Name: 伯尼桑德斯如何回答問題？ (How Bernie Sanders Answers A Question)
Uploaded: 2026-02-03T17:04:51.000Z
Duration: 9 min 14 s

Is there an increase in taxes on the middle class to pay for Medicare for all?

中產階級的稅會增加來支付 Medicare for all 嗎？

程度副詞

Or rather, where would the tax burden go to pay for that?

或者說，稅負會轉嫁到哪裡來支付這筆費用呢？

Okay, under my legislation, which has 15 co sponsors, I believe in the Senate now, nobody in America will pay any more premiums.

好的，在我提出的法案裡，有 15 位參議員 co sponsors，我相信在參議院，美國沒有人會再支付任何保費。

Just talked to a woman the other day who pays $1,700 a month, $20,000 a year gone.

前幾天我才跟一位女士聊過，她每個月付 1,700 美元，一年就花了 20,000 美元。

Right now, 500,000 people in America go bankrupt because of medical bills.

現在，美國有 50 萬人因為醫療帳單而破產。

Nobody in America under my bill will pay more than $200 a year in total for their prescription drugs and will stop the ripping off of the American people by the pharmaceutical industry.

在我的法案下，美國沒有人每年在處方藥上總共支付超過 200 美元，並且會阻止製藥業對美國人民的剝削。

Now, having said that, is health care free?

不過，說了這麼多，醫療保健是免費的嗎？

So what we do is exempt the first $29,000 of a person's income.

所以我們做的是，豁免一個人收入的前 29,000 美元。

你的收入如果低於 25,000 或 29,000。

You pay nothing in taxes above that in a progressive way, with the wealthiest people in this country paying the largest percentage.

你就不需要為此繳稅，而是以累進方式，由最富有的人支付最高的比例。

But if I say to you that right now you're paying 20,000 a year in a tax called a premium for the insurance companies, that that's gone.

但如果我告訴你，你現在每年要繳 20,000 美元給保險公司當保費，而這筆錢將不再需要支付。

And then I say, Stephen, you're paying $10,000 a year now to the federal government.

然後我再說，Stephen，你現在每年要繳 10,000 美元給聯邦政府。

You'd ask me, where do I sign off to that?

A little over four very, very long years ago, I made a video about the way then candidate Donald Trump answers a question.

大約四年多前，我做了一支影片，探討當時的候選人 Donald Trump 回答問題的方式。

I tried to show that Trump's salesmanlike phraseology was very effective at communicating a feeling to the listener, even if the actual claims were bogus or nonsensical.

我試著說明，Trump 那種推銷式的措辭，即使內容虛假或無意義，也能很有效地向聽眾傳達一種感覺。

I don't think this is the only reason he won in 2016, but

我不認為這是他能在 2016 年勝選的唯一原因，但

his skill as a communicator was definitely a big part.

他作為一個溝通者的技巧絕對是重要的一環。

Like Trump, Bernie Sanders, who is currently leading the contest for the Democratic nomination for president, has a talent for communication in a million ways that I won't enumerate here.

就像 Trump 一樣，目前在民主黨總統提名競選中領先的 Bernie Sanders，在溝通方面也很有才能，我在此就不一一列舉了。

These two men are very different, obviously, but

the polls and the votes show that they both know how to connect with with voters.

民調和投票結果顯示，他們都知道如何與選民建立連結。

And a significant reason for this, I think, is the way they wield language.

我認為，其中一個重要原因就是他們運用語言的方式。

Today I want to take a look at Sanders answer to a question that he gets a lot.

今天我想來看看 Sanders 如何回答一個他經常被問到的問題。

為了實現 Medicare for all，中產階級的稅會增加嗎？

And I think an interesting place to start might be to look back at what I said about Trump's speaking style and see how Sanders compares.

我認為，從回顧我對川普說話風格的評論，並看看桑德斯如何相比，會是一個有趣的起點。

After all, both these answers Happen to be the same number of words, 220.

畢竟，這兩個答案恰好都是相同的字數，220 個字。

Though Sanders takes an extra 30 seconds to get through them, which I'll get back to in a little bit.

雖然桑德斯講完需要多花 30 秒，這我等一下會再回來談。

So these are the four things I said about Trump's speech.

