#41  
Old 11-09-2012, 10:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
So if you don't think something good is possible you make matters worse instead? I don't get what point you are trying to make. There can be no world peace so lets make world war? Just keep doing bad things because probably only bad things are going to happen? "Meh there's nothing I can do to change things so I'll just keep feeding the problem." Well that's very inspiring but I'll fight for what I believe in no matter how daunting the feasibility of it is but that's just me. I'm not interested in what other people think can or can not happen I'm interested in what is right and so should everyone else.
But when did I say I can't make world peace so lets make world war instead?
Obama is making moves to send our country in the right direction. That's what i'm voting for.

Quote:
People said a lot of things were unrealistic 100, 200, 300... years ago that are very real today. If people only fought for what they believe what was 'realistic' we wouldn't have ventured to outer space, sailed across the Atlantic ocean, invented all the different technologies we have today, never bothered to fight against the British, never thought to have ended slavery, racism, sexism etc. Times change and are changing all the time. Look at the massive change in our culture between the 1950s and the 1960s. Who's to tell you times can't or won't change again? The only constant in the universe is change and not the fake change our current chief of state's slogan was.
That's what you don't seem to get. I never said that times won't change. I said it takes time, and it does. It takes time to convince a population that the system they've known their entire lives is flawed. Can it happen? Yes, of course it can. Will it happen? Probably. But it obviously wasn't going to happen this election, and more than likely it won't happen next election either. Chances are it'll be a good two more terms MINIMUM before enough people start voting Libertarian to matter. Good news, the Libertarian party is growing in popularity and currently Gary Johnson holds the very respectable 1% of votes. Maybe next election a Libertarian will receive 2-3% or maybe as much as 5% if the gain in popularity is that rapid. Who knows, maybe it'll be as much as 10% for the term after that.
The day I think a Libertarian has a decent chance(at least 30% of votes or more) is when I'll vote Libertarian. But for now I'm going to make sure my vote matters. And voting for someone who is alleviating some of our debt concerns is better than voting for no reason and having a president that wants to spend WAY more be elected.

Quote:
There's always 'signs' the economy is improving. Is it really improving? No. Its smoke and mirrors delaying the inevitable the direction we're heading. If you are personally borrowing more than you pay in then immediately once you borrow a lot more times are ok for a while (and signs of improvement) until your debt catches up on you again. Rinse/repeat. No nation can withstand this massive debt long term. Let me know once we're back down to 12 figures let alone 13. Spending money like drunken sailors as if we have money to burn. Do I think we're in deep shit. Yeah its almost a certainty by now we fall into the abyss but fuck it I'll fight anyway because yes I'll also believe anything is possible no matter how someone says how unrealistic something is. It is more possible than you may think.
Economic improvement is a step in the right direction for fixing our debt problem.
And only time will tell if we fall into the abyss.

Last edited by MikeMovie; 11-09-2012 at 10:42 AM..
  #42  
Old 11-09-2012, 01:13 PM
I bet Jim Colyer's pissed!
  #43  
Old 11-09-2012, 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMovie View Post
But when did I say I can't make world peace so lets make world war instead?
Obama is making moves to send our country in the right direction. That's what i'm voting for.
You were asking me and no he's not.

Quote:
That's what you don't seem to get. I never said that times won't change. I said it takes time, and it does. It takes time to convince a population that the system they've known their entire lives is flawed. Can it happen? Yes, of course it can. Will it happen? Probably. But it obviously wasn't going to happen this election, and more than likely it won't happen next election either. Chances are it'll be a good two more terms MINIMUM before enough people start voting Libertarian to matter. Good news, the Libertarian party is growing in popularity and currently Gary Johnson holds the very respectable 1% of votes. Maybe next election a Libertarian will receive 2-3% or maybe as much as 5% if the gain in popularity is that rapid. Who knows, maybe it'll be as much as 10% for the term after that.
The day I think a Libertarian has a decent chance(at least 30% of votes or more) is when I'll vote Libertarian. But for now I'm going to make sure my vote matters. And voting for someone who is alleviating some of our debt concerns is better than voting for no reason and having a president that wants to spend WAY more be elected.
If you want your vote to matter then let that % grow more with your vote.

Quote:
Economic improvement is a step in the right direction for fixing our debt problem.
And only time will tell if we fall into the abyss.
But its not real economic improvement. We still have to pay for what we spent. That trillion dollar number isn't going away and its going to rear it ugly head again. Right now in America we have a new low standard year by year. Expectations from our government is getting lower and lower. "oh unemployment dipped to 8.0% let's celebrate!" A record pace of more people on food stamps, disability, etc than ever before. Again smoke and mirrors.

