Political Thread

[ButtonDog]

Originally Posted by Otiluke

moiramarie,

I earlier posted a blog about Jimmy Carter being the worst president in the 20th century. I listed about 10 reasons. Go back and address each one. And, about your allusion to Bush, I specifically said 20th century, for a reason.

As for ratings of countries, most often the ratings you sight are generated in a way that purposefully weights European socialism and derates capitalism. I can come up with a rating system that will make the US seem like the best in nearly everything. Would you believe it?

It was Republicans pushing for more regulation on the FM's. It was Democrats that consistently stood in the way. By the way, most Wall Street deregulation you ostensibly decry was passed during the Clinton administration.

You purposefully ignore the government role in the collapse of the economy. As I stated, the FM's, in many cases, controlled the market for the trading of these fraudulently rated securities. And the financial accounting employed by the FM's, if done by a private company, would earn the scorn of every liberal in this country, make Enron look like a lemonade stand, immediately result in criminal charges.

How come liberals like you decry the cost of the wars and complain about the debt caused by them, but then make statements about how we should have used that "imaginary" money for social programs?

There is a stark difference between providing a societal safety net and providing cradle-to-grave welfare. I am agreeable to the former and strongly opposed to the latter. The healthcare now being debated in much more the latter. Additionally, it completely disregards even the most basic of economic truths. In short, the healthcare bills have nothing to do with providing for the citizens of the US. The bills are aimed at gaining control over the citizens of the US and creating a permanent political class (oligarchy). They are tools for corruption.

The above argument is what differentiates the European models of social health care from the US bills. The European models were set up in the aftermath of WWII and though terribly imperfect, are far superior than the current bills. What you don't realize is that Europe has paid a high price for its social systems because it is near impossible to compare what could have been to what is. What we can say with certainty, however, is that the standard of living for US citizens in every quintile of income is higher than in Europe.

The last paragraph say's it all. People are making the assumption that because of the title of the health care bills they must be good bills. When you read them you recognize that they aren't good bills and actually makes health care worse and more expensive to the working poor than it already is.

We need health care reform, but we don't need bad health care reform.

These bills do nothing to lower the cost of health care to individuals. In fact the cost will actually rise for everybody except those that are able to work, but refuse to work. The working poor will still see no relief from the high cost of health care, the retired living on Social Security and depending on Medicare will see no relief from their co-pay or monthly premiums that is held out of their Social Security checks to pay for their Medicare.

Those that are able to work, but refuse to work though will now be eligible for Medicare starting at age 55 without having to pay the monthly premium that those surviving on Social Security must pay and they won't lose their Medicaid coverage doing so. They will be double dipping from the health care programs at no cost to themselves. The tax payers will be paying their premiums for them.

These bills will make things worse, not fix them.

"An oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) (oligocracy) is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military, or religious hegemony. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (ὀλίγος olígos) and "rule" (ἀρχή arkhē). Such states are often controlled by politically powerful families whose children are heavily conditioned and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy".

we all somehow agree on the health care being proposed by both your houses of congress. i do hope that the senator from vermont (independent) holds fast and does not vote with the dems on this bill. the only bill that would benefit the american society is a single payer universal health care bill or medicare for all. as long as the insurance companies run the government of the united states no meaning reform will happen. and that will not change unless you get election reform. that will happen when former govenor palin stops denying global warming. as you understand from my posting the definition of an oligarchy, that is the system you now have.

i find it rather odd how ordinary citizens ( i am assuming persons with millions of dollars are not writing blogs here) show such great concern over a welfare recipient. they cost your society a small fraction compared to the corporate welfare receiving tax payer funds. a perfect example is the insurance industry you want to keep their power over you. that is where my anger is directed in my country .........the corporate welfare.

i am an American I do not like the term of hyphen american. afro american mexican american. either youre american or not. i will vote 3rd party from now on. . the republicans now dont have a clue with america tilting left towards socialism. the dem party has been taken over by left wing radical whacko's. so whats our next move? hey btw i went to mcdonald today bought a happy meal and won the nobel peace prize ...woot woot

LapSteel,

While is strongly share your vomitous disgust with some of the Republicans, let me urge you to continue to vote for them. But don't do so blindly. Get involved in your local congressional races and find out who, if any, are primary competitors are of the persuasion you find most acceptable. Inevitably, you will find no one with whom you agree with all the time, but if your congressional representative is less then stellar, then put your weight (and time and energy) behind the competitor who is best suited in your view.