所以，這是我對川普演講說的四件事。

The first two are about his simplicity, both in the words he chooses.

前兩件是關於他的簡潔，包括他選擇的詞彙。

I want to find out what is the problem, what's going on, and the way he constructs sentences.

我想找出問題在哪裡，發生了什麼事，以及他如何組織句子。

These people, they did not come from Sweden.

The third thing I noted was his ability to reframe an assumed negative reaction to what he was saying by his use of the second person point of view.

我注意到的第三件事是，他透過使用第二人稱視角，來重新詮釋別人對他所說話的假設性負面反應的能力。

And you watched last night and you see people talking about and by implicating us in what he's saying, as if we've already agreed.

你昨晚看了，看到人們在談論，並將我們牽涉進他說的話裡，好像我們已經同意了。

I've had so many people call me and say thank you.

And finally, I pointed out how Trump likes to end his sentences with punch, with words that will leave you with a thematic sense of the emotional content he's trying to convey.

最後，我指出川普喜歡用有力的結尾來結束他的句子，用那些會讓你對他想傳達的情感內容留下主題性的感受的詞語。

Fourteen people dead, other people going to die, they're so badly injured.

十四人死亡，其他人也會死，他們傷勢嚴重。

About three quarters of his answer were one syllable.

他回答中大約四分之三的詞都是單音節。

Here's how he stacks up against Trump with more complicated words.

看看他與川普相比，使用較複雜詞語的表現。

It looks like Bernie uses significantly more three syllable words, but otherwise a somewhat similar breakdown.

看起來桑德斯使用三音節詞的比例明顯較高，但其他方面則大致相似。

They both understand that rhythmic series of short, simple words can burrow into the listener's head.

他們都明白，一連串有節奏的簡短、簡單的詞語，可以深深地烙印在聽眾的腦海裡。

說了這麼多，那醫療保健是免費的嗎？

Of course, Bernie doesn't need to use short words to find rhythm.

當然，桑德斯不需要用短詞來找節奏。

The reason he takes longer than Trump to get through the same amount of words is because he gives every single syll to breathe.

他講同樣字數比川普花的時間長，是因為他讓每個音節都有喘息的空間。

Now, in sentence construction, Bernie's answer is more complex than Trump's.

現在，在句子結構上，桑德斯的回答比川普複雜。

In fact, he starts his answer with two dependent clauses back to back.

事實上，他用兩個從屬子句開頭。

Under my legislation, which has 15 co sponsors, I believe, in the Senate now, he's also talking a lot about things that require a basic understanding of politics, health care and taxation, which makes his language necessarily more sophisticated.

在我的法案下，參議院現在有 15 位 co sponsors，我相信，他也說了很多需要對政治、醫療保健和稅務有基本瞭解的事情，這使得他的語言必然更為精煉。

As for reframing negative reaction, he does that in a similar way to Trump by putting the listener directly into his answer.

至於重塑負面反應，他用和川普類似的方式，讓聽眾直接進入他的回答。

In this case, using Colbert as a stand in for all of us.

在這個例子中，我們就以 Colbert 作為我們所有人的代表。

You'd ask me, where do I sign up for that?

你們會問我，我要在哪裡簽名？

And finally, yes, he does end his sentences with punch, just not in the way that Trump does.

最後，沒錯，他的確會在句末收尾，只是方式跟川普不一樣。

By using thematic words, Sanders uses apistrophe, a stylistic device in which you repeat words at the end of sentences for effect.

桑德斯透過使用主題詞，運用了疊句（epistrophe），這是一種在句末重複詞語以加強效果的修辭手法。

誰一個月要付 1,700 塊，一年 20,000 塊？

You can almost see your out of pocket medical bills blipping out of existence.

你幾乎可以看到你的自付額醫療帳單消失。

So there are actually some interesting similarities in the way Trump and Bernie speak, but

所以川普和桑德斯在說話方式上其實有一些有趣的相似之處，但

of course these answers aren't perfectly comparable and there are a lot of differences in their styles as well.

當然，這些回答不能完全相比，他們的風格也有很多不同。

Trump is singular in the way he improvs stream of consciousness rants that often look incoherent when read back, yet connect with his supporters in the moment.