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
  #44  
Old 11-10-2012, 12:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
Then the same goes for the other party as well.
Of course. And the same goes for some, but not all, third party candidates.
  #45  
Old 11-10-2012, 01:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postmaster General View Post
Of course. And the same goes for some, but not all, third party candidates.
Well 3rd parties like Libertarians don't 'create' villains they expose them.

Plus I don't know why any Rep/Dem politician would blame 3rd parties for our problems since they've had like .1% of control of the government since our long term problems started to snowball. Can't create a villain when they're a complete underdog.

Last edited by creekin111; 11-11-2012 at 05:06 AM..
  #46  
Old 11-11-2012, 10:19 AM
There have been some amazing things happen in the last week. Many Republicans I know all of a sudden want to 86 the election of the President system and go with the popular vote. Did not hear many of them complain when Bush beat Gore and Gore won the popular vote. Nearly all the conservative pundants picked Romney to win states like VA and Oh and Fl and he lost them all. The next day when Obama won, these same people had nothing, but bullshit to say and now they seem to be turning on Boehner. The liberal side said that the Republicans are going to have to regroup and other bullshit. Some nice things came out after the election that would have hurt the race for Obama, but the Super Storm Sandy seemed to have helped.


Last Tuesday night, I went to bed depressed. I am depressed not because, who I wanted to win lost, but because I have lost faith in the people. To me, this was a race over two different philosophies. The Republicans want you to earn everything you get yourself and the Democratics wants the government to help you as much as humanly possible in order to succeed and be happy. More than 50% of the people want the government to give them as much as possible and that is sad. And who are all these people? Well, 99.999% of African Americans (not that I blame them, but voting based on skin color is racist) and 40% of white people (of that 40%, 60% of them are tied to unions) and somewhere between 75%-80% of latin people make up who voted for Obama. If you look at the states and the areas within each state, (even the ones Obama won) you see that Romney won a huge chunk of the state and lost all the metro (city) areas. That in itself is telling. We live in a divided country and that is sad.

At the end of these next 4 years, I hope that whatever happens Obama will take credit or blame for what happened during this 8 years and not continue to blame Bush or whatever parts of Congress the Republicans control. I hope that Obama does not yield to the demands of the Latin people who want something for their votes and it has everything to do with immigration. By the way, that is called pay for play. The gays pushed Obama very hard to get rid of Dont Ask Dont Tell after they threatened not to vote for him. I hope Obama does not allow the Middle East to do whatever the fuck they want as they have for the last 4 years, but it seems like he will not stop them. I have not seen any response to Iran shooting at our drone nor do I expect it.

I am not hopeful at all that the country will be headed in the right direction. I believe the middle class will continue to get crushed and more and more end up in lower income land. The only lower income people who will make it out of that class will be those in the music, sports and entertainment fields, which will be comical when African Americans get no where in 8 years with an African American President (half white) and still vote democratic as if that party has done anything for them in the last 20 years. The rich will prob pay more taxes and still get richer. Businesses will continue to slide and go out of business. More larger companies will get bigger and stronger, which is a bad sign for America. We will end up with an even higher federal deficit than what we have now. Gas will be well over $3 a gallon for most of the next 4 years. The economy will continue to be stagnant for the next 4 years and oh yeah, the middle eastern contries will be stronger and that is bad for us. Lastly, that 40 somethign percent who don't pay federal taxes will grow larger as less and less people are supporting more and more people. We are headed in the same direction as Europe and that is not good. But hey, this is who 50 something percent of the people wanted to lead our great country and they have no one, but themselves to blame in 4 years when they are no better off than they are right now or even 4 years ago.
  #47  
Old 11-11-2012, 03:17 PM
I'm a proud liberal and I favour socialism, I think it's needed in this country. I don't care if that makes me "evil" in yours or anyone else's mind. I'm quite pleased with Obama's re-election and I think you're way off base in your statements there Erroneous. I'm just glad the good guy won again.
  #48  
Old 11-11-2012, 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
I'm a proud liberal and I favour socialism, I think it's needed in this country. I don't care if that makes me "evil" in yours or anyone else's mind. I'm quite pleased with Obama's re-election and I think you're way off base in your statements there Erroneous. I'm just glad the good guy won again.
We shall see over the next 4 years. The last week has been quite telling so far. Obama is no good guy. He was the lesser of two evils. lol
  #49  
Old 11-11-2012, 07:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
Lastly, that 40 somethign percent who don't pay federal taxes will grow larger as less and less people are supporting more and more people. We are headed in the same direction as Europe and that is not good. But hey, this is who 50 something percent of the people wanted to lead our great country and they have no one, but themselves to blame in 4 years when they are no better off than they are right now or even 4 years ago.

Let's plunge a stake right into the heart of this fallacy about "47% of the population being a bunch of moochers" right here and now:



If you've ever claimed your children on your taxes: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you serve in the military or are a student: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you are elderly,retired,live off your retirement and/or SS: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you are disabled and live off SS: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you make MORE than $200,000/yr*: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you make less than $20,000/yr, etc: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you pay PAYROLL TAX: YOU ARE THE 47%


Just because you don't pay income tax does not mean you don't pay ANY taxes, and it doesn't mean you don't work.




*mainly from charitable and hospital deductions, not to mention capital gains.

Last edited by electriclite; 11-11-2012 at 09:05 PM..
  #50  
Old 11-11-2012, 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
I'm a proud liberal and I favour socialism, I think it's needed in this country. I don't care if that makes me "evil" in yours or anyone else's mind. I'm quite pleased with Obama's re-election and I think you're way off base in your statements there Erroneous. I'm just glad the good guy won again.
Socialism is an awful horrible governmental system. We've pissed on freedom for so long now people are wondering why we don't have freedom anymore.

The Nazis were socialists. Nazi stands for National Socialist. As late as 1928, the Nazis and Communists were non-factors in German politics. With the beginning of the Depression in 1929, both the Nazis and Communists gained popularity and a notable percentage of the votes in ensuing elections. The business community and the military found this troubling since both movements were bent on wiping out the old order and installing a new one. Hitler saw an opportunity and he showed the same pragmatic tendencies that led to his rapprochement with the Soviets in 1939. Over the strenuous objections of his long time friend and supporter Ernst Rohm, he reached out to the business community and the military and offered to maintain their places in society in return for their support. This created a schism within the Nazi party which only ended with the night of the long knives. The Nazi's believed in an all powerful state which would be served by every man woman and child. They were collectivist socialists who merely cut a deal with capitalists in order to gain power.

Socialism and fascism are actually quite similar - in both cases, the rights of the individual are sacrificed for the power of the state and collectivist ends. They're really just two sides of the same coin. If someone really believes that fascism is the opposite of socialism, it's no wonder they have the skewed world view as they do. They don't equal each other. Just that they are very similar in most of the important, fundamental points to each approach.

I would argue that the ends each movement claims to seek are not nearly as important as the means they use since it's the means (big government power that values the "collective good" over individual rights) that inevitably results in both movements ending up at a very similar place (whether they claim to want to get there or not).

When I say collective good, I'm not differentiating between socialists saying they want to directly redistribute wealth to everybody versus fascists saying they want to artificially prop up certain businesses. Both claim they want to do what they do - substitute government power in place of freedom and voluntary association - for the "greater good" of the nation. Again, it's two sides of the same coin.

And as for which may have a greater chance for a "democratically" elected, I don't really view that as much of a worthwhile point one way or the other. Contrary to the neocon dogma, democracy does not necessarily equal good and oligarchy does not necessarily equal bad. You can have tyrannical democracies that don't value liberty just as you can have a benevolent monarchy that limits its power and protects liberty. The manner in which a government is assembled is nowhere near as important to me as what that government does.

I think it's rather obvious which way the needle has been moving over the last century, albeit slowly. There are still more elements of capitalism, with more and more elements of socialism. and the problem is that when things go tits-up, capitalism is what gets blamed, when it's usually the more socialistic elements (ie government) that are the real culprit. And because capitalism gets incorrectly blamed, more and more socialistic ideas will creep their way in. The evil and ills caused by inflation (caused by a central bank's policies) are probably the main thing that cause a populace to demand more and more government control over industries in an economy.

In the end socialism (like all the other forms of authoritarianism) ALWAYS Fails.

It seems to work halfway decent at first and maybe even lasts a few years (or a few decades) with much of the downside not readily apparent but there's only so long you can get stuff for "free." Eventually, you have to pay up.

The real fundamental difference between governments are libertarian vs authoritarian. Either you value freedom or you don't.
  #51  
Old 11-11-2012, 11:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Let's plunge a stake right into the heart of this fallacy about "47% of the population being a bunch of moochers" right here and now:



If you've ever claimed your children on your taxes: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you serve in the military or are a student: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you are elderly,retired,live off your retirement and/or SS: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you are disabled and live off SS: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you make MORE than $200,000/yr*: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you make less than $20,000/yr, etc: YOU ARE THE 47%

If you pay PAYROLL TAX: YOU ARE THE 47%


Just because you don't pay income tax does not mean you don't pay ANY taxes, and it doesn't mean you don't work.
Please do not confuse what I said with what Romney said or meant. I did not imply the 47% were moochers. I know exactly who the 47% are. Seniors alone will grow the 47%. Some of what you have there is not correct, but the spirit is. The fact is for whatever reason 47% of the people do not pay federal taxes. My point is that the percent will grow and it will do so through a variety of reasons and less people will be supporting them. The lion share of federal taxes from private citizens comes from payroll taxes not other federal taxes such as the gas tax.
  #52  
Old 11-12-2012, 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
In the end socialism (like all the other forms of authoritarianism) ALWAYS Fails.
Marx is spinning in his grave...

Please don't compare National Socialism to true-socialism. Just because the former had "socialism" in its name didn't mean it adhered to its principles. There are no examples of socialism (in its truest form) in history. What the world has seen are considered "experiments"; failed attempts to initiate a global socialist revolution to counter the rise of capitalism. Socialism is a pipe-dream, will only work on paper, and never truly exist unless the world (not just one or two countries) realizes the alienation and disenfranchisement of the middle-class and rises up to counter the bourgeois.

And your country is farthest from ever being socialist. Any notions of such persist due to exaggeration and politically-charged fear. There is a difference between becoming a politically centrist country and becoming socialist. The policies of a government that cares is leftist, but farthest from ever being labelled socialist.
  #53  
Old 11-12-2012, 09:38 AM
I'm glad Obama won. Not that I like him, but I think he was definitely better than Romney.
  #54  
Old 11-12-2012, 10:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
The Nazis were socialists. Nazi stands for National Socialist.
Yeah, and North Korea calls itself a Democratic Republic. What's your point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
Socialism and fascism are actually quite similar - in both cases, the rights of the individual are sacrificed for the power of the state and collectivist ends.
"The communists do not preach morality at all...They do not put to people the moral demand: love one another, do not be egoists, etc.; on the contrary, they are very well aware that egoism, just as much as self-sacrifice, is in definite circumstances a necessary form of the self-assertion of individuals. Hence, the communists by no means want to do away with the 'private individual' for the sake of the 'general', self-sacrificing man."

-- Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels, The German Ideology

Last edited by Squid Vicious; 11-12-2012 at 10:24 AM..
  #55  
Old 11-12-2012, 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
Contrary to the neocon dogma, democracy does not necessarily equal good and oligarchy does not necessarily equal bad. You can have tyrannical democracies that don't value liberty just as you can have a benevolent monarchy that limits its power and protects liberty.
A "libertarian," ladies and gentlemen.
  #56  
Old 11-12-2012, 11:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vong View Post
Marx is spinning in his grave...

Please don't compare National Socialism to true-socialism. Just because the former had "socialism" in its name didn't mean it adhered to its principles. There are no examples of socialism (in its truest form) in history.
There are no examples of capitalism (in its truest form) in history and no socialism doesn't have to be 100% absolute in order to exist. Give me an example of pure capitalism in the US. I can give millions of examples of pure socialism.

Quote:
What the world has seen are considered "experiments"; failed attempts to initiate a global socialist revolution to counter the rise of capitalism. Socialism is a pipe-dream, will only work on paper, and never truly exist unless the world (not just one or two countries) realizes the alienation and disenfranchisement of the middle-class and rises up to counter the bourgeois.
Yes and we're another experiment doomed to fail. The government owns a monopoly of force. Not even the richest individual has power over all government. The only way the rich keep permanent power is because either people gladly support them or government ensures their status. Either its good or not the fault of capitalism.

Quote:
And your country is farthest from ever being socialist. Any notions of such persist due to exaggeration and politically-charged fear. There is a difference between becoming a politically centrist country and becoming socialist. The policies of a government that cares is leftist, but farthest from ever being labelled socialist.
No we're pretty much closer to being considered socialist. I think you're confusing Socialism with Communism. Its like saying nobody can be 100% mixed race. Yes they can. Again in the end its still authoritarian vs libertarian. Eventually the past majority tyrannies of prior generations catch up to modern generations as things stay fixed and can not change with the times or unforeseen changes in the populace. Why are people OK with others who have made money being shaken down to support middle class consumerism disguised as Dickensian tragedy?

We have Social Security. We have Medicare. We have Medicaid. These programs are supposed to provide subsidies and medical care for the poor, the disabled, the elderly. Rather than address and fix these incredibly fucked up programs which have us on the road to financial ruin, rather than reform them so that they provide for people in real need and require people perfectly capable of taking care of themselves to do so, this president and his allies in the congress added a new behemoth of a law on top of these disasters. Now we have almost three thousand pages of new law, new government intervention in the market, new costs, new distortions, new problems before we have one sentence on fixing the old fuck ups. We're drowning in government. Any new government initiatives should be enacted only as a part of a broad sweeping reform that ends up with government consuming a substantially smaller portion of GDP than it currently does. People hate the word "socialism" in these arguments, but when government in good times and bad, over the course of multiple decades, consistently consumes more than a third of national economic output, you've moved too far down the continuum towards socialism. You've gotten to far away from the American ideal of very limited government and the supremacy of the individual.

Last edited by creekin111; 11-12-2012 at 11:50 AM..
  #57  
Old 11-12-2012, 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post
Yeah, and North Korea calls itself a Democratic Republic. What's your point?
You omitted it.

Quote:
"The communists do not preach morality at all...They do not put to people the moral demand: love one another, do not be egoists, etc.; on the contrary, they are very well aware that egoism, just as much as self-sacrifice, is in definite circumstances a necessary form of the self-assertion of individuals. Hence, the communists by no means want to do away with the 'private individual' for the sake of the 'general', self-sacrificing man."

-- Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels, The German Ideology
Glad you mentioned Marx. The very foundation of Marxist beliefs is the false notion that men are little more than beasts of burden - their only worth being measured in their capacity for manual labor. Marx completely dismisses the value of the human mind, the value of ideas, the value of being able to assess a given system and find a way to make that system function better, the ability to invent a new product or new way of working that allows other men to reap more rewards for less labor. That has value - TREMENDOUS value in fact - faaaaaaar more value than being able to cut down 10 trees instead of 2.

Regardless of how a man accumulated his wealth however - whether it's a matter of labor, ideas, inventions, wise investments, or even simply inheritance, it still doesn't change the fundamental fact that you want to take the property of one man and give it to another. It IS robbing Peter to pay Paul no matter how you may try to justify it.
  #58  
Old 11-12-2012, 11:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post
A "libertarian," ladies and gentlemen.
So what I said is not possible? And what does what I said have anything to do with my political ideology?
  #59  
Old 11-12-2012, 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
Glad you mentioned Marx. The very foundation of Marxist beliefs is the false notion that men are little more than beasts of burden - their only worth being measured in their capacity for manual labor. Marx completely dismisses the value of the human mind, the value of ideas, the value of being able to assess a given system and find a way to make that system function better, the ability to invent a new product or new way of working that allows other men to reap more rewards for less labor. That has value - TREMENDOUS value in fact - faaaaaaar more value than being able to cut down 10 trees instead of 2.


This is actually, like, the exact opposite of what Marx believed. I mean, holy shit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
So what I said is not possible? And what does what I said have anything to do with my political ideology?
Oh, I'm sure it's possible. I'm just glad that you confirmed for me that libertarianism has nothing to do with liberty in any meaningful sense of the word.
  #60  
Old 11-12-2012, 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
No we're pretty much closer to being considered socialist.
Based on what? Socialism occurs after a revolution, not when right-wing pundits feed notions of such a thing to their audience.

The framework in today's global economy is heavily focused on capitalism. Any Western country that exists as part of globalization is considered capitalist. The notions and tenets of socialism do not permit a country existing as part of the global market for profits. No amount of leftist thinking from any politician can ever transform the already capitalist monstrosity that is America.

The mere idea that the United States is moving towards socialism is the most impossible transformation economically, politically and rationally. Not to mention laughable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
I think you're confusing Socialism with Communism.
No, I'm not. Socialism is an economic and political stepping stone towards communism. And no country has ever successfully accomplished a complete transfer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
We have Social Security. We have Medicare. We have Medicaid. These programs are supposed to provide subsidies and medical care for the poor, the disabled, the elderly. Rather than address and fix these incredibly fucked up programs which have us on the road to financial ruin, rather than reform them so that they provide for people in real need and require people perfectly capable of taking care of themselves to do so, this president and his allies in the congress added a new behemoth of a law on top of these disasters. Now we have almost three thousand pages of new law, new government intervention in the market, new costs, new distortions, new problems before we have one sentence on fixing the old fuck ups. We're drowning in government. Any new government initiatives should be enacted only as a part of a broad sweeping reform that ends up with government consuming a substantially smaller portion of GDP than it currently does.
You're confusing small shifts in policy to address already corrupt and inept institutions within the United States with some backwards notion that these measures belong to a socialist agenda. Your country's political structure and right-wing twats are the root cause of all the failings in your medical institutions. Obama worked with what he could to please everyone on both sides of the aisle. It's like trying to renovate a building when the contractors have different opinions on finished product. Of course it's going to be fucked up at the end, you couldn't agree on something solid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
People hate the word "socialism" in these arguments, but when government in good times and bad, over the course of multiple decades, consistently consumes more than a third of national economic output, you've moved too far down the continuum towards socialism. You've gotten to far away from the American ideal of very limited government and the supremacy of the individual.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Are you're saying both the Democrats and Republicans over the course of "multiple decades" have been pushing towards socialism? If so, this just blows my mind. Regardless of this ridiculous conspiracy you've concocted, how does increased spending lead to socialism?

You seriously need to read Marx, Fourier and Luxemburg before spouting any claim to understanding what socialism is. You're drunk on information provided to you by misinformed American pundits.
  #61  
Old 11-12-2012, 06:03 PM
In light of some silly people in this country signing something asking their state to leave the union......

Although I do not believe in what the President is planning and trying to do, I do hope I am wrong and it leads to a better America. I would be more than happy to admit I am wrong if something he does works out better for us all, not just some of us.
  #62  
Old 11-12-2012, 08:14 PM
Without specification of the type of Communism and Socialism, this conversation is futile.

I would support a system of restricted population size inhabiting in a fixed size, unnamed, and flagless area -- the majority of the world would be left as a natural ecosystem. By restricting population size, we would have more control in aligning demand with supply, available jobs with demand for jobs, available food with demand for food etc. Politicians would be legally binded by their manifestos. Policies not mentioned in a manifesto would only be implemented if at least 70% of the public (it seems the minimum for a clear majority) agree through a referendum. All citizens would have the option to produce their own food, in a part-time farmer, part-time worker lifestyle -- although their will be backup food supplies run by the state. Language, agriculture, politics, economics, sciences, philosophy, sports, and arts will be the staples of the education system. There needs to be an incentive to do the stressful, but essential jobs like that of a surgeon, so different jobs will vary in wage; however, there will be a distinction between justifiable wealth and excessive wealth, with the latter being avoided, and the former defined as being entitled to 2 or 3 months worth of holidays per year instead of the standard 1 month. Benefits will go to those who can prove unable to do any work. There will be a national health system for all. Prison will only be for violent offenders; community services will be allocated to white collar criminals. People will be free to live how they choose, so long as they don't infringe on the free will of others or undermine the health of others including themselves. The state language will probably have to be an invented one.

Whatever the name of that system, that's my ideal.
  #63  
Old 11-12-2012, 09:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SS-Block View Post
There will be a national health system for all.
This, this this. THIS! All day fucking long, THIS!

Health care should be a RIGHT for the citizens of any & every country, not a fucking privelege that must be paid for! I have over $2000 in medical bills. But I will NEVER pay them. They can go straight to fucking hell and kiss my ass on the way there, cuz I will NEVER pay for ANY health care I ever receive in this country! And if you wanna use the "it'll make your credit look like shit if they get sent to collections, etc." - My credit is shit anyway, and if that makes me a dumb asshole, so be it.
  #64  
Old 11-12-2012, 09:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
This, this this. THIS! All day fucking long, THIS!

Health care should be a RIGHT for the citizens of any & every country, not a fucking privelege that must be paid for! I have over $2000 in medical bills. But I will NEVER pay them. They can go straight to fucking hell and kiss my ass on the way there, cuz I will NEVER pay for ANY health care I ever receive in this country! And if you wanna use the "it'll make your credit look like shit if they get sent to collections, etc." - My credit is shit anyway, and if that makes me a dumb asshole, so be it.
So you believe in slavery?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post


This is actually, like, the exact opposite of what Marx believed. I mean, holy shit.



Oh, I'm sure it's possible. I'm just glad that you confirmed for me that libertarianism has nothing to do with liberty in any meaningful sense of the word.
Yeah we have nothing more to discuss here. Bye.
  #65  
Old 11-12-2012, 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vong View Post
Based on what? Socialism occurs after a revolution, not when right-wing pundits feed notions of such a thing to their audience.
Socialism only occurs after a revolution? Nope.

Quote:
The framework in today's global economy is heavily focused on capitalism. Any Western country that exists as part of globalization is considered capitalist. The notions and tenets of socialism do not permit a country existing as part of the global market for profits. No amount of leftist thinking from any politician can ever transform the already capitalist monstrosity that is America.
Yeah and that framework has been smashed to bits.

Quote:
The mere idea that the United States is moving towards socialism is the most impossible transformation economically, politically and rationally. Not to mention laughable.
So there is less government than there was 100 years ago? Prove it. If you can't then you don't know what you're talking about.


Quote:
No, I'm not. Socialism is an economic and political stepping stone towards communism. And no country has ever successfully accomplished a complete transfer.
And during a partial transfer everything gets destroyed and economies crumble.


Quote:
You're confusing small shifts in policy to address already corrupt and inept institutions within the United States with some backwards notion that these measures belong to a socialist agenda. Your country's political structure and right-wing twats are the root cause of all the failings in your medical institutions. Obama worked with what he could to please everyone on both sides of the aisle. It's like trying to renovate a building when the contractors have different opinions on finished product. Of course it's going to be fucked up at the end, you couldn't agree on something solid! I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Are you're saying both the Democrats and Republicans over the course of "multiple decades" have been pushing towards socialism? If so, this just blows my mind. Regardless of this ridiculous conspiracy you've concocted, how does increased spending lead to socialism?

You seriously need to read Marx, Fourier and Luxemburg before spouting any claim to understanding what socialism is. You're drunk on information provided to you by misinformed American pundits.
Yeah again resorting to pointless attacks to prove your point. "You're just misinformed because I said so." Oh yeah ok. "Right wing twats." Nice. Nothing further to discuss here when you resort to grade school language. Thanks for playing. Maybe that kind of language works in the school yard but not with political discourse.

Last edited by creekin111; 11-12-2012 at 09:18 PM..
  #66  
Old 11-12-2012, 09:26 PM
Again if some of you others think our society is some sort or enlightened utopia where we have these angels in government that have all the answers on how an entire completely diverse population should live every second of their lives then just say so. Otherwise its ridiculous to think than full grown responsible adults can't make every day decisions in their daily lives and know what's best for themselves. What does a politician living in the big city know how someone 1,500 miles away should live? You know exactly what is best for a society today as well as 100 years from now, 500 years from now? Really?

Going with the healthcare is a right mantra. If you don't like the word "slavery" call it indentured servitude. If you don't like either of those terms, call it whatever you think best sums up the matter. But the bottom line is that health care is not like water or air. It's not some commodity that merely exists like manna from Heaven. It must be created through work (schooling, time, energy, thought, creativity, investment, risk, personal sacrifice in pursuing a learned profession while missing out on other things in life). So when the government steps in and says that a man has some inherent right to the fruits of your labor, it doesn't sound that far from slavery to me. But like I said, use whatever word you find acceptable. The point remains the same. As for me forcing another man to give his time/knowledge/labor for your medical care is not slavery? I'm pretty sure being forced to work for another man is kinda' the textbook definition of slavery. But maybe I'm just a sickening idiot.
  #67  
Old 11-13-2012, 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
So you believe in slavery?
*facepalm* Nevermind.

Last edited by jaw2929; 11-13-2012 at 01:23 PM..
  #68  
Old 11-13-2012, 03:05 PM
What the hell has happened to this thread?
  #69  
Old 11-13-2012, 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
and if that makes me a dumb asshole, so be it.

It does in fact qualify you. What else do you think the government should give you? A free car so you can go to the free doctor? Free clothing to wear to that doctor? Well you are gonna need gas to get there too so along with EBT, free medical care, free clothing, free car, you now need an EBT card for gas too.

At what point (I doubt you ever have) do you say to yourself, holy crap I am literally not responsible for a single thing in my entire life because Obama gives me everything. From your attitude though that would seem to make you happy, instead of realizing just how pathetic that really is.
  #70  
Old 11-13-2012, 05:57 PM
You know... whenever I hear anti-Obama types talking about things they don't understand (which, let's be honest, is a lot), or describe an America that only exists in a fantasy world, this is how I imagine they act all the time.
  #71  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
Health care should be a RIGHT for the citizens of any & every country, not a fucking privelege that must be paid for! I have over $2000 in medical bills. But I will NEVER pay them. They can go straight to fucking hell and kiss my ass on the way there, cuz I will NEVER pay for ANY health care I ever receive in this country! And if you wanna use the "it'll make your credit look like shit if they get sent to collections, etc." - My credit is shit anyway, and if that makes me a dumb asshole, so be it.
Healthcare is not a privilege, but you do have to pay for it. You pay for everything in this world. If you have two grand in medical bills, you should pay it and not expect the people to put up the tab.

What you should be fighting is why did it cost 2 grand? How do we lower the costs not how it gets paid for and by who.

Why is your credit shit? Why do you think it is my job and people like me with great credit to pay for your life?
  #72  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
It does in fact qualify you. What else do you think the government should give you? A free car so you can go to the free doctor? Free clothing to wear to that doctor? Well you are gonna need gas to get there too so along with EBT, free medical care, free clothing, free car, you now need an EBT card for gas too.

At what point (I doubt you ever have) do you say to yourself, holy crap I am literally not responsible for a single thing in my entire life because Obama gives me everything. From your attitude though that would seem to make you happy, instead of realizing just how pathetic that really is.
I guess that guy does not understand how Russia went down.
  #73  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:08 PM
I'm willing to give Obamacare a chance but let's get one thing straight. We Americans are promised three things. Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness. Health care is most certainly not a RIGHT.
  #74  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badbird View Post
You know... whenever I hear anti-Obama types talking about things they don't understand (which, let's be honest, is a lot), or describe an America that only exists in a fantasy world, this is how I imagine they act all the time.

You'd be wrong. On all accounts.
  #75  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:14 PM
Well if Obama brings out a new healthcare scheme which l know he wanted to bring out one that is simalar to our medicare

Our medicare sysytems gives you the right to have your doctors bill bulk billed if you are a low income perosn or you are under a certain wage

i feel if you go under our system which Obama has sugested you will see the benifits plus you dont have to pay full cost of bill you might get in hospitol

In Australia you can be a private patient alos where you put money into a fund and when you need doctors or hospitol care it is sometimes halved

I just dont undrstand why America has taken this long to have a proper health care system running so everyone has the right to be treated
  #76  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badbird View Post
You know... whenever I hear anti-Obama types talking about things they don't understand (which, let's be honest, is a lot), or describe an America that only exists in a fantasy world, this is how I imagine they act all the time.
It is a shame you can't even begin to understand how people who do not think like you think or feel. While you think you are liberal, you are closed minded. You take things at face value, give it a name and degrade it to make yourself feel superior before you even ask why. You paint with a mighty big brush.

What you did was not only unfair to many, but just insulting. Why can't you just accept that there are others with an opinion different from your's and it might not be stupid, racist or whatever else you say about a different opinion? You should to the fact that you might be wrong and accept it when if proven so without blaming others
  #77  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotch View Post
I'm willing to give Obamacare a chance but let's get one thing straight. We Americans are promised three things. Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness. Health care is most certainly not a RIGHT.
Well l know l am a aussie but it is true you have to see what Obama does this time around and see if things do improve

Plus you have more republicans in certain seats in congress

So isnt it hard for a president to get things passed when you have to go through so many people

if it was ony him it would be a diffrent story
  #78  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
It does in fact qualify you. What else do you think the government should give you? A free car so you can go to the free doctor? Free clothing to wear to that doctor? Well you are gonna need gas to get there too so along with EBT, free medical care, free clothing, free car, you now need an EBT card for gas too.

At what point (I doubt you ever have) do you say to yourself, holy crap I am literally not responsible for a single thing in my entire life because Obama gives me everything. From your attitude though that would seem to make you happy, instead of realizing just how pathetic that really is.
I dunno where this "free doctor" thing is coming from. Unless you are really fucking poor you have to BUY your own insurance. Its just now, everyone is actually going to get accepted by the insurance companies, and with that flood of money coming from all these new insurees the price will actually go down.

AHA, will actually END the "freeloaders" who flood emergency rooms (who's services are far more expensive than preventive care) and can't/don't pay their full bill and end up having their balance rolled over into the costs of the dun-dun-dun insured patients, causing their deductibles to constantly go up and eventually forcing their private insurance to dump them to maintain their profits, creating more uninsured Americans.Thus continuing this vicious cycle that will effectively bankrupt the middle class one catastrophic illness at a time. One uninsured patient costs an insured person about $375, a family $1000. The uninsured cost the insured to the tune of about $43 billion a year and steadily rising.

And let's get something straight here, the genesis of the AHA started in the Heritage Foundation in the mid 80's, before it came to be known as Obamacare 2010 it was called Heritage Consumer Choice Health Plan in 1993 and then Romneycare in 2006, and no one was calling it unconstitutional on the right... all the way up to 2007! Republicans have been working on and been FOR this plan since 1989,1993 and 2007, which is why there isn't a single payer option. IT IS THEIR PLAN. But because it happened under Obama, its creeping socialism and not conservative ideology.

Which is just another example at how masterful Republicans are at creating and maintaining the narrative and the Democrats just cannot.

Last edited by electriclite; 11-13-2012 at 06:59 PM..
  #79  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:29 PM
Well if you are going under the same medicare sysem as Australia and this is what Ombama wanted for Americans

it is true it does help the poor but there is a thresh hold of how much you earn

it can be around 30,000 dollars year in Australia if you are high than this you can not gwet this

But if you are on a very high income you shouldnt need medicare

Also in Australai we have pubic and private hospitols so even if you have a high wage you can go into a public hospitol and still have treatment for nothing
  #80  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
It does in fact qualify you. What else do you think the government should give you? A free car so you can go to the free doctor? Free clothing to wear to that doctor? Well you are gonna need gas to get there too so along with EBT, free medical care, free clothing, free car, you now need an EBT card for gas too.

At what point (I doubt you ever have) do you say to yourself, holy crap I am literally not responsible for a single thing in my entire life because Obama gives me everything. From your attitude though that would seem to make you happy, instead of realizing just how pathetic that really is.
I was waiting for the part about pedophiles. And it never came.
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump