and one had an attempt on his life, but managed to get away).

Bernie knows, like Theodore Trust-Buster Roosevelt, that you cannot let financial institutions grow so massive. Such behemoths breed inequality and instability and, when they (inevitably) crash, the ensuing recession will devastate millions.

---

Wealth Inequality – Wall street protests:

In 2003, Bernie questioned Alan Greenspan before Congress again, telling him (in a chunk of dialogue that is well-worth the read, even more worth the watch):

“Mr. Greenspan, I have long been concerned that you are way out of touch with the needs of the middle-class and working families of our country [and] that you see your major function as [representing] the wealthy and large corporations — and I must tell you that your testimony today only confirms all of my suspicions."

"You talk about an improving economy, while we have lost 3 million private sector jobs in the last two years, long-term unemployment has more than tripled, unemployment is higher than it has been since 1994, we have a four-trillion-dollar national debt, 1.4 million Americans have lost their health insurance, millions of seniors can’t afford prescription drugs, middle-class families can’t send their kids to college because they don’t have the money…, bankruptcy cases have increased by a record-breaking 23%, business investment is at its lowest level in more than 50 years, CEOs make more than 500 times of what their workers make, the middle-class is shrinking, we have the greatest gap between the rich and the poor of any industrialized nation, and this is an economy that is improving!"

He saw the growing inequality and injustice, and how it would continue into the future, before virtually anyone else did. He was part of the Occupy Wall Street movement before it ever began. He was speaking out about the issues centre to this 2016 election cycle before Bush even got elected to his second term. He was shouting against the gap between rich and poor eight years before people started camping out in New York with signs emblazoned, “We Are The 99%.” He was railing against wealth and income inequality long before it was politically advantageous.

He saw the reality of America’s oligarchy years before the U.S. middle-class did. He was angry and fed-up before the people even knew they should be. Although here i have only listed some of the predicted things he's spoken out about, there are doubtless others which would only add credence to him as a man who is informed and understands the precarious consequences of decision-making; especially when the whole picture is not considered. He is someone who would help transform the foundations of the economy; an economy so broken that it is barely supported by itself. All other candidates will only strengthen the failures of the crippled system; amending things which aren't the true cause of the problems.

---

Bernie Sanders on being asked what kind of president he would like in 1988:

“I would like to see someone who has the guts to begin to stand up to the people who own this country, to recognise in our nation today, we have an extreme disparity between the rich and the poor. That elections are bought and sold and controlled by people who have huge sums of money. So my first concern is to have a president who has the courage to look reality in the face and say that we need some radical changes [...]”

Well, I think we have our man. Although he speaks to an American audience, to have him in office, at the head of one of the most powerful countries of the world, it can only lead away from ridiculous conflicts and towards a world of humanity.