川普的即興發揮、意識流式的咆哮很獨特，讀起來常顯得語無倫次，但當下卻能引起支持者的共鳴。

Sanders, on the other hand, has been preaching about the same things for decades.

另一方面，桑德斯幾十年來一直在宣揚同樣的事情。

He sharpened his message to a fine point, which is extra impressive when you consider that so much of his rhetoric has to do with context.

他把訊息磨練得非常精準，考慮到他的許多言論都與脈絡有關，這點尤其令人印象深刻。

或者更確切地說，稅負會轉移到哪裡來支付呢？

Colbert asks him if he's going to raise taxes, and to his credit he's willing to answer yes.

Colbert 問他會不會加稅，而且說實話，他願意回答「是」。

But it's here, couched in 200 words of fine tuned context, he has to explain why, in his view, raising taxes isn't the scary thing it's assumed to be when you factor in all your premiums and co payments, the artificially high prices of prescription drugs set by a pharmaceutical industry that's ripping us off.

但在這裡，他用 200 字精心調整的脈絡來解釋，為什麼在他看來，考量到我們的所有保費和 CO payments，以及製藥業設定的、讓我們吃虧的藥價虛高，加稅並不是大家以為的可怕事情。

He's ensuring us that the richer will get taxed more and struggling people not at all.

他向我們保證，富人會被課更多稅，而掙扎中的人們則完全不會。

Overall, we'll pay less in taxes, he wants to say, since current healthcare costs are a tax in all but name one that can be and has been devastating to many among us.

總體來說，他想說的是，我們的稅會變少，因為目前的醫療保健費用實際上就是一種稅，而且這種稅已經對我們中的許多人造成了毀滅性的打擊。

For Bernie, I've noticed that foregrounding the important context is a game of volume, volume and emphasis.

對於 Bernie，我注意到強調重要脈絡是一場關於音量、音量和強調的遊戲。

While it might seem like he's yelling all the time, Bernie does modulate a lot.

雖然他可能看起來一直都在大喊大叫，但 Bernie 的確會做很多調整。

And if you pick out the moments when his pitch where his volume ramps up, you can see a sketch of what he wants the listener to take away.

如果你挑出他音調或音量提高的時刻，你就能大致看出他希望聽眾記住什麼。

Nobody in America will pay any more premiums.

No more CO payments, no more out of pocket expenses.

All of that is gone for their prescription drugs.

他們的處方藥就不用再付費了。

If I say to you you're 10,000 to the good, you'd ask me, where do I sign off for that?

如果我跟你說你省了 10,000 元，你一定會問我：「在哪裡簽名？」

As with my Trump video four years ago, I'm not trying to make a comment on Bernie Sanders politics, I'm just obsessed with the way politicians attempt to communicate with voters.

就像我四年前的川普影片一樣，我不是要評論 Bernie Sanders 的政治立場，我只是著迷於政治人物如何試圖與選民溝通。

Sanders obviously has a good sense of rhythm and delivery and an iron grip on the points he wants to make.

Sanders 顯然很有節奏感和表達能力，而且對他想傳達的重點掌握得非常牢。

But what's even more masterful is his ability to articulate an ideology out of all the things that surround his answer to a question in a way that often makes the questions feel not only stupid, but

但更厲害的是，他能將圍繞著問題回答的各種事物，闡述成一種意識形態，而且常常讓問題聽起來不只愚蠢，

a symptom of the stupid worldview that he's trying to fight against.

還像是他試圖對抗的愚蠢世界觀的症狀。

It remains to be seen whether those principles can win the presidency or even the Democratic nomination.

至於這些原則能否贏得總統大位，甚至贏得民主黨提名，還有待觀察。

Regardless, they have a powerful messenger hey everybody, thank you so much for watching this episode was brought to you by Squarespace if you don't know, you can use Squarespace to make beautiful websites for anything you might need.

不管怎樣，他們都有一個強而有力的溝通者。嘿，大家好，非常感謝收看本集節目，本集由 Squarespace 贊助。如果你不知道，你可以用 Squarespace 來製作任何你需要的精美網站。

A personal site, a wedding website, a site for your business or portfolio, and

個人網站、婚禮網站、公司網站或作品集網站，