If that person loses, oh well. That is what elections are for. Then, and I know this is a bitter pill to swallow, vote for your Republican. Voting for a third party will only ensure the election or re-election of the Democrats that are steering this country so far left.

With all regards...

This is kinda funny - I went away 8 months ago or so as almost the only voice against this god-awful administration and now I come back and it's just one lone Canadian socialist trying to defend the ridiculous concept that wealth is to be distributed and not earned. Where is everyone else? What happened to all of these people who kept beating me down telling me Obama and the dems were the 2nd coming? Where are all the people who said the economy would get better under Obama? Where are all the people who said that the mortgage crisis would end? And that unemployment would go down? And that we would be out of Iraq? Where are you?

As for all of you liberals and socialists out there here is a little lesson in 7th grade economics. Read and Enjoy.

Just A Little Company Get-Together – a MUST read! | No Bull, No Bias

Ciao!

[ButtonDog]

Originally Posted by moiramarie

"An oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) (oligocracy) is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military, or religious hegemony. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (ὀλίγος olígos) and "rule" (ἀρχή arkhē). Such states are often controlled by politically powerful families whose children are heavily conditioned and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy".

we all somehow agree on the health care being proposed by both your houses of congress. i do hope that the senator from vermont (independent) holds fast and does not vote with the dems on this bill. the only bill that would benefit the american society is a single payer universal health care bill or medicare for all. as long as the insurance companies run the government of the united states no meaning reform will happen. and that will not change unless you get election reform. that will happen when former govenor palin stops denying global warming. as you understand from my posting the definition of an oligarchy, that is the system you now have.

i find it rather odd how ordinary citizens ( i am assuming persons with millions of dollars are not writing blogs here) show such great concern over a welfare recipient. they cost your society a small fraction compared to the corporate welfare receiving tax payer funds. a perfect example is the insurance industry you want to keep their power over you. that is where my anger is directed in my country .........the corporate welfare.

Welfare for those that are able to work, but refuses to work is wrong regardless if is corporate welfare or just plain lazy people that refuse to work when they are able to.

Health care is not a right. Free health care is something somebody, somewhere is paying for. Freedom of speech, religion, or press are rights. Nobody else is paying for them. Nobody has a right to expect others to pay for what they receive free.

Health care reform is needed, but it should be better than what we have now. The current bills before the House and Senate makes things worse than the current situation. I have read the House Bill several times. The Senate Bill Harry Reid refuses to allow on line. What is in the Senate Bill that they are afraid of the American people seeing?

Something else that has not been addressed in the Health Care bills. That's the issue of most retirement accounts of our retired citizens are retirement programs bought through the insurance companies. What happens to those in their 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's whose income is through those insurance retirement programs they put money into all of those working years?

The biggest fraud is committed by those that are able to work, but refuse to work. They are stealing from the working poor, the disabled, and the retired.

<img src=http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q290/capricorngod29/Obama_Im_with_Stupid.jpg>

if you google corporate welfare, you can find out the exact numbers re corporate welfare vs individual welfare. not even in one's wildest imagination could one think ( and be correct ) individual welfare is greater than corporate welfare.

Just one article of many i copied and pasted:

"The federal government spent $92 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to businesses and private- sector corporate entities — expenditures commonly referred to as "corporate welfare" — in fiscal year 2006. The definition of business subsidies used in this report is broader than that used by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis, which recently put the costs of direct business subsidies at $57 billion in 2005. For the purposes of this study, "corporate welfare" is defined as any federal spending program that provides payments or unique benefits and advantages to specific companies or industries.

Supporters of corporate welfare programs often justify them as remedying some sort of market failure. Often the market failures on which the programs are predicated are either overblown or don't exist. Yet the federal government continues to subsidize some of the biggest companies in America. Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, General Electric, and others have received millions in taxpayer-funded benefits through programs like the Advanced Technology Program and the Export-Import Bank. In addition, the federal crop subsidy programs continue to fund the wealthiest farmers."

again i am very proud i live in a country where health care is a right. i do believe all the countries in the developed world offer this human right to it's citizens. it is only in the usa where "free health care clinics" who service citizens in the third world nations must come on american soil to offer health care to it's citizens. i would be very ashamed to live in a country like that.

just a guess as to what will happen to the seniors if medicare fails............they will do the same as the seniors who had all their savings in enron. ( remember bush's buddy )

welcome back

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN










welcome back

Originally Posted by moiramarie

if you google corporate welfare, you can find out the exact numbers re corporate welfare vs individual welfare. not even in one's wildest imagination could one think ( and be correct ) individual welfare is greater than corporate welfare.

Just one article of many i copied and pasted:

"The federal government spent $92 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to businesses and private- sector corporate entities — expenditures commonly referred to as "corporate welfare" — in fiscal year 2006. The definition of business subsidies used in this report is broader than that used by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis, which recently put the costs of direct business subsidies at $57 billion in 2005. For the purposes of this study, "corporate welfare" is defined as any federal spending program that provides payments or unique benefits and advantages to specific companies or industries."

I am not certain of what you meant to say, but here in the states, it comes as no surprise that welfare payments of all kinds far outweight what you call "corporate welfare". According to 2008 federal government figures, welfare payments of all kinds (social security, medicare, medicaid, housing, food stamps, etc.) totaled $1.65T or roughly 55% of the entire budget. You seem to be upset over a mere $57B. Given the demographic trends (more elderly than young people), the upward trend in government spending on welfare programs will continue to increase. I am not saying that every welfare dollar spent is unjustifiable, merely that the total amount spent is enormous and causes a tremendous distortion in the free market for priorities.

Originally Posted by moiramarie

Supporters of corporate welfare programs often justify them as remedying some sort of market failure.

I don't know a single supporter of corporate welfare, as you define it, that uses the argument you state above. Actually, I would argue that there is no such thing as corporate welfare as you define it unless a receiving company gets more money from the government in tax breaks than it pays in taxes. You seem to believe that all money is the property of the government. Thus, when a company gets a tax break, you can claim it is welfare.

I, on the other hand, believe that any money received by a company for the sale of its products and services, is the property of the company. Government then steps in and takes some away. If the government takes less of the profits, all for the better. Why? Companies provide jobs with profits. If companies' profits are lowered through taxation, then they provide fewer jobs. Seems like a small price to pay for job creation. Besides, and I don't expect you to understand it, taxed income is immoral in it very nature.

you misunderstood the discussion on corporate welfare. it was in response to a belief that someone who receives taxpayer monies and somehow cheats the system is not forgiveable. my response is and always will be that corporate welfare is much worse. but you are entitled to your opinion and you pay the taxes that subsidize these corporate welfare companies (not i). and you also know who pays most of the tax burden in your country. and giving these tax breaks and ludicrous deals to your companies ( just look at how your defense department has robbed tax paying citizens of billions). and huge tax breaks to 1% of the richest people really has worked well for the american people, as the world has seen. that is why your unemployment rate is so low and the world should take copious notes to show their bankers how money should be handled. those tax breaks really have created good paying jobs with benefits the last decade..................eh.

you are correct about income tax, not sure if moral is the right word. your constitution does not allow for taxing a man's sweat. but then there are a few things your constitution says and is not followed. especially this last decade.....eh?


when i heard this crime on the news yesterday i had to post it here and wonder if american thinking is like nazi thinking when it comes to work. i was even told earlier that christianity supports this view? i answered not my christianity views.

"The sign from the gates of the Auschwitz death camp has been stolen.

Poland yesterday vowed to recover 'at all costs' the 15ft metal inscription Arbeit Macht Frei - Work Sets You Free."

Read more: 'Arbeit Macht Frei' sign over Auschwitz is stolen, prompting fears Nazis took it | Mail Online

climate change............my country, rightfully so, should be ashamed of it's lack of commitment to lowering our carbon footprint. our economic greed will destroy the world. don't worry about mortgaging your grandchildren's future, if we don't get control of global warming there is no future. it would be nice if our leader (conservative) was pushing for alternative sources of energy. the only bright spot will be if america develops and implements alternative sources of energy. this will force us to stop the insane "drill baby drill" mentality here. being your largest supplier of oil is causing the short sighted view of economic growth at the cost of destroying our future generations of fresh air and water.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN