-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous Contents of My Bag of Chips | What your friends do when you are sick Next »
» 340 TPS Reports
Leave a Reply
-
Latest Comments
John on Construction Site Hand Si… cantab on Portion Sizes Have Grown, and … Mettan on Construction Site Hand Si… Otterlore on Strange Facts About Our Feline… Otterlore on Strange Facts About Our Feline… Name is Required on So You’re Playing Diablo… Brian on Forever Unemployed JediLink on The Cost Is Nothing Compared t… JediLink on And Yet He Knows the Names of … Mrcvak on Portion Sizes Have Grown, and … Me_Gusta_Nicht on Cat Fur, Cat Fur Everywhe… natalie on Venn Diagram of Tastiness natalie on Portion Sizes Have Grown, and … flonkertonchamp on Portion Sizes Have Grown, and … FlonkertonChamp on Portion Sizes Have Grown, and … 
Cheezburger Company Blog
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
When will people learn, its not THAT you killed a fly, its HOW MANY flies you killed. Leave him alone for killing one… in fact I want to see a celebration if he kills more. Tell me none of those people in the media never killed a fly nor any other creature for **** sakes!
do you know how his wife and 19 children feel? obamas a murderer. june 16, 2009 2:35pm – june 16, 2009 7:29pm… Poor fly : (
yes… they must be mourning… i really feel for them at this difficult time
having to live with such a fly murdering bastard
its terrible
and this man rules our country
what has the world come to?!
originality fail? That exact joke was on either the Colbert Report or John Stewart’s show.
Colbert, it was. I saw it. It was sarcasm.
No no no, Colbert does stuff not in sarcasm, he just does it in a way that makes it funny, while still getting his point across. Well, at least for a lot of things.
at first I read this reply and thought it was sarcasm.. so I will give the reply in how it should have been written…
No! Colbert isn’t sarcastic, people just laugh cause he’s so humorous because he’s ironic
we shouldn’t leave him alone,
what is the message that he sends out to our youth?
he’s a criminal
Let the irrational (especially from any PETA freaks), off-topic, political flame wars begin!
I am a PETA freak, but could care less about the fly. Its the graph’s use of ‘socialize USA’ that is stupid. Another idiot fear-mongering about socialism. Fail.
Obama is a socialist. Any government leader who tries to take control of private businesses and tax people into poverty is.
But you’re probably on welfare, so why would you care.
You wouldn’t know the definition of “socialist” if it walked up and whacked you in the face with a jack boot.
socialists don’t have jack boots. That’s fascists.
Hammer and sickle, then. Same end of ignorance.
*sigh*
Brian Moore hasn’t endorsed any of Obama’s policies.
I love your comment of ignorance while stating that the symbol of socialism is *obviously* the hammer and sickle.
I point this out because you’re thinking of communism. The CORRECT symbol for socialism would be a red flag. People are too stupid to understand that you NEED a little socialism in your country to be successful. Don’t go mad at me with questions about equality, because if it’s not obvious that I’m not suggesting that, say nothing at all.
Oh… and about the fly. Who cares?
True this, insofar as standard cliches go, but those Soviet military did have some awesome boots.
you’re stupid.
“a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of PRODUCTION and DISTRIBUTION, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.”
~Dictionary.com
Socialism is not the distribution of tax money to those who need it. A socialist government controls how much produce/whatever a company is allowed to make and sell, and then regulates the prices on various things.
As opposed to Capitalism, which is “an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.”
~(Dictionary.com again, I didn’t feel like paraphrasing…)
And I’d like to point out that that dude is probably not on welfare. And accusing people of having financial problems is pretty rude.
Very good, very good.
I like the little “Socialism is not the distirbution of tax money to those who need it.” Why do they need it? Why can’t they EARN it? Let me guess the Rich “get or win” their money?
Ever heard of disability claims? Some people /can’t/ get a job, and not just people with disabilities. Are you saying that a single mother should abandon her two year old and go work so she can “earn” her living. And before you say she should put her in daycare I’m going to point out that people on welfare can’t afford daycare.
maybe the single mother shouldnt have had a child if she couldn’t support it
You’re talking about people who NEED economic support and to support your claim you use a single mother? Come on, you can do better than that.
Nice, but there are many definitions of socialism including this one from dictionary.com:
“Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.”
It can mean exactly what us “fear mongering right wingers” are talking about.
And you’all know it to; jeez. It couldn’t be more obvious what Obama is doing. He’s systematically instituting HIS brand of SOCIALISM. If that’s your thing, you go have at it. I’ll be joinging the revolution thank you very much.
“It can mean exactly what us “fear mongering right wingers” are talking about. ”
It *could* mean anything, but it doesn’t. Honestly, “socializing” essential services is a time-honored tradition in the United States (among other places). For examples, see fire and police services, water management, department of public works, etc.
Healthcare is an “essential service” as much an any of the other items I just mentioned, so it’s pretty easy to see how splitting the burden of a medical system would make sense in the same way that splitting the burden of police services does.
Also, if you’re going to quote the whole Merriam-Webster entry, please do that:
“1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done”
You’ll notice that none of that sounds even remotely like anything the president has proposed.
*raises hand* There are actually 12 definitions of “socialism”. It depends on where you focus it. China has a socialist government but their economy is very capitalistic.
Those who need it? Why? Why can’t the people as a WHOLE be better and GIVE to the poor, or PROMOTE their learning instead of feeding them money, People need to shape up, become better people, and help the disabled people for themselfs instead of the government doing it for us, and they often do screw up along the way. It would be better in our own hands, Obama is defineltly Democratic Socialist. http://www.oldhippie.com/photos/data/560/medium/socialism1.jpg So true.
At least in my opinion
And since Obama isn’t doing either of those things, how does that make him a socialist?
well…he did manage to kick out the CEO of GM…so isn’t that the government taking over industry? Isn’t this technically socialism when that happens? and isn’t he also pushing for a new health-care plan which involves the government providing the citizens with health care, which in itself is socialism, as the government is once more taking over a certain industry…and refresh my memory, but isn’t the reason most people come over to the US for medical treatment because they don’t have to deal with the socialized medicine practices of the rest of the world, which almost require you to be on your deathbed before you get any treatment?…just saying…and don’t hate…
His administration has also done a number on the banking industry.
Excuse me, but that was more on the legislative branch, and happened during the PREVIOUS administration, to boot.
And many of the banks have repurchased the shares that the gov’t bought, with no quibbles at all. So if it was socialism, it’s short-lived.
Are you kidding me? Do you know how much of the taxpayer’s money AIG alone has? Don’t even get me started on Citi, BOA, and Wells Fargo.
“On your deathbed”? Are you serious? You know ZIP about other countries’ healthcare systems, obviously.
I know residents of the UK that have gotten breast reductions — while a matter of some importance, it certainly wasn’t a matter of life or death.
Breast reductions are unconstitutional.
Sometimes it is necessary, as in the case of cancer.
All the industries in which the federal government now holds a stake as a result of the Obama administration’s policies add up to a tiny fraction of the overall value of the US economy. Also the government-based health care program the administration has proposed would co-exist with conventional private insurance.
That hardly adds up to a government takeover of the US economy.
The health plan I’ve heard most about is the gov’t providing an *option* of purchasing health insurance from them, not health care. Quite the difference.
and who ends up paying for this when everyone is going with this “option” because it’s the most logical? Then what have we? How will the health care industries in the private sector compete with the gov’t provided option?
The problem isn’t so much the plan that has been laid out….the problem is what it evolves into.
Why do you care? Do you hold a stake in the insurance companies? I can’t wait until the day when those scoundrels are put out of business.
umm, why should we care? cause the quality of health care will deteriorate immediately. liberals love to ignore the fact that we have the best doctors and hospitals in the world. good luck getting good health care from the u.s. government. name one thing the federal government has managed effectively that couldn’t, or hasn’t, been done more effectively in the private sector?
The point isn’t that we have good health care. It’s a question of affordability and availability. It’s always the people with access to health care that seem like they want to deny others what should be a right. Let’s see – “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…” I think health care could easily fall within the “life” part. And an argument could be made that access to health care falls within the “pursuit of happiness” part.
Um, actually, I live in texas, and they tried to privatise some of the governments functions, and it was an epic, epic failure. It costs us more than ever and doesnt get the job done as well.
Ummmm actually, you know which country which has the best doctors in the world? Cuba – a socialist country. Free (or at least low cost) healthcare for all is not socialist anyway, and even if it was – who the heck cares? It is a pretty basic right in most civilised countries.
“liberals love to ignore the fact that we have the best doctors and hospitals in the world.”
Here are the results of the World Health Organization’s analysis of the “best” health care system in the world: http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Since you clearly aren’t a fan of facts and you might not even check, the US is number 37.
Here’s some more information on the system in France: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92419273
I was saying he wasn’t one. And I’ve never heard someone who came here to escape bad health care; I don’t know where you heard that, but you might want a new source. Most of the countries who chose socialism happen to be dictatorships, and I’ve heard of people who moved to escape that, but more often than not foreign people I’ve met came here due to career choices.
Also, doing one thing that fits into a philosophy does not mean that you follow that philosophy. If I wear something from HotTopic, that doesn’t make me goth.
And “providing” health care, aka. paying for it, does not take over the health care industry. If anything, it’d be taking over the insurance industry, but my understanding of it is that we can still get private insurance if we can pay for it.
Ketdemon, here is a big one, Belinda Stronach, a major proprietor of centralized Canadian Health care. Canadians consistently wait long periods of time (as to Brits, for that matter), so she, a politician in part responsible for Canada’s health care system, had to come to the US to get treatment. Not to mention the testimonials from Canadian doctors about long wait times in Canadian health care.
What you, and all liberals lack, is foresight. Your heart is headed in the right direction, unfortunately your brain jack-knifed about 3 miles back.
So lets just keep paying high insurance rates or doctors bills without insurance. You make a lot of sense yourself falcon.
Since when did healthcare become a luxury item?
Belinda Stronach didn’t go to California to avoid a wait. RTFA:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070914/belinda_Stronach_070914/20070914
She went there to see a specialist, having been referred by her physician.
Conservative argument FAIL.
Unless you’ve actually received treatment at a hospital in a government healthcare controlled country you cannot talk about the practices. I have received healthcare and I was not anywhere on my death bed. The care I received was adequate. Not to mention it only cost $25. In the US it would have cost at least $60-$100.
Also, more insurance companies in the US keep people on their deathbeds until they die. They have no interest in actually treating the person, just in sticking the families with ridiculous bills. Frontline did a story on this a couple years ago. Look it up.
Actually, it isn’t, because even with the bailout the government doesn’t have a majority ownership of GM. Also, the proposed health-care plan would be in addition to existing private insurance for those who cannot afford it, not a replacement for existing insurance. Also, perhaps your memory does need to be refreshed, because while the United States spends more on health care as a percentage of GDP than any other country, that spending doesn’t equate to the highest standard of living or lifespan.
I’d like to congratulate and insult you for calling every president a socialist… really, you are that stupid
USA is a mixed economy. If people actually want true(r) capitalism then they would best be supporting people like Ron Paul.
Obama is more of the same essentially. To save what can be saved some of it needs to be nationalized. They can be sold (privatized) again later.
Bush would’ve done many things the same way…
Bush DID do some of the same. The 1st bailout happened under HIS administration.
Exactly. The ship was sinking and to repair it costs money.
Obama certainly didn’t create the economic mess, it was there even before he was elected.
Yeah he’s just spending money we don’t have to get out of it. Gotta spend money to make money (wait isn’t that what drove GM to the ground). Also should we talk about “Date Night” when the country is in recession he’s flying up to NY for a Date with his wife, costing the Tax payers money, CLASSIC EGO MANIAC. Obama is a tool!!!
No, we shouldn’t talk about date night. Sheesh. Let the man have a little time to destress and tend to his marriage, why don’t you? Family values, fulfilling promises, and all that. The world won’t fall apart because he takes a few hours off. The money is a drop in the bucket and well worth it, if it keeps the prez relaxed and able to govern.
“Date Night”? Come on. Obama flies to New York to see his wife once time in the five months he’s been in office — meanwhile Bush took *how* many vacations to his Crawford, TX ranch on the taxpayers’ dime over the years? He went to Crawford something like forty times in the first year alone.
Funny how the right wing radio hosts don’t bother to mention *that* little point, huh?
a) Bush at least stayed at his location for more than 2 days. Oh and it was his own HOUSE.
b) I wasn’t happy about that anyhows.
c) When you’re in a recession, and the President is telling AMericans they have to make sacrafices, and then he spends about $1 Million of tax payers money to have a “Date Night”, seems pretty hypocritical to me.
You think that the taxpayers footed the bill for his evening out? You’re a crackpot.
I’d like to see a breakdown of this “million dollar date”. Is it the cost of presidential security for any visit anywhere? Or do you infer that he dropped a million taxpayer dollars on Michelle for a nice evening out?
It’s the price tag to take out Air Force One/ Marine One, and all security measures. He piad for the night, WE paid to have them go out. Naoyusimi WHO do you think paid for the Fuel, the security to go with him, and all other “essentials”? He flipped the bill for the show, whoopee. If I take a date out I pay for the gas in my car, the tolls, etc…..
You’re a moron. That same “million dollars” you’re talking about that Obama has allegedly used ONCE for personal reasons, is about 1/200th of what the previous president used. So what if Bush went to his own house in Crawford? He went to it ALL THE TIME!
You just said that Bush’s trip was okay because he spent more than 2 days on vacation and it was his own house. Then you turn around and say Obama’s isn’t okay because “we paid to have them go out.” You don’t think “we” paid for Air Force One/Marine One, the fuel, and the security every time Bush went?? Get a clue man. Finally, you complain that Obama did all this for only one night and it was better that Bush went for more than 2 days. However, your other post in this thread complains that he shouldn’t have taken off any time at all because of the recession in this country. Nevermind all those days Bush spent in Crawford during the recession and during other tough times for the country though, I’m sure it was a well-deserved rest for such a brave, honest, good, hardworking president.
Maybe he should just get blowjobs from chubby interns? Also have you heard of John Maynard Keynes? LEARN TO ECONOMICS
The debt level was at at least 10 trillion before he took office. Two republicans are mainly responsible for that, Reagan and Bush 43 (taxcuts that are unfunded plus increase in military, neither hardly fiscally conservative).
As said, Obama needs to repair a sinking ship. And that costs.
I think you could make a good argument for calling Obama a Keynsian, but that’s a long way from being a Socialist.
Actually Bush’s bail out were loans, NOT purchasing of the companies. I’m sorry but since the Government now is the majority share holder in AIG, GM, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, I’d have to say the country is leaning away from Capitalism to Socialism/ Communism (redistribution of wealth to those that need it). Obama has taken liberties with the constitution and for those that don’t see, keep drinking the Kool Aid. Also the financial mess is years in the making, most of it start under Clinton with his “deregulation” of banks to help those poor unfortunate souls purcahse a house, even though they can’t afford it. Once again liberals, home ownership is not a RIGHT it’s a Privelege… use it wisely.
Bush & legislature did the first bailout, and some were loans, some were “capital infusions”, so they could get lending again, which they promptly DID NOT.
Bush is the one who took liberties with the Constitution! Suspending habeas corpus? WTF is that?
“… most of it start under Clinton with his “deregulation” of banks to help those poor unfortunate souls purcahse a house, even though they can’t afford it.”
Au contraire … much of it started under REAGAN, with HIS deregulation of the banking and credit industry.
Actually, some easing of the regulations I still see as a good thing . . . but I have a personal stake in it. I purchased my home with 100% financing. I don’t think that’s any reflection on whether a person can afford a home, just of the difficulty in saving huge amounts of money beforehand. So, here I am, nearly 6 years later, in the same home, every single payment on time.
Mr. Peanut Butter: It’s easy to see—with comments like, “Once again liberals, home ownership is not a RIGHT it’s a Privelege… use it wisely”, and others—that you think “liberals” is a name for everything stupid and wrong with the world. I’d be willing to bet that, of those who misused credit or those who lost their homes due to foreclosure, there were a wide variety of political beliefs. Stop making such senseless accusations.
Naoyusimi: I was referring to the liberals who believe EVERYONE is entitled to what they WANT vice what they earn. I don’t see Conservatives saying, HEY TAX ME FOR WELFARE!!!!! Far right conservatives are too busy bible thumping. I’m sure conservatives lost their homes too, but this whole MESS was due to the LIBERAL belief that the system was out to “get the little guy”. Anyone who can not see that a lot of good intended practices ARE not practical. The banks were greedy, but also people were greedy to feel they were entitled to a home they couldn’t afford. I would have loved to take the loan the bank offerred, but instead went much much less expensive and own a home that is smaller than I’d like, but at least I can afford it.
So as someone who is so adamantly against socialism… You’re going to decline Medicare coverage and donate your Social Security checks to… I dunno, the Hitler foundation or something?
I’ll decline Medicare (since I’ll have Health Care when I retire due to my benefits), and I’d rather take the Social Security taxes I’m paying today and invest in my own future thanks. Dave funny how you don’t realize that you’ll end up paying more into social security than you’ll get. And a rue idioso who doesn’t understand the system, NOT everyone gets Social Security, you have to become eligible for it, ie when you’ve put more into the system that YOU’LL EVER see back.
You know when you insult strangers, you completely lose any credibility having valid points might give you. Oh, and making assumption that someone doesn’t understand how the system works isn’t a valid point to begin with in this case, so never mind. Let’s examine some of the other government provided services with Socialist aspects… Public schools. Even if you don’t have kids, or do have kids and don’t use the system, you are receiving benefit from the education of the people who will be providing you services most of your life. Cops. The Fire Department. The military, interstates. All things everyone uses, directly or indirectly, far from privatized. All socialist programs, none of which have destroyed the fabric of America, and have done more to better this nation than sending good Americans to deserts to kill brown people to protect the interests of Oil execs and, of course, dear ole Dad.
So wait you talk about insulting someone? “You’re going to decline Medicare coverage and donate your Social Security checks to… I dunno, the Hitler foundation or something?” So isnce I’m against Socialism I’m a Nazi? How is that not insulting. I was going by your response you don’t understand Social Security, b/c you actually made the dumb ass remark to say I would be getting a check. By the time I’m elligble it’ll be gone, and or only for those who didn’t create a 401K (once again planners bailing out the unplanners).
As I said I’d love to get the federal government out of everything except National Defense. That includes Military, Intelligence, Interstate Crime, that’s all I’m supposed to be taxed for by the Fedral Government (check that pesky ole document the Constitution). NEXT State Level social programs is not Socialist (needs to be on a federal level). And did you know that some towns have an ALL VOLUNTEER fire department, so they are not paid individuals. Please tell me, when was the last time you passed an interstate construction zone and seen ALL the people working? That’s the government’s money right there being WASTED, so yeah it has helped to destroy the fabric of America.
Really about Iraq and Oil, have you seen any of that Oil? Hmm I sure haven’t, look Oil prices are going back up, must be b/c Iraq is GIVING so much to AMerica….. perhaps, just perhaps Sadam was showboating and trying to make it look like he had WMD (you know to seem a bad ass), so Bush, hoping to prevent another catastrophe (helped largely by Mr. Clinton and his dissection of the CIA and NSA) by not letting “brown people” who want to see our country burn get such weapons. Just perhaps… maybe… I don’t know though it doesn’t fit into your idolized kool aid liberal view that unless you’re a tree hugging, tax hungry, give me what’s yours you’re evil type.
Woo- way to go Godwin’s Law.
“(since I’ll have Health Care when I retire due to my benefits),”
Yeah, if the company you work for doesn’t decide to take them away, as so many have done. Because “they can’t afford it”, anymore. Oh, GM was one. Retirees have lost their health benefits all over the country. I probably couldn’t list all the companies that have taken away benefits. But hey—YOU’LL be fine. I’m sure. You’re sure, right?
Yes actually I will be fine. Only 3 more years, and yes I’ll have no problem with my health benefits.
Wow, you have a lot of faith, assuming that you’ll have no problem with health benefits for the rest of your life. You must be 100% sure that the company you work for will not only be fine for the next three years, but also for many years in the future until your death. Out of curiosity, who do you work for, that you can have that much confidence in their leadership and benefits?
Health care when you retire, from benefits.
Union, perhaps? Or a civil service pension . . .
That’s not just socialist, it is flat-out communism!
LOL, that’s some funny satire. You really had me going for a minute, I actually thought you were that stupid! Well done!
Wow, congratulations. You’re a complete moron with no understanding of economics. Please shut up now.
Lol. Socialism is a real concern. Capitalism is what made this country great. and Socialism is what will ruin it all. We will be like any other country. And all the people who died for freedom will have died in vain. You will be told what you can and cannot do. Someone will decide whats best for you, not yourself. Do you even know what socialism is? Read about it or shut the hell up. You care nothing about freedom.
Stolen land (with abundant natural resources), incredible transportation abilities, and forced labor didn’t hurt.
Oh, that’s a hole-in-WIN!!
Being a PETA freak throws you in with the rest of us idiots as you call us. If you haven’t seen the Homeland security lexicon regarding Homegrown terrorists, animal rights activists are on the list right along with us that support the Constitution. One must wonder why they would do that to those who believe in protecting animals and those that believe in what this country is founded on…don’t you think?
Before you quickly buy into what the media and politicians sells you, don’t you think it might be of benefit to you personally to see what the so called fear mongering is all about? and who is really doing it?
Unless of course you are a socialist and think that that is a good thing. History has a few for you to reference…Carl Marx to begin with.
Be well
I’m actually sorry to hear you’re a “PETA freak,” as it was put.
I prefer actual animal-rights groups, like the Humane Society and the SPCA. PETA has killed several hundred healthy animals for every 1 that is allowed to be adopted (and those are usually to help its PR). The president of PETA has openly stated that she thinks owning pets is akin to slavery, and that domestic pets should be released into the wild (where they would starve and die because they’re not evolutionary able to survive the wilderness).
She also supports eco-terrorists, and advocates criminal activity in the name of animal “liberation.” And yet, nothing is said about the puppy mills and actual animal cruelty going on all the time. (No, I’m not talking about the “cruelty” of people being omnivores by nature.)
The SPCA and Humane Society, however, use the system to wage legal and legislative battles against puppy mills and animal mistreatment. They encourage no-kill shelters, while PETA puts thousands of healthy animals to death every year.
In 2007 (or 2008, I’ll have to bring up the article), PETA only tried to find homes for 7 animals out of over 2000 they ‘rescued.’ The rest, they killed without even trying to find homes for them.
Plus, I’ve been attacked by PETA members with paint for wearing an IMITATION leather jacket. So not only did they break the law by assaulting me, they did it for nothing.
So yea, I’m a little bitter at the pseudo-animal rights group called PETA. I’m sure YOU mean well, but the people that run it do not.
There has been no coverage on his “Socializing the USA” because he hasn’t socialized it. It’s like saying that there hasn’t been any coverage on my ability to fly and speak Atlantian – because it doesn’t exist.
Excellent response
Are you saying that America isn’t Social? Heck, we go to most parties (that we’re invited to.) We can usually hang out with other countries without attacking them (recent history not withstanding.)
Goddamn you are built out of win!
So the Government having 60% Shares of GM is not a form of Socialism? Or perhaps having controlling shares in AIG? So the Governement controlling private industry is NOT socialsim? Or perhaps him sayin ghe wants to “nationalize” healthcare, isn’t a form of Socialism? I’m all ears here. Oh and JK, your insults don’t count as retorts to my FACTS!
Hey, if the government has 60% shares of GM, and the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people, then—where are MY shares? Where’s mah moneh?!
Oh, that’s right: 60% of nothing is nothing. Damn math.
You say this as if the government has never held a stake in any private industry until now. Tobacco companies, health insurance companies, major media groups, pharmaceutical companies, the list goes on.
The government has NEVER owned a controlling share within a comapny. The Government has given subsidies and grants, NOT purchase a company. There is a BIG DIFFERENCE. If Obama wanted GM to start building more fuel efficient cars (which isn’t too far fetched), he can make GM do that, without having to go through the whole Checks and Balance system of Bills and Laws. That doesn’t scare you? So you’re saying Obama making companies fire CEOs is a good thing? You trust Obama enough to run you banking? Sorry the guy just fired the IG without 30 days notice (which was one of the few bills he actually voted on besides “Present”), to stop him from looking into a scandal by one of his friends. Yeah I REALLY want this guy in charge of businesses, b/c his ethics ARE stupendous.
excellent response.
Here’s what I don’t get. GM was begging for help – if the government didn’t do something, they were going to fold. So the government does something they are asked to do, and people get pissed about it.
And so what if the government currently holds 60% of shares in GM as part of the bailout? GM is one company (that is effectively bankrupt right now anyway). It’s not as though having 60% of GM means they have controlling interest in every company in the United States. Big deal. If and when GM gets their act together and starts making cars that people are willing to buy at prices people are willing to pay, they’ll get in the black again and buy those shares right back.
I Like Peanut Butter, I’ve read most (if not all) of your posts in these discussions, and I have to say your logic is fatally flawed. If Obama wanted GM and other companies to build more fuel efficient cars, that is a good thing any way you slice it. Good for the environment, good for the consumer, good for the country (because we can cut down on the billions of barrels of oil we import from other countries). If he decides to do that, he won’t make GM the only company that has to. It will go through the same checks and balances process as every other law, and will be required of any company that wishes to sell vehicles in the United States. You act like Obama himself has 60% of GM and is going to start making radical redesigns of the corporation.
Furthermore, in regards to the firing of CEOs, we’re talking about guys who are effectively criminals. Screwing employees out of benefits, pensions, and health care, circumventing laws designed to keep companies from destroying the planet, creating tax shelters, embezzling company funds…the list goes on from there. Some of these criminal CEOs deserve a lot less than being fired without 30 days notice, they deserve to be hung from the Empire State Building. You show me a CEO that gives his employees a 30 day notice before laying them off – I know people who got laid off from companies two years ago with no notice, ten days before Christmas. Meanwhile, you’ve got CEOs buying $12,000 coat racks and selling all their stock options three days before the company announces it’s biggest losses in history. Don’t act like these white-collar criminals are being treated unjustly.
did he actually kill the fly? I thought he only swatted at it. Shoot – if you can really KILL the darn things by swatting at them, I’ve been wasting money on citrenella candles for camping :/
Yes he killed it, after swatting it it landed on his hand and he smacked it good… then they did a closeup of the dead fly on the carpet.
It had to have been a very slow news week for that to be the biggest thing going on.
socializing just .21 % of banksmeans .21% of news coverage.
i lovedthe fly thing though! i miss silly news! giveme my daily show!
George Bush engineered a war that killed far less than .21% of Iraqis. It got far more than .21% of the news coverage.
But that’s because no one cares about banks.
Common sense: Human lives > banks/ money.
not necessarily. the value of a human life was calculated to be $129,000 per year as of last year. adjust for inflation, do the math and see if you’re right.
Esp. “adjust for inflation” … Americans are vastly “inflated” these days.
I find it kind of disturbing that a human life is worth less than a lot of the houses on the market a couple of years ago. What is the world coming to???
socialize USA? i think that hasn’t gotten much media coverage because he isn’t trying to do it. hrrmm. however, there has been plenty of right-wing media coverage of the fantastical idea that he just might, someday. dead flies are easier to understand, anyway.
hmmm…not trying eh? What about socialized medicine or government controlled auto industry.
Seems a little like socialism to me.
If you’re so afraid of socialism, then you can’t have the post office, social security, or public schooling, for starters. Why don’t up the definition of socialism, it’s not communism you know…
Fine. Then privately owned companies would fill in the needed gaps and nothing would change, except that the quality of service would be drastically higher than we get from those gov’t agencies.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH HA HA HA private companies. You know how much you’re gonna pay to mail a letter to a private company? You think 45 cents is a lot? You’re gonna be paying a buck or two each if that gets privatized.
You know nothing about economics. If there wasn’t SOME socialism, then the GDP in this country would be static. Education will especially be hit hard and that would cause the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. With no middle class, this country would fail.
JK….you just listed several talking points noted on the huffington post blog. The funny thing about economics is, it’s all theoretical. And regarding the middle class, you are correct. Socialism destroys the middle class. It creates haves and have nots. The American economic system created a large middle class of have somes. I Agree that Bush started the bailouts…however what is the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. I pity the left. The only political ticket the have run on in the past 20 years has been change. Now that they won…they have proven that it was just empty promises.
Thank you for a nice response.
What I find to be accurate is that there cannot be pure capitalism. Some socialized things are okay. It actually helps competition among private firms, which is another long argument that I do not want to type out.
Basically, health care should be just as education is. There should be SOME private and most government run. That way, those who want “better health care” can pay for it, and those that prefer the minimum can get it for free.
To end this point with relevance to the graph, there’s no coverage on socialism, because there really isn’t any…
Good riddance. Get rid of Social Security, since they keep upping the age to get it. I’ll have to live to 80 to collect. My dad, a highly decorated war vet was ready to retire, and had the age moved up 1 1/2 years on him. What a farce.
Get rid of the Federal Schools, it’s not like they are effective. And the post office? Give me a break.
You are correct about socialism and communism not being the same. The NAZI’s were national socialists, and the Soviet’s were communists. And they hated each other. Does Obama’s socialist leanings mean we will have to invade Cuba?
Nazism != Socialism. Nazism = Fascism. Go back to school.
Wow, you definitely didn’t learn a thing in School.
The word Nazi was short for Nationalized Socialism.
But hey, with the way our school systems are Today – I wouldn’t doubt the fact you didn’t learn that.
Hitler may have been a dictator – but that doesn’t change what the word Nazi stood for.
Just because they called themselves Socialists doesn’t mean they were.
Quite honestly no one has managed to get true socialism right. Except maybe Jesus and Buddha, but I don’t think they really count
Oh, awesome! They totally count in my book!
The National Socialist party was about as “socialist” as the Democratic Republic of the Congo is either “democratic” or a “republic”.
Win.
Indeed.
“Talk amongst yourselves, I’ll give you a topic…”
haha, well played!
actually the nazi’s were a long way from true fascism. mussolini and the italian’s where much more fascists and the baathists in iraq were the closest to the “textbook” definition of fascism.
Uh, seems YOU need to go back to school. Or at least tune in to the History channel once in a while. Since I am half German, I think I would know. And the saddest thing, most of what the Obamasiah preaches now sounds just like what Hitler was saying about 1933. Except for the Sudatenland. This time the hated Jews will be the angry white males.
Smart comparison. Hitler (racist, anti-Semetic brutal dictator) v. Obama. That TOTALLY makes sense. Way to go, keep up the conspiracy theories.
Yes, smart comparison. Obama (Racist, anti semite with plans to castrate the American economy in order to become the messiah)
I am 100% German, even living there *gasp* Do I get cookies now?
The Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP) was never socialist.
TY for pointing that out, Rebecca. [But we still have plenty of "maroons" who won't believe you.]
Oh, by the way. Those “maroons?” Girl Scout cookies?
Pass me my cookies. I lived there too. There is even a town named after one of my ancestors. I have volksmarched all over the hunsreich, and have the medals stored away. One of the best times of my life.
I haven’t spoken or read German much in more than 20 years, and even I can see the word socialist in the name. That is what they stood for. and as usual, when one power takes control of the government, they take over. Happens every time. This is why our government is supposed to use checks and balances.
Since German is much easier for your to understand, and you don’t need an interpreter, go back and play the speeches of Herr Hitler in the 30′s. Might shock you how much he spoke of hope and change and change and hope and change and hope.
I’ll make a deal with you, tell me something American you might like, or want to try, and I’ll ship it to you. I haven’t had a decent Brautworst or brochen since 1981. Hawn AFB is no longer there, but Rodern is. I would love to see some pictures of it now. I still remember flying kites in the field between there and Mitzeborn. If you don’t know them off hand, they are about 12k out of Kirschburg.
” . . . and even I can see the word socialist in the name.”
Tired of pointing this out, Carolinian, but:
IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT A GROUP CALLS THEMSELVES, IT MATTERS WHAT THEY DO.
Yes, it matters what they did. Look at the 30′s. Before he became the messiah and destroyed Germany.
You, go! Git AFTER that STRAWMAN!!
Attack it! Yes, you’ve got it on the run! Oh, you made your point and skewered the strawman right through the heart!
Way to go.
Ok, so you resort to name calling when you are caught flat with your phony logic.
Do you even know anything about the 1930′s Germany? You keep trying to point to what Hitler did AFTER he became messiah.
I’m namecalling? Where?
I “keep trying to point to what Hitler did AFTER he became messiah”?? Where?
It’s beyond beyond time someone called Godwin’s Law on this exchange.
Do you have any other elements to your argument that don’t involve Nazis?
Well, the comments wont nest below your insults below, so here goes. Above is the very name calling you deny.
Sometimes, a Nazi needs to be called a Nazi. Or National Socialist. Because Adolf Hitler and worship of a government is what some of us are trying to avoid.
Yes, I have, and spoke of several. You even commented on the typo in one of them. You still have yet to respond to several. I’m waiting on how you try and squeeze socalisim into the Constitution. Individual freedom and mass hypnosis are not one and the same.
Oh, and the best for last, you keep trying to say that Hitler wasn’t a socialist. Yes, that is looking only to one point of time to suit you. He started out with the promise of shovel ready jobs. Ever hear of the Autobohn? Hope for the German people, once more be proud of thier great nation. Change you could believe in!
That is where you point to Hitler after he became Messiah, when you deny what he used to blind the people.
If you’re referring to “Git after that strawman”, above, you must be ignorant of the logical fallacy of that name. A straw man is a misrepresentation of a position in order to make that position easy to attack. By misrepresenting Nazis and making parallels with Obama’s decisions thus far, you’ve set up an easy-to-attack strawman. The problem is that the strawman is less than solid, it’s full of STRAW.
Making parallels can work for you, it may work to convince people who can’t think critically, too. I’m not sure how lengthy I want to get here (and no–why should I refute your every point? I never signed on for that; only to correct your assumptions that NAME=TRUTH), but have you ever seen the parallels drawn between Lincoln’s and Kennedy’s presidencies? Ooooh, scary. What a bunch of hocum! The problem is that it’s fluff, it’s froth, “it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” “Shovel-ready jobs” is a parallel that PROVES NOTHING. FDR had “shovel-ready jobs”, too, and dragged this country up by its bootstraps and got it going again (yes, I know, the recovery was not absolute, and the real “fix” was, seemingly, WWII). My grandparents and parents watched those jobs HELP the country, where nothing before helped. Hoover’s do-nothing, the-market-will-correct itself ideas were a disaster!
Sure, some businesses should fail. But when they ALL fail, WE ALL FAIL. Like dominoes, we’re all connected. I can’t believe there are still people out there who don’t understand that.
So, let me get this right, Justacarolinian. You’re saying that because Obama speaks of hope and change for 21st century America, he is the same as 1930s Adolf Hitler, who also spoke of hope and change?
Hope and change are words they both used to encourage the people of their respective countries, who were experiencing difficult economic times (albeit the current American economy is not nearly as poor as that of post-WWI Germany), recovering from major wars (though, we’re still stuck in ours), and coming out of a period of bad leadership (Bush and von Hindenburg – on this one, I think we may be about even). So, is it any surprise that both of them would use words like “hope” and “change” to keep the people’s heads up? I think not.
Obama’s use of words like hope and change do not make him a Nazi, a Socialist, a Communist, or any other thing you want to spin. They make him a leader who doesn’t want his citizens to give up and let things get even worse.
“Hope and change” are not synonymous with “Nazism and Socialism,” regardless of how many years you lived in Germany, how much German you speak, or how much you claim to know about history. Naoyusimi is right here, you need to stop the strawman tactics and provide some sensible comments.
Again responding to your below comment.
It’s amazingly ironic that you call me the strawman, when you are the one who keeps putting lipstick on the pig. Hitler and the Nazi’s were socialisits. No matter how much you try to change that fact, it’s still true. It’s like rain on your wedding day, or a free ride when you’ve already paid. It’s the good advice that you just didn’t take.
I’m not making paralells, Obama is. And once again you change the subject in order to avoid the truth.
I’m still waiting on you to answer where Socialisim fits into the Constitution of the Unites States of America. You know, that black fly in your Chardonay.
Oh, and you might call my actions “ironic” . . . but you’ve picked a poor song with which to emphasize your post, since most of the things in that song, esp. those you’ve quoted, are merely unfortunate, and NOT IRONIC.
In a way, it’s ironic that we’re butting heads over something, the accepted definition of which you just will not accept, and to underscore this, you try to use examples of irony which don’t fit the definition of ironic . . . either you have a real problem comprehending the meaning of things, or (I’m trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, here, since you seem to be fairly intelligent) you’re just having a really bad day.
You have a crappy history channel, Justacarolinian.
I’d pay the extra $5 for the factually accurate one.
“Since I am half German…” lol, what an incredibly unimportant fact to bring to the table. Kudos.
Extremely important. Tells you it means a lot to me to know both the good and bad of my heritage.
Take your $5 and try to get you a good psychiatrist that will help understand what keeps you from reading the subtitles on Hitler’s 1930′s speeches.
Again with the Hitler business. You’ve got to let it rest man. But since heritage seems so important to you, I’m about 90% German (my family is from Bad Oeynhausen), and I can clearly see you are in the wrong with some of these comparisons you are making here. Take some time to think about it.
If you are 90% German, I would presume you know the language. And if you don’t, that’s ok too. Go back and watch the speeches Hitler gave in the 30′s. You are clearly jumping to your opinion.
The nesting wont allow me to respond to your above comment. So here it is. It is more than just the 2 words of hope and change, but how they are used to seduce the masses into following blindly.
Socialisim, Communisim, Fascisim, Marxisim and all the totalitarian forms of Government have one thing in common. Big Government. Official control of the lives of citizens, and not liberty to do one’s will, so long as that will doesn’t interfere with others.
Maybe you can borrow that $5 from Danny and get you some glasses since you can’t clearly see the nose on your own face.
My genealogy is FULLA German–Bavaria, thank you–my GGG-grandfather came over in 1869, though, so while my grandfather spoke German at home when he was younger, by the time he was raising my father, he no longer spoke German all the time.
Socialism is NOT totalitarian. Where did you “learn” these things? Seriously. Just stop and do some reading. An unbiased source. I used “Encarta” above … I thought that was both fairly accurate and unbiased.
There are things I can’t remember now from college, but I think that socialism and communism are purely economic systems, and totalitarianism is a form of government, so they’re not even on the same playing field.
Ok, I’m going to address 2 of your posts in this reply. The Ironic song quotes were just a bit of humor.
Ok, I didn’t say that Socialisim and such were totalitarianisim. I was speaking to the various forms of government where government is the master, not the servant. And how they all have that in common. Seriously, read the posts before you respond. “Learn” the point of what some one is saying before you choose the unbiased source that supports your point of view. After all It’s not like the definitions have changed. You can go to 3-4 of the major accepted dictionary websites and get different views. Sometimes just in the primary meaning, sometimes in the 2nd or 3rd.
Ok, I don’t want to be insulting here, but come on.
to⋅tal⋅i⋅tar⋅i⋅an⋅ism
/toʊˌtælɪˈtɛəriəˌnɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [toh-tal-i-tair-ee-uh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
Use totalitarianism in a Sentence
–noun
1. the practices and principles of a totalitarian regime.
2. absolute control by the state or a governing branch of a highly centralized institution.
3. the character or quality of an autocratic or authoritarian individual, group, or government: the totalitarianism of the father.
so⋅cial⋅ism
/ˈsoʊʃəˌlɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] Show IPA
Use socialism in a Sentence
–noun
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
com⋅mu⋅nism
/ˈkɒmyəˌnɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
Use communism in a Sentence
–noun
1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.
4. communalism.
Hmmm, I don’t see economic systems. A social organization in control. A form of governance. Please take note of the 3rd meaning of socialism.
This came from Dictionary.com
Since you keep missing it, I will spell it out in easy terms. The 3rd Reich didn’t wind up being socialist, but rather started out that way. The gateway.
Add the fact that it is 100% against the foundation of what made America in the first place. Go read the Amendment specifying states rights.
And what you miss the most, while the Federal government has no business involved in social issues, local communities have that say over their own lives. Charity is not charity when it’s forced. There were BIG reasons the founding fathers limited the powers of the Federal government. I would suggest to you reading the Federalist papers.
The Nazis only called themselves socialists (National Socialist German Workers Party, to be precise) but they had little nationalization of industry, except for the creation of a government body to coordinate manufacture of war materiel by private corporations. Incidentally, the United States used a very similar system.
My same reply is to you:
You know nothing about economics. If there wasn’t SOME socialism, then the GDP in this country would be static. Education will especially be hit hard and that would cause the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. With no middle class, this country would fail.
Who taught you that, your liberal professor. Socialism is NEVER needed. The Government couldn’t run any business. The only thing the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT should be paying for is Defense, which includes Intellgience gathering, interstate crimes, ans oh yeah the Military. Education should be at a state level (as the constitution intended). Man I’m too tired of listening to the kool aid drinking liverals who barely pay taxes preaching about their Messiah Obama. Once you start PAYING for the CRAP he wants, then maybe I’ll listen. Talk all you want, it’s your right (1st Amendment that y’al love to trounce on).
You’re the stupidest person I have ever seen write a response so far. I am not even going to waste my time with a retort. I can’t wait until you get proven wrong.
HMMMM yes resort to name calling…. true liberal tactic. Have you ever read the Constitution? Probably not.
I’m not so sure you have read it either, as the Constitution makes no mention of education at all, much less what level of government should oversee it. I’d also like to know what Kool Aid has to do with anything. Incidentally, I am a liberal, and I both pay taxes and support all aspects of the 1st Amendment. However, it should be noted that with the freedom of speech comes the responsibility to think before speaking. It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Hmmmm, it DOES say that the Federal government is limited, and that all things not given to it are for the states to control themselves.
JK…name calling is no substitue for open mindedness
Sadly, when you get proven wrong, it may be too late for millions of people. I hope not.
Last time I checked, education *is* at the state level, if not more local, practically.
Education get’s federal grants, to make it even among everyone, b/c some states have more money than others.
You make it sound like the fed’s supply a majority of our education money.
In reality, the majority of the money for public education comes from property taxes. And as any homeowner with half a brain knows, the municipal government, not the federal government, controls property taxes. Nice try.
BTW, as far as the effectiveness of public school is concerned, let’s not forget that private schools can be selective in who they accept or decline; public schools can’t. Any A.D.D., foreign, special education or “bad” students can be weeded out by private schools while public schools must accommodate everyone equally.
Given those circumstances, it only seems logical that private schools should trounce public schools in any kind of scholastic testing, don’t you think?
BOW TO THE MIGHTY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
TEACH MY WAY OR LOOSE ALL YOUR MONEY AND GET REPLACED
I seem to recall reading about the last time states’ rights were brought out in that kind of way … Something about a “civil” war.
Except it wasn’t about states’ rights, unless you count states’ rights to allow human slavery.
Coming back to what you said, No Child Left Behind (a Bush program) did indeed cut funding for schools if the schools weren’t doing well (by their standards), so that particular concept has been around for a bit longer than President Obama has been President.
You probably think the Stars and Bars actually WAS the Confederate flag. Heck, old Robert E Lee himself beat 3-4 slaves a day, just to unwind after killing some damn yankees.
And you will not hear me chearleading for Bush, so don’t try to hang that on me.
So do tell me, just what was the reason South Carolina succeded from the Union?
South Carolina succeeded? When?
J/K.
(I’m sure you know you meant “seceded”.)
Yes, yes. A late night typo. They have succeeded with making the best Bbq ever to enter the human mouth. Ribs and chicken too. Bbq that doesn’t need sauce. Dang, I’m actually drooling now.
Look up Martin Sausage road, Liberty SC. I drive more than 2 hours to get there about every 3-4 months.
South Carolina is taking it’s lumps right now, but overall, the it’s one of the best places in the world to live. Great farming, fishing, hunting, lot’s of industry, and thousands of sites to see.
There were more battles of the Revolutionary war fought in SC than the rest of the Colonies put together. People who had principles and stood by, come life or death.
I’ve been all over the world in the Air Force, and even went north of the Mason Dixon line, and the Carolina’s will always be home to me.
And to tell the truth, I saw more white trash rednecks up north than I have ever seen in the south.
” . . . even went north of the Mason Dixon line” GOODNESS! However did you find the courage to venture into the mouth of Hell itself?
“. . . to tell the truth, I saw more white trash rednecks up north than I have ever seen in the south.”
Truth! There are plenty of them here in Iowa. Too many. But one good thing about Iowa is that the massive housing bubble that hit other places was only a slight swelling, here. It didn’t do the damage that was done in other locations, consequently. Our industries haven’t been gouged as deeply by the recession. Some of the very things we’ve lamented over the years: our aging population, loss of young educated people, lack of technology jobs–those things have somewhat insulated us from a deeper recession. And it can be a beautiful place to live, too (but please, Internet, don’t believe me. I don’t want you all to move here and spoil it).
JK is right about wasting time answering your tired ole B.S. charges, but I can’t resist this one: “I’m too tired of listening to the kool aid drinking liverals [sic] who barely pay taxes”
Hold on, there, mister! I’m liberal, run my own business, and pay PLENTY in taxes, and I’m damn glad to do it. Before you paint everyone with your hateful brush, stop and use your head. You just accused someone of having a “liberal professor”… that would be a highly educated, well-paid (probably too well-paid, in your opinion) professor, right? You think THEY don’t pay taxes? Again, use your head! Think things through before you type, for once.
I can CALL myself The Potato Queen, but that doesn’t make it true. Dictators and doublespeak go hand-in-hand. They’re always going to make themselves SOUND benevolent, even if they’re such in NAME only.
You may be “half German”, but you have a lot of learning to do. Both halves do.
Yes your highness. And sadly you think you have no learning to do. We humbly bow to your elitist powers. Mercy Master. Mercy.
Excuse me? Where did I say I “have no learning to do”?? Don’t put words in my mouth. When I haven’t the answers, I don’t spout off, but when glaring errors present themselves, I have to educate. You’re just sorry it was *you*.
Oh, now you are the command chief educator. Your opinion dictates what everyone else has to believe.
That glaring error to you may be the beacon of shining light to others. But you just bash away. Anyone that doesn’t agree with you is wrong.
Sorry, but putting a pretty dress on Michael Jackson doesn’t make him pretty. He is still a grocery bag, plastic and dangerous to small children. And so is socialisim, no matter how you redress it to try to hide it. You can’t make a wild bear eat tofu when the beehive is 10 feet away. And you can’t keep government from taking freedom just by saying your inbred form of socialism will work.
TY for making my point: “Sorry, but putting a pretty dress on Michael Jackson doesn’t make him pretty.”
And the Nazi’s CALLING themselves Democratic Socialists doesn’t make them democratic nor socialist.
Please, please, look further into this.
Yes, look no further at your attempt to put a different shade of lipstick on that pig. Maybe Palin can loan you some.
Are you stupid enough to not know that Hitler’s first actions were shovel ready projects? Preached about how much Hope Germany had, how much change was needed for Germans to be proud of their nation again.
Oh, gosh! The similarities! I see the light now!
F%$# you, if you’re going to call me “stupid”, rather than the use of “ignorant”, as would be appropriate in that sense.
PoliSci 101 : The Nazis were not democratic. They were not socialists.
I’m sick of this silliness. LOOK. IT. UP.
Since you have looked it up, then you know better. That is not ignorance, but rather stupidity.
They were democratic, in the begining. Till the messiah told them it wasn’t needed any more. They needed him to get them what they needed and wanted.
All those forms of Socialism, Communsism, Fascisim, Marxisim, ect…. have one thing in common. A big government that tells you what and how you can do, and how you live to serve. The exact opposite of what our founding fathers set up for us.
Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. Look that one up.
Actually….. FedEx tends to deliver my packages more quickly than the post office, social security is a failing money pit, and you know our public school system in the toilet because when the tests scores do not meet our standards, we lower the standards!
Are you from Louisiana?
Well, see? Some socialism is good: ex – FedEx – private company, faster. Post office – public, slower. At least there is a choice. If I didn’t care when my letter was to be received why would I want to pay more? Social Security is an issue because of the baby boom in the 40s (higher population means more people to pay ss to). Your school system theory is incorrect. They actually constantly raise the standards so there will always be a percentage not passing. However, like the FedEx/post office example, there is some good to having both public and private. At least there is a minimum standard “free” for everyone is they so choose. If there were only private schools, so people would not be able to afford the schooling, without education you can’t get a good job, and driving a higher population into poverty. The gap between the rich and the poor will be so huge that GDP will be static and the country would fail.
JK…as a former educator I will respectfully disagree with your education specualtion. It is incorrect. Standards are lowered and have been lowered consistently over the last 30 years regarding education. We feel that self esteem is more important than reality in this country. A recent AP article highlighted this in New York. Several schools are no longer awarding Valedictorian honors because it “promotes unhealthy competition” between students. Thats sad…copetition drives success. We have lost our morality so we can no longer be honorable winners or losers. Instead…the “Ghetto” mentality wins. Remember the adage…”if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again”?
in the know – Thank you I appreciate your response. My high school has got rid of GDP because of what you stated in your argument, and I absolutely disagree with it. However, if there were no free schooling, what would be a viable option for the poor who need this step to succeed? My same argument is for free health care.
Actually, I have good luck with the USPS … their prices are about comparable with UPS … Fed Ex is more expensive, and not ostensibly better or “faster”. All 3 offer services that are “faster” or “slower”—depending on what you’d like to pay. I do, however, like UPS’ website, and find its services are more comprehensible on the site than the USPS.
As a contract courier, delivering merchandise all over the Carolina’s, (enjoying those uniquely Carolina blue skies) most of my customers complain about the way packages arrive by the USPS and UPS damaged and incorrect.
You get what you pay for. And I agree that we need a national mail system, but it needs to be run cost effectively.
“most of my customers complain about the way packages arrive by the USPS and UPS damaged and incorrect.”
And UPS is a private company, much as FedEx is. Your mileage may vary.
We had a town nearby here switch to a private ambulance company from the town-run outfit they had been using. Response times went up from when the town ran the ambulance service. If we’re going to pick a single example, I could conclude that privatization fails.
Privatization is a great idea … except for essential services. Profit motive does not play well with life-or-death things like healthcare and other essential services.
The nice thing about private companies, when they don’t work, YOU CHANGE WHO YOU USE.
One of my biggest customers went from UPS to using Courier’s like myself, and won awards for they changed their industry, and became one of the examples for others to follow.
I have customers who tell the source company not to ship UPS or USPS, they only want Me.
You know, if you hire kids to mow your grass, and they mess it up, don’t hire them again.
Public schools are full of union workers who are overpaid and way overrated.
I sent a package through the postal service. It was supposed to go to Peru, instead it ended up in Australia. Way to go government.
OVERPAID?!?!?! Are you crazy? Or just one of those elitist born-rich who went to private school? Half the teachers in my school were nearly on WELFARE.
Underpaid and underrated is what you meant to type.
Perhaps i am being harsh. Since i’m not from everywhere i wouldn’t know how “great” everyone’s public school systems are. I do know that Milwaukee public schools are terrible (41% graduation rate).
And to Mae, yes i did go to private school, but my family isnt even close to being wealthy.
A graduation rate shows nothing whatsoever about how good the education is in the school … is the school holding the students back from graduating? No, sounds like they’re dropping out. You’re going to blame the schools and teachers for THAT? Sounds like a cultural problem to me. Something needs to be done at the family level to keep kids in school . . . hey, I know! Let’s get back to valuing education and not celebrity. Sports stars, reality shows, plastic surgery, gangs, rap . . . I think they’ve combined to create an unrealistic picture of a “Welcome to my crib”-world. If I act out or look good, I’ll get my 15 minutes of fame and strike it rich! Flame if you want, but I know plenty of kids that think that way.
Pop culture is definitely a problem, ill agree with you. Kids need actual role models and not sex & violence promoting musicians.
Family is a problem too. Parents also need to be role models, but if parents are sucked into bad things then their kids will likely follow.
A good friend of mine is an English teacher at a junior high in Arlington, TX. He said that he had the kids write a paper about what they want to be when they grow and he said that half the boys wrote that they will play football or be a rapper.
Something I whole heartedly agree with you on. See it does happen!
I am a kid in public school and not to make my ego bigger I am one of the smartest kids in my school. It makes me sad to see how little some of my classmates try I have to say that 40% honestly don’t try or care about passing. To blame the school for that is wrong. Also many of your statistics come from standardized testes that do not show a real look at a school and their funding is based off that and makes it so they stop trying to teach us what we should know and instead take up half of the school year reviewing how to take these test when its simple but they have to make it so they keep up funding. (btw I am not a liberal or conservative I don’t think anyone truly is ether you can all have the exact same ideas on everything but if I had to chose I’d pick liberal) And this Obama is a socialist stuff is pointless how about this idea do whatever it takes to fix the economy and if we need to then change anything do it after its stable and we are not swimming in debt!?
o I have some spelling errors in there sorry tests* and some others but that helps prove my point I am great at math and science but my spelling is atrocious if it weren’t for spell check I would do horrible and a standardized tests would show I’m stupid.(I believe i have dysgraphia because i read at a past collage level (I find it sad the standers are that low I have been past that from the end of elementary school.)
You used the wrong country code.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/postmaster-general-gets-pay-bonus-agency-falters/
Overpaid my ass! Both of my parents are unionized public school teachers, and from everything I’ve heard from them, they’re not paid nearly enough for what they have to deal with. This is also reflected by the high turnover rate among young teachers. Not something that would be expected with a supposedly secure and high-paying job.
Although I can see why you dislike union workers, after all the horrible things they’ve helped introduce to this country: The eight-hour day, overtime pay, child-labor restrictions, workers’ comp, minimum wage, the idea of the weekend, etc.
Who cares, I do everything online. At Christmas I use UPS or FED EX, cheaper and more reliable.
Social Security is a scam started during the Great Depression. It doesn’t work, I don’t want, NOT relying on it when I retire.
Public Schools are not on a federal level, that’s a state level. And why do you think this country has both Home Schooling and Private Schools (b/c the Government does such a bang up job?)
As said Earlier Obama is a Socialist and a Communist at heart. Redistirbute the wealth is Communist, his reaction to the Banks and GM, and now signing the new Smoking Laws, and the new Energy Bill, all aimed at controlling industry = socialistic. So he’s both… either way he’s wrong for this country, unless you’re a lazy slob who wants to get paid NOT to work.
You’re the most uninformed, unintelligent person on this forum, and it’s great to listen to you on here. It makes me know that I actually AM better than some people in the world.
Even if Peanut Butter were 100% wrong, your attitude shows you to be the ignorant one. And hateful too.
Your comments are mind-bogglingly uninformed.
Instead of this thought-vomiting online, think before you reply. If school’s were only funded at the state level, why is No Child Left Behind a federal initiative where under-performing schools could be penalized for failing to perform?
Issue after issue that you post on here is mis-informed, and your perspective is ridiculous. Read what some people here are writing – it may not be that they’re posting just to disagree with you. You don’t know as much as you think you do.
Instead of calling me mis-informed PLEASE retort. There is some federal funding to schools, but for the most part schools are paid out of local Property taxes. Hence the reason for Property taxes. Why not read your state charters once in a while.
Please inform me oh powerful JK and Whatever… lend me your Kool Aid so that I too may fork over 60% of my pay check to help the “less Fortunate” souls in this country. Please let me work 60- 80 hour weeks, so that I can pay for someone else’s Medical Benefits…. PLEASE oh PLEASE give me such a privelege…. PLEASE!!!!
And our Public Schools have gotten worse (yeah my Sister and Mom are both teachers and they agree), why is it Private School and Home Schooling are on the rise? You would think a “luxury” like Private school would go down in this economy, but it’s not. Oh wiat maybe we could take after NY and pay teachers $70K a year to play scrabble or surf the internet b/c they couldn’t do their job in the first place and are being “investigated”.
You made the statement that schools are not federal, I present you with evidence that they are at least in part federal, and then you revise your statement. How is that not back-pedaling?
And this is just education. One issue after another, you overstate, mis-state, and conflate irrelevant issues.
You put “Less Fortunate” in quotes despite the fact that JK and I never used the phrase. Who are you arguing with? In fact, no one else who replied to used that phrase.
Also, where is the data to support your claim that private school / homeschooling is on the rise because of quality issues? I can only find data from 2003 (though the study is from 2006)
(http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/parentsreasons.asp)
But the most common issue was safety of the environment, and the next most common issue was religious/moral instruction. Neither of those is quality – which I assume is the point of the comment about teachers playing scrabble for 70k.
Obama’s tax plan does not tax *any* bracket at 60%. Nor does he insist anyone work 60-80 hours a week.
You’re exaggerating heavily for alarmism’s sake.
All he’s done is roll back the income tax breaks on the richest 5% to the levels they were under Reagan.
Take this in turn:
whatever: The state is the primary responsibility for education, the federal governemnt gives some substadies to the schools. Not relaly back pedaling as clarifying my position.
Please inform me on the other issues I over stated. Or else your arguement is null and void.
as for Less Fortunate, you’re not the only liberals blogging on this forum. You’re not the only ones using words.
Safety of enviroment is a part of Quality. Part of the school’s job is to protect students while on the school grounds, if that can’t be done, you’re not meeting Quality standards, also moral/ religious reasons (I know to a liberal morals and religion are not considered Quality), but really the needs of the child (in the parent’s eye) is not being met, hence POOR quality.
And the $70K issue: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_re_us/us_rubber_rooms
Mekkis:
Where do you think the money will come from for Health Care? Where is the moeny to come from for paying for the Stimulous package? He’s looking to Tax Benefits, Federal Sales Tax, the “richest 5%” has gone from that to 250K to now 200K. And that’s at 47%, plus FICA and Medicare we’re at about 53%, then state sales tax puts us at 58% (5% Ave among the US), then add in taxing benefits you’ve reached 60%.
1) “Please inform me on the other issues I over stated” Mekkis called you out on the 60% tax. There was this gem about GM is another one “Gotta spend money to make money (wait isn’t that what drove GM to the ground). ” Here’s a hint – not really. It wasn’t failed R&D and investments on the part of GM (what that saying actually refers to), but the failure for issuers of auto loans, due to the credit crisis, to grant loans to car buyers, which was the death knell on an already struggling industry that relied on that cash flow for operation.
2) use your browser. Search for the phrase “less fortunate” – it occurs 3 times, now 4 – you were the first to use the phrase in this forum. No one else. The way you wrote that statement suggests that I would have said it / needed to defend it. It’s what someone means when they say, “you’re putting words in my mouth.”
3) Your statement about quality is yet another overarching generalization — because if you read the link you would see that it was open ended and they could put whatever they wanted. Religion/morals does not count as poor quality teaching (please see you scrabble example), nor does school safety – and to what extent do you believe it is the responsibility or roll of the teacher? Quality of instruction (your reason) is independent and completely distinct from the top two reasons attributed for increase in homeschooling.
Actually if you’re wondering why there has been such a drastic increase in hours worked per week, it is pretty clear if you look to the attacks on Labour Unions and Workers’ rights that really got into full swing during the Reagan era and have pretty much continued ever since. The defeat of the Air Traffic Controllers strike in the 80′s in the US and the Miners’ strike in the UK are emblematic of this trend.
Along with rising hours-worked per household (to compensate for declining real-wages adjusted for inflation, often in the form of 2nd jobs) there has been a pretty dramatic increase in industrial accidents and occupational injuries & fatalities. And guess what else has been on the rise, profits!!
It really doesn’t take a genius to figure out that all this isn’t the result of some paranoid conspiracy of some guy to get elected as president and “become the messiah” (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Good to see that someone else has noticed the attacks on Labor and the effects of it. What I don’t understand is why more people haven’t seen the subsequent decline of the middle class and the increasing disparity between socioeconomic groups in the U.S. It’s there; it can’t be denied, yet people try.
Information is relative to the source. If you only listen to a source of information that conforms to your ideologies, then you are “informed” regarding those ideologies. If you truly are open minded (which i suspect you think you are ,but in fact are not), then you would draw logical conclusions based upon facts. Unfortunately, facts are hard to come by in the media. This includes the “information highway” of the interwebs (sic). the easiest way to get a fool to follow you is to tell him what he wants to here.
hrmmm – this argument doesn’t parse.
Let’s review: among the other inane generalities made by Peanut Butter, one includes that public schools are not “on a federal level”.
Except that the federal government absolutely has a say – thus my comment about NCLB.
PB backpedals, saying there is some federal funding, and then goes hypersarcastic, and makes up some point about homeschooling.
He suggests that the reasons why homeschooling rates would rise has to do with failing quality (which, btw, does not correspond to the National Center for Education Statistics – http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/index.asp)
Then, you come out of the wood work with a vague criticism, lack of facts, and ad homonym.
Have I left anything out? You can accuse me of not being open-minded, but you’ve said nothing of substance here. I think that just makes you an ass.
So whatever you talked about education. What about the other things I talked to? What about oh let’s say GM, AIG, etc…….. Or perhaps Health Care? Nope just education, and you call me closed minded, I’ve responded to ALL of your retorts, you’ve only narrowed your search on one. Oh and name calling is a TURE sign of open-mindness.
Ad hominem? I lacked no ethics in noting the perception of open mindedness. I simply brought credence to the “perspective” of facts. You, however, through the use of red herring, inflammatory rhetoric (ass, mind-bogglingly uninformed, etc…) have commited an abusive ad hominem. In addition, nothing of substance has been said “HERE”. Simply regurgitation of talking points from media outlets and political parties who ultimately desire control. How about some simple logic…remove the emotion.
Ok, but where does that criticism arise from?
“Information is relative to the source” – look at the thread, specifically where you see my responses to PB – what are you talking about?
In what way am I quoting media outlets?
Where is the herring you are accusing me of, again?
You said, “If you only listen to a source of information that conforms to your ideologies, then you are “informed” regarding those ideologies.” But there are none. I’m not quoting media. I quoted the NCES. Meanwhile – PB is similarly being called out elsewhere in the thread for his overstating of, for example, the economic incentives of war (vis-a-vis Naoyusimi) – which is all I said in my original comment (not the economy, just the overstating/oversimplification)
My comment in the previous post was addressing your criticism: “If you truly are open minded (which i suspect you think you are ,but in fact are not), then you would draw logical conclusions based upon facts”
1) you make that conclusion from 2-3 comments, or perhaps you are choosing to, but in what way do you assume. If you want to make that conclusion from my tone – go ahead, it’s not as though that’s what actually bothers me, here. But, look at PB’s claims and tell me that there’s no sense of exageration or complete mistatement. Look at what people are replying with. Similarly, look how PB replied to you, lower in the thread.
2) what exactly was that comment in response to? Exactly where am I coming across as narrow-minded? Where am I quoting facts from the media? Seriously, what are you talking about?
The perspective angle referred to both arguments. As for the open mindedness, typically the left espouses to being “open minded”. I have, based upon your arguments, assumed that you draw information from that ideology. I make no condemnation for what you believe. I respect that right (it’s what made this country great). However, your arguments infer to PB that he is uneducated because he disagrees with you. He asked you to retort to legitimate questions and you responded by refusing to answer. If indeed everything you say is correct than please respond with legitimate, intelligent arguments. I have seen this time and time again from leftist ideolouges. When faced with tough questions, they respond with anger and vitriol. I am not implying that you are or do the same. I actually may agree with some things you say if they logically make sense. Brute force will never truly change a persons beliefs. Dictators know this. How many people under Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Kim Jong (both), Mao, Pol pot, Ho Chi Min…(i can go on) were murdered because they disagreed with thier ideologies? Simply put. Prove your point logically. Narrow minded referred to the silence when questioned…college professors are notourious for that. I know.
“If indeed everything you say is correct than please respond with legitimate, intelligent arguments.” – I see only this in whatever’s responses
“I have seen this time and time again from leftist ideolouges.” – you’re kidding right?
“When faced with tough questions, they respond with anger and vitriol.” – you’re kidding right?
Public Schools, interstates, the Post Office; none of those are socialist. Where the hell are you getting this from? In order for a government to exist there must be taxes, in order for a government to function, there must be ways to spend those taxes. The development of society through the use of legally appropriated funds is not socialist at all, it’s a basic governing concept. You tax the people, you offer protection (Military, Law Enforcement) and services to increase the standards of life in your country. These are roads, schools, assistance programs, etc.
That’s basic governance, not socialism.
“increase the standards of life in your country” …. hmm, sounds like *social* programs, which you’re asserting are “socialist”.
I guess it all depends on how broad a definition one wants to apply to the word “socialist”. In some right-wingers’ cases, that definition is very, very broad.
If you want to stick to a definition relating to economics, then the US has a long, long, long, long way to go before it would EVER be socialist.
Do us all a favor. Please quote the US Constitution on the roles of the federal government. There are basic necessities that “We the People” agree to do. But stop there. Because when you go past that, you interfere with the right to individual liberty and the pursuit of happiness. None of is guaranteed anything other than the right to do our best, without the hinderance of our freedoms. Government is a necessary evil. And no matter if Government is 100% in charge or some King, dictator, Pope, Priest or what ever is in charge, there will be abuse. That is why we have the rule of law. Not to force our will on others. Eat all the trans fat you want, just don’t force me to eat it.
government controlled auto industry, or any industry for that matter is facism, not socialism. The last group running the country paved the road for this to happen with the handouts prior to exiting stage right.
Perhaps people need educated on what the different isms are before being allowed to spew forth nonsense.
Which handouts are you referring to? Bail-out monies? Gee I hope you don’t mean them. They were “handed-out” at the direction of the incoming president. Also, if socialized medicine is not socialism then what is it? Look at the countries with socialized medicine. Are they happy about it? No! They travel to countries with privatized medicine (ie USA) for treatment. The quality of medicinal aid will not improve if it is socialized it will degrade since the number of “top” doctors will not work in the US since they can get paid more elsewhere.
actually the original 750 billion was handed out at based on the rules set by the outgoing president. those same rules that he changed after the tarp funding was approved to allow him to buy stock in failing banks rather than provide loans as it was originally intended.
actually, certainly our privatized medicine has lead to us having better medical care, but in the same vein the basic care given is not the same as countries with socialized medicine. We have a higher death rate in deaths that can be avoided through simple heathcare. people here just don’t go to the doctor because they can’t. If we get a system where those without healthcare may recieve healthcare i think we will be better for it, particularly since i don’t think privatized healthcare is going to be abolished completely.
And actually, the vast majority of people in countries with “socialized” medicine are very very very pleased about it. They DO NOT travel to places like the USA for medical treatment, except maybe a couple of the super rich when they need plastic surgery. Get your facts straight and stop quoting false republican talking points.
My Canadian friends disagree with you. For more difficult/involved procedures there are a limited number of practitioners therefore putting you on a waiting list. A list of death. Yeah, that sounds like fun!
What about the increasing number of people in this country who elect to go to third world countries to get their procedures done b/c it’s cheaper and you don’t get discharged 24 hours after surgery? Seems like privatized medicine–which has a financial bottom line like any business–isn’t the be-all, end-all Republicans make it out to be. Just b/c the word “socialized” isn’t in front of it doesn’t mean it’s the better choice.
You know how many people you’re actually talking about? it’s like, five. No, not five percent. Five people. “Anecdotal” doesn’t even begin to describe how inaccurate that bullcrap talking point is.
When a business has completely FAILED, but in its failing it may drag down a huge number of other businesses and further wreck our economy by putting huge numbers of people out of work, then SOMEBODY has to step in and save it/them . . . I don’t care whether it would have been another business, or a government. You DO know the definition of FAILURE, right?
It’s not government-controlled, it’s government-salvation — oh, geez, that’s so awful. Guess some of these dumbass corporate execs—the greedy, short-sighted bastards I’m sure you idolize—should have run their businesses better, so you could stop whining and crying and wringing your hands about it.
Is running around with your hair on fire good exercise?
How about when he got the Dog?
Or:
Obama goes out for Cheeseburgers!
Or:
Obama eats Ice Cream Sundae!
How about Michelle?
humm…
Now we’re getting somewhere »»
Creating government controlled health care is a step towards socialism.
And a giant leap over the edge of a slippery slope at that. We’ve been marching toward socialism ever since Bush Sr. got into office. Obama just put it in overdrive, that’s all.
its not a coincidence that the countries that rank highly in overall happiness of population are also the countries with socialized healthcare. people need to get over their “OMGZ socialism makes us devil worshipping commies!!!!!!111″ attitude in this country
Because socialized healthcare makes people happy. That makes perfect sense.
Until they die an early death from breast cancer, prostate cancer, etc. (much higher death rates in Canada and UK than US)
Much higher death rates as in abnormal causes or just overall?
… Except they don’t.
That’s because a rate is a percentage. Sure, they’ll have a higher rate than our country when they have fewer people. It’s basic math.
Here in the U.S. people die from cancer quite often. It’s because cancer has no true cure yet. It most likely has nothing to do with their health care (why? because healthcare simply determines who will pay the bill, not how much the bill is paid). Sure, they have some idiot doctors over there who misdiagnose people but we have the same thing here.
Keep in mind that Obama’s plan for healthcare is basically Tricare and Medicare for the entire population. Say what you will about Medicare, but Tricare is one of the best healthcare programs. It is so good that my parents opted to pay the military to keep the plan after my mom retired instead of paying for another program that will have more doctor choices. They did that because Tricare pays for more of a bill and more bills than many other plans out there. It allows our family to remain healthy by being able to go to the doctor about illnesses and injuries without having to worry about how to pay the bill.
If we can handle paying for every military family to have Tricare (obviously, the government’s ability to pay for bills doesn’t come from thin air) and for all the people who go to the emergency room without a healthcare plan (we do cover part of their bill through taxes), then we can handle those people having a healthcare plan that is affordable but still decent in its coverage. Plus, if we manage to stay out of unnecessary wars (seriously, we could have waited a while to invade Iraq…and keep in mind the whole WMD thing was the initial reason for invasion, not Saddam, which, btw, we have the most WMD’s of any country and us taking them away from countries not threatening us is quite hypocritical…I’m not saying good things did not come out of it but we could have waited a while), there will be more money in the budget, hence more money to help cover the government healthcare. Oh and this plan isn’t mandatory. It’s meant to be available for the 50 million people (I think that’s right) who can’t afford the private healthcare. I’m pretty sure there will be plenty of people still paying for the good private healthcare plans. The ones that will fail will be the poor plans that people don’t like having anyways.
Quite elloquently put. Thank you for that.
Except it’s not true. Simple math, by percentage, the US has a significantly lower death rate from breast and prostate cancer. There is no way to no why for sure, but the speculation is that we get most drugs earlier than those two countries. (yes, likely because they can charge more)
And Mexico gets the drugs first.
Ok to those “smart” individuals who think the war was “wasting” money, let’s look at a few things:
1. Who fights the war? American Soldiers (note American soldiers, ie Americans employeed)
2. What is used to fight? American made weapons. (note Tanks, Missles, Ships, bullets, guns, etc are made here in the good ole US of A, employeeing more Americans)
People don’t realize that about 85% of the bidget for Iraq and Afhganastan get recycled back into the US economy. Is there any other “social” program that can claim that? (I know I know murdering thousands of terrorists to boot wasn’t an added perk). Since Rafi decided to bring up the war on an economic base, that’s how I’m judging it.
Did you even go to college? Are you one of those drop outs?
So JK, vice arguing the validity of points, just insult. Which proves I’m correct. Where am I wrong, so me the numbers that financially the war in Iraq does not waste as much money as you’d like the world to believe.
Good Lord! Stop posting….you have yet to intelligently reply to someone you call stupid. And in case you ask. Yes, I went to college…4 times (you can guess what my level of education is)
Ummm let’s see…. that would make it an Associates… wait no, no, no I’m too stupid to know….. Dr. HMMM Dr. In The Know has a nice ring to it.
Why do you waste your time on forums like this?
SOME of the money from the war gets back to our economy, but NOT 85%. No way. CITATION, please.
I’d say a large portion of it has gone to trying to rebuild the Iraq infrastructure … after we blew the hell out of it, of course. Hey, rebuilding schools and water treatment plants … those sound like social programs to me! Is that wrong?
Another large portion is lining the pockets of the military “contractors”, who provided substandard service (look up the “shocking” work done on the military housing by electricians) to our men & women who risk their lives.
An “added perk” was “murdering thousands of terrorists”? OH, please! More *citizens* of those countries were killed than terrorists. Tell me, please: what happened to going after Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda? Of the terrorists who carried out the attack on us in 2001, how many were Iraqi? Oh, that’s right: NONE. How many were Saudi Arabian? When are we going to attack Saudi Arabia?
The United States is one of only a handful of developed nations with an increasing population, a group excludes the United Kingdom and Canada. The higher mortality rate is not necessarilly indicative of poorer healthcare, or, in fact, of anything other than the fact that proportionally more people die each year.
@Traitorfish:
I think you’re referring to a post above which was *trying* to say–if I may interpret it–for example, that the rates of infant and maternal mortality are good indicators of the less-than-stellar healthcare in the US, esp. when one compares them with other wealthy industrialized nations, and most especially when one looks at the dollars we (the U.S.) throw at medicine in this country. For the number of dollars we spend, we just don’t get the best results. So, yes, it’s indicative of “proportionally more people” DYING–for 2009, according to the CIA, the US infant mortality rate is 6.26 per 1,000–we had a higher rate than Cuba, Italy, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, South Korea, Slovenia, Israel, Spain, Czech Republic–should I go on?–Norway, Finland, France, Iceland, Norway, Hong Kong, Japan, Sweden, Bermuda, and Singapore. Of course, the 2009 results are all estimates. You can call them on their info, if you like:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
Socialism refers to any one of various theories of economic organization advocating state or cooperative ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal opportunities/means for all individuals with a more egalitarian method of compensation based on the full product of the laborer.[1][2] Modern socialism originated in the late 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticized the effects of industrialization and private ownership on society. Karl Marx posited that socialism (a stage in which the working class controlled the state and owned the means of production before the state and classes withered away) would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution, and would be a transitional stage between capitalism and communism (the final stage in which class dichotomies and the state itself ceased to exist).[3][4]
Places with government run healthcare systems also have the highest unemployment rates.
Think about how the DMV is run, do you want to have that same quality expirence in your doctors office? Even more fun, lets skip on over to some of the hospitals that are currently run by the government… I would rather go see a veterinarian than go any where near a government hospita.
I use government hospitals. In fact, almost everyone in the military uses government hospitals. They are very similar to private hospitals actually…
Kudos
I would if I got paid for it (PTO from work) and i didn’t have to pay a co-pay. which is what the UK and Canada do.
TY for that. Gave me a
Nesting fail. I was talking about this:
“people need to get over their “OMGZ socialism makes us devil worshipping commies!!!!!!111″ attitude in this country”
Here! Here! An open minded thinker? You sir cannot have been educated in the U.S. after 1969…
You don’t actually have to do anything to be a Democrat or Republican. You can simply state whichever you choose. It’s what you actually stand for that makes you liberal, conservative, or socialist, regardless of what you say.
You don’t see Ralph Nader or any other type of party pointing out Obama “Consuming” the industries like the Reps do.
And?
Then what was the point of your comment earlier? I thought you were saying that i misunderstood everyone who took Obama as the “Socialism Guy” as a Republican…. -.-
I wasn’t trying to be inflammatory. I meant “you” in the general sense. I guess if I was to associate my beliefs with a party, the Libertarians would most closely define me. However, I don’t look at things in terms of party, and was just making the point that party affiliation these days has little to do with what way someone actually leans. I find it troubling that Republicans are trying so hard to be “Not Democrats” that they are swiftly losing that which used to define the party. Much in the way certain Lutheran Synods are so “Not Catholic”, that there really ends up being little that distinguishes them apart, other than minor technicalities here and there. I guess this was all in response to your comment about Democrats being in-the-closet socialists. Unfortunately, many of them are Democrats and Socialists at the same time, simply because they can call themselves Democrats, and that is all that is required to be a part of that party. I don’t ascribe this to the majority of the voting Democrat public, just to many of the Democrats that get voted in.
Too soon. D:
But how good is the “coverage” on your tinfoil hat?
I don’t mind the coverage… because swatting a fly with your hand is pretty damn impressive. I can only ever get them with a flyswatter. -_-
Seriously, that’s a great feat.
I thought so, too. My fiance can catch ‘em. Damn fast reflexes on him. I was impressed when Obama did it.
Yet again, I am reminded the vast majority of people couldn’t functionally define “socialism”, “communism” or “fascism” if they were sat in front of a dictionary and told to read the relevent entries at gunpoint. Hurrah.
If he succeeds in “socializing” us (hooray for double meanings that are both appropriate!), you’d best believe there will be coverage.
Yes, the fly killed his father. He had to take some serious ninja action.
haha! fox news….XD
lols, so true! but wait there’s more!
people are starting to relate him to a Nazi! (Socialized-nationalist!)
I think hes a freak among freaks. though both candidates were crazy.
oh well, bring on the taxes! CA is going bankrupt and our horrid state wants more. damned unions.
California is going broke for two reasons:
1. The 2000 energy crisis caused by Enron, and the fact that Schwarzenegger “terminated” the suit started by Governor Davis — the lawsuit that was supposed to reclaim the *billions* of state dollars extorted and swindled from CA by the Enron scammers
2. The CA state wing of the GOP is engaging in obstructionism by virtue of a complete refusal to compromise. The Democrats in the state have been trying to pass a budget, but due to the fact that CA requires a 2/3 majority to pass *any* budget, the GOP has now not only refused to raise taxes, it has refused to close tax loopholes in the state tax code, and now is holding the majority hostage by demanding that Democrats cut all social and education spending altogether. They just rejected the last budget on the claims that “the cuts weren’t deep enough”.
“the cuts” are fake. cuts to proposed spending increases are not cuts.
and when the repubs finally voted on a budget, it still had tons of new taxes. lovely taxes.
what billions extorted by enron? you just want to chase out another company i guess. CA is the worst state to run a business in…
soooo, we are going broke because we are hemorrhaging money to government workers and crap projects.
oh yes, and without the 2/3 vote, we would be the highest taxed state in the nation.
California is going broke for the same reason the whole country is, it’s overrun with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS and welfare leaches!
“rich” people there pay OVER 50% in taxes while MILLIONS of scum bags pay NONE.
Over 50% in taxes. I’d like to see a link on that one.
Property taxes in California are quite low (although the sales tax is pretty high). If you’d like to read more about California Property Tax, try this:
http://www.calproptax.com/
Welfare leeches and illegal immigrants to blame for everything, eh? I don’t see any figures about how much “welfare fraud” costs the state, but I figure that killing a program which provides “safety net” support for thousands who actually need it to stop a few abuses is a bad idea. Also, I can’t find any “real” illegal immigration figures other than “FAIRUS”‘s 10 billion dollar figure, which is provided with no sources or other information for determining reliability, as well as a dearth of information as to who they are or how they come by their data. Smells like bull from here.
yay, someone else with the right idea! *cuddles*
Too true.
We right wingers left the last country. It’s the leftwingers turn to leave.
keep reading the new york times polls. You clearly missed the fine print regarding the actual polled numbers. Statistically inaccurate and not valid.
right of center? what planet are you on?
most people support communist health care??
go ask the people in Canada or England how they like their “health care”
The only people who support MORE handouts are people who DON’T WORK and filthy rich liberal pukes who can afford to pay 60% in taxes.
get a CLUE!
The only people who want “handouts” are crackheads and others who are too ignorant and lazy to work.
However, you’ll find plenty of working class left wingers who support welfare and other government assistance programs to people who honestly can’t afford the expense of living.
They can’t afford the expense of living because THEY DON’T WORK and yet they pump out bastard kids every 10 months, SIXTY PERCENT OF THE US BUDGET GOES TO PAYING FOR PEOPLE WHO DON’T WORK!
Anyone who works for a living and supports paying people who don’t to reproduce deserves to live in poverty because they’re just as stupid as the welfare leaches who haven’t worked for 3+ generations.
“SIXTY PERCENT OF THE US BUDGET GOES TO PAYING FOR PEOPLE WHO DON’T WORK!”
[CITATION NEEDED]
since there’s so many idiots here:
A book “The Complete Idiots Guide to Economics” written in 2003 cites the U.S. Government budget as reporting that entitlements make up approximately 65 percent of our budget, distributed as follows:
Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 12%
Medicaid: 7%
Other Means-tested entitlements: 6%
Mandatory payments (pensions, etc.): 6%
Net interest on debt: 11%
by the way, medicaid is also known as
FREE HEALTH CARE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON’T WORK
“by the way, medicaid is also known as FREE HEALTH CARE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON’T WORK”
No, no it’s not.
It’s government assistance for people who can’t otherwise get medical care, in the same way we have SAGA and other state-run programs to attempt to keep people from dying due to lack of medical care simply because they don’t make enough money to have a roof over their heads, eat and go to the doctor.
Check out the FQHC system if you want to know more about our “safety net” system for caring for people who don’t make enough money to get screwed by the insurance system in this country.
(By the way, I do have a well paying job, pay my taxes, have insurance, and still would rather pay for a single payer system than purchase private insurance.)
You forgot “Getting a dog”
Wow, you couldn’t have got it more wrong.
There was just a CBS poll today that said most Americans were happy with their health insurance.
But you’ll see what you want to see as that seems to be a common liberal trait.
“There was just a CBS poll today that said most Americans were happy with their health insurance. ”
That’s push polling. The question is framed for those who *have* insurance. Most people aren’t sick, so they aren’t going to get the butt end of the insurance industry.
If you don’t make enough money to buy commercial insurance and/or are denied care due to any arbitrary pre-existing condition…
My mother in law takes care of herself and her two grandchildren on her pension money, which is apparently too much to allow her to qualify for Medicare Part D, so she has to shell out incredible amounts of money every month for medications which are essential to her survival. And being over 60, she has accumulated enough “preexisting conditions” so no commercial insurer will cover her for anything short of highway robbery.
I’m assuming that she would be listed as not being “unhappy” with her insurance, since she doesn’t qualify for it.
LOLOL awesome win!!!
Lolz someone doesn’t know what a communist is! If you can find some examples of Obama overthrowing the upper class to lead the proletariat to victory, making ALL private property government-owned, setting up collectivization and x-year-plan policies, and other practices associated with communism–then you’re stupid claim has some cred.
But since you’re a f*cking idiot and have no idea what you’re talking about, shut the hell up and read a damn book.
Did you say Obuma is right of center? Right? Of center? The most LIBERAL of all Senators is right of center? Maybe you were public schooled. Center means in the middle and this punk ass president is so far left of center he doesnt even show up on the graph!
I’d say the vast majority of the morons who denounce socialism don’t know what it is. If Obama was actually a socialist, I’d sure as hell like him a lot more. Besides, people who demand small government are usually idiots. Weren’t we always taught that size doesn’t matter and that quality is more important that quantity?
The burden of government spending in the United States has grown considerably since 2000, but this is just the calm before the storm. Thanks to unchecked entitlement programs, America is at risk of becoming an uncompetitive European-style welfare state. Total government spending already consumes about one-third of national economic output, with the federal government spending $2 for every $1 spent by state and local governments. If left unchecked, however, the federal government’s budget will metastasize, growing from about 21 percent of GDP today to nearly 40 percent of national economic output after the baby-boom generation retires.
Try moving to China if you think socialism is so wonderful, see how long they let you sit on your ass begging for handouts.
Does that soap box come in any other colors? You ought to check out Pundit Kitchen because I’m sure there are dozens of folks over there willing to offer you one or two at a low cost.
China’s communist, not socialist. And it’s not its socialist policies that upset people. Read a book.
Oh yes, Socialism is sooooo evil. Those poor suffering people in Denmark.
The problem, employers and economists believe, has a lot to do with the 63 percent marginal tax rate paid by top earners in Denmark — a level that hits anyone making more than 360,000 Danish kroner, or about $70,000.
oh yeah, I wanna move THERE!!!
The problem, employers and economists believe, has a lot to do with the 63 percent marginal tax rate paid by top earners in Denmark — a level that hits anyone making more than 360,000 Danish kroner, or about $70,000.
Do any of you people who think paying way more than half of what you make to pay for people WHO DON’T WORK actually have a J O B?
“Do any of you people who think paying way more than half of what you make to pay for people WHO DON’T WORK actually have a J O B?”
You really must love it up there on that pedestal, with your fancy job.
Did it ever occur to you that the services which we socialize are used by *everyone*, not just people who aren’t working? Also, as you may have noticed, we’re approaching a national unemployment rate of 10-11% due to companies closing. I seriously doubt that the people who are not working *want* to be out of work, but the job market has dried up. Would you deny any sort of assistance for them during the downturn merely because you were luck enough not to be the one to get the axe?
The vast majority of people on welfare have NEVER worked a day in their life you idiot. The vast majority of people on welfare are females who get knocked up repeatedly by different guys JUST to get MORE welfare. Welfare has been around since 1967 and has cost TRILLIONS all to encourage the piss in the gene pool to reproduce. How does “society” benefit from that?
You’re not familiar with the “Contract with America”?
From Wikipedia, I know, but still:
“The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, Pub.L. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105, enacted August 22, 1996) is a United States federal law considered to be a fundamental shift in both the method and goal of federal cash assistance to the poor. The bill was a cornerstone of the Republican Contract With America and was introduced by Rep. E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-Florida) who believed welfare was partly responsible for bringing immigrants to the United States.[1] Bill Clinton signed PRWORA into law on August 26, 1996 under his promise to “end welfare as we know it”.
PRWORA instituted Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) which became effective July 1, 1997. TANF replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program which had been in effect since 1935 and also supplanted the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program of 1988. The law was heralded as a “reassertion of America’s work ethic” by the US Chamber of Commerce, largely in response to the bill’s workfare component. Some criticized the bill as a reinstitution of workhouses and believe the new system has been ineffective in getting people out of poverty. TANF was reauthorized in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.”
*One thing TANF did was set lifetime limits on receipt of benefits.*
From another source:
“On time limits, the general rule is that no family that includes an adult recipient may receive federally-funded assistance for longer than 60 months (whether or not consecutive). States are allowed to use federal TANF dollars to extend time limits beyond five years, but only for up to 20 percent of the caseload.”
I’ve seen what I *believe* are exceptions to the rules, but I don’t know how they’re committing this fraud, nor do I know for sure that they are.
The solution to that is: you ferret out fraud wherever it may be; you don’t get rid of the safety net that any one of use might need in our lifetimes.
In other words, you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
My 2nd source was the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=936
Lack of coverage of the first one is understandable, considering it’s a non-existent issue used as exclamations by Sarah Palin and others who are similarly idiotic.
Really?
Results 1 – 10 of about 6,360,000 for obama socialism. (0.22 seconds)
Results 1 – 10 of about 4,250,000 for obama socialist. (0.42 seconds)
Results 1 – 10 of about 5,860,000 for obama communist. (0.35 seconds)
lets go for “lack of outrage over new amnesty plans” then.
Let’s move forward and address climate change and spare the few remaining old growth forests from the axe!
http://DrReese.wordpress.com
Yes, there is climate change, the natural cycle of heating and cooling. And it happens that we are in the heating phase, just like the earth was in the cooling stage in the sixties. I’m telling ya’, all this this talk is just hype to give special interest groups of minorities a big voice to force their opinions onto others.
Fascism-a style of government where businesses are privately owned but subject to government control.
A few points:
1. I ask respectfully that someone give me an example, in history, of when Keynesian economics has worked. The mythical multiplier has not yet surfaced, in my recollection.
2. Government is a necessary evil-there are things that government can accomplish that the free market isn’t interested in, such as clean air and water laws. Government is also suited towards providing services that can’t be differentiated between people, such as military defense (example: you and your neighbor live on a beach. An invading force comes to that beach. A private defense firm would defend just your neighbor’s house (unless you paid for them too), but not yours, which would be foolish in a battle; defend both homes and get rid of the invaders). HOWEVER (and this is a big however), government intervention to ‘save’ companies in which their political allies have a large stake is neither constitutional nor in our best interests. If a company fails, there is a reason it fails; it does not behoove anyone to keep that company. Jobs are not static things; if they were, we would still have a substantial number of jobs in the typewriter repair industry. Company turnover is a natural and necessary part of economic renewal. GM was making cars that weren’t selling on the market, in addition to excruciating labor costs that its competitors have watched their employees vote against secret ballot after secret ballot. Companies going under are replaced by new companies that manage to do the same service for better prices and/or service. Remember Montgomery Ward stores? They weren’t able to compete with Sears when it came out, and went bankrupt. Sears lost market share to Wal-Mart. But no one cried out for government to save their jobs then-and you should be glad they didn’t, as you get your goods more cheaply because these other companies came in with more efficient methods. Saving jobs is an emotional argument-and one that doesn’t fall in line with history.
3. Government does not truly ‘create’ anything in and of itself aside from bureaucracy. Government only gets its money from someone else-you and I. That money may have been spent in a more efficient way by us in the free market (which, by the way, is NOT an amorphous, emotionless being; it is the sum of every decision involving money that you and I make each day. Do you want that pack of gum? Market influence. Are you saving your money in a bank account? Market influence). Government is the only entity that can get money from you (legally) by threat of force. As such, it is not subject to the same constraints as a privately owned business. Businesses are profit-and-loss businesses; both profit and loss serve to send messages about their product. Government, as we see with California, is not subject to profit and loss; they can simply, as one poster advocated, raise taxes to compensate. What company can do that? If Wrigley’s (to go further with gum) decided that it was suffering too much in the market and raised its prices by $5/pack, would you keep buying Wrigley’s gum or would you go somewhere else? Yet that is advocated about the government-except instead of you making the decision to buy Wrigley’s with a raised price, everyone MUST buy the Wrigley’s or leave.
4. Point 3 is why I’m opposed to the ‘government option’ on health insurance. We have Medicaid, which has been running as a deficit since its inception. We have Social Security, which has NEVER EVER been saved money; instead, it has been pooled into the general fund and spent every single year. There is no lockbox-and thus no guarantee that you will get SS money. The government option, while it may function as the post office does, has the unique ability to be manipulated by politicians. Not many people care about their mail nearly as much as they care about their healthcare. Government has an endless supply of money-us. A private business does not have a limitless supply. In this way, government can easily impose a monopoly on insurance-simply make government options the absolute cheapest and drive the others out. Competition amongst companies leads to better quality of life for us all, but government is not a company. It is not subject to any of the same checks and balances. If a company is making a product that no one wants, they don’t sell it and they go bankrupt. In government, positions are given to people making $70,000/year but aren’t allowed to work due to political issues. A president mandates an automaker to continue making cars that drove them out of business in the first place. Do you go to your community health clinic? Most people don’t, because the service is terrible. But even though no one wants the product, our taxes still pay for it. I don’t want politicians with that kind of power; we act as though we expect politicians to be moral arbiters and then are shocked, shocked when they make the same kinds of mistakes we do but are entrusted with power that reverberates through generations (see the ineffective [ask Warren Buffet!] ‘stimulus’ that results in record deficits and the hopes that the Chinese will quit offloading our bonds and buy them again).
5. Buddha was not a socialist. Buddhism notes that life is a series of tragedies and pains. He wanted people to seek Nirvana, which is a state of bliss in which you are separated from the desires of this world. Socialism (or at least the modern definition of governmental security) is concerned with the desires of this world. Government welfare does not remove the desire for food from you. It does not deprive you of your lust for the Johnson’s new car. As such, Buddha was not concerned with government, but your own enlightenment. Jesus was not a socialist-read the Bible. Jesus was a monarchist. He said He was the son of the king of the universe. He was a king. He did not want for you to be able to petition your government for longer vacations, he wanted your obedience. Jesus wanted YOU to go give your money and help the poor around you; giving to the government allows us all to assuage our consciences without ever having to look another human being in the face. We don’t get the luxury of having our favorite religious figures agree with our politics, much less our ideas. They were who they were (or are who they are), and hold their own ideas. Just because you want to be justified doesn’t mean that you have a right to claim Nelson Mandela agrees with you, nor Jesus, nor Mary, nor Mohammed, nor Buddha, nor your ancestral spirits.
Please give me the same courtesy that I’ve given in these statements. They are not party line statements; you’ll note that both major parties have contributed to this mess.
“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” -George Santayana
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” -George Washington
John, this is the best post I have EVER read on any Blog. Period. Honest and straight to the point. Well spoken my friend, and I am in 100% agreement.
Sadly, there is a movement about that thinks Jesus was a drunk hippie promoting free love.
Also, most of the things the socalist’s want could be done by local governments. It would give the option to be away from that government’s controls, and chose another town/county/state. A good example is Charlotte NC. The non welfare crowd and all the business in fleeing across the state line into York and Lancaster counties.
For those who think the Gospel was socialist, remember, the apostles practiced “if you don’t work, you don’t eat.” Not from each according to his ability to each according to his need.
Liberals aren’t socialists, you idiot. Link to definition of a SOCIALIST.
You better call yourself an idiot. I didn’t say that liberals are socialists. And up in this thread, you will see where I posted the definition of socialist.
“Also, most of the things the socalist’s want could be done by local governments. It would give the option to be away from that government’s controls, and chose another town/county/state.”
Sorry, then. I AM an idiot, but anyways, I assumed you were talking about Democrats. I get a little tired of the entire party being incorrectly labeled “socialist”, and my head was ready to explode.
Thank you for admitting that. Now just admit that Democrats are the demon leigons of Satan himself, with Ole Lucifer himself wearing the costume of Obama and we will truely get along.
Ok, ok, ok, allow me a joke every now and then. After all, it’s not like that idea wan’t what Bush/Republicans were portrayed as for the last 8 years. Oh, yeah, it was. Mind you, I am neither, republican or democrat.
I do have a question for you, what was the founding platform for the Democrat party?
And please tolerate my sense of humor, as the Good Lord only gave me 2 talents in life. My sense of humor and being butt ugly.
The verse you are referring to for the “no work no eat” is 2 Thes. 3:10 which was speaking of a letter originally sent to the Ephesians in verse 4:28. That verse says that the reason people were to work was so that every person could provide “something to share for those in need.”
It’s funny how even the Bible can be misquoted. I’m not saying that Jesus was a socialist because these books were both written by Paul in the first Christian church. Paul was a disciple of Christ though and wrote most of the New Testament, that which you seem to put a lot of stock in.
My appologies if you thought I was saying that you were trying to make Jesus a hippie, right the opposite.
And you are correct about the verse, I didn’t quote it or refer to it directly, as it usually causes the anti religious crowd to go flame crazy.
I totally agree that we are all to do our part to help others. But it takes more than earthly charity. 1 Cor 13:3.
2 Thes 3:10 says “any” not just the reformed thieves. Verse 11 even remarks about busybodies who don’t work.
Thank you for saying I put a lot of stock in the New Testament. Seems to me you know it quite well yourself.
I’m a different Jon than Johnimus.
Sorry, I am usually in bed by 11, and it was well after 1am when I wrote that. I missed the difference in the names.
Political arguments over the internet are serious business, yeah?
Hey socialism is OK but…..
1. It should be with your own money
2. It shouldn’t be forced. Forced charity is not actual charity.
So other than Jesus, no one got it right.
How does one socialise a country? Go around shaking everybody’s hands? Chat over garden fences?
Oh, you mean Obama’s trying to turn the USA into a socialist state. I see.
Fail.
On several counts.
Not going to get into a new debate here… But I think respecting religious beliefs would top your fancy graph thing.
Exactly, above comment. I’m gonna be crazy and say that capitalism does work, but the level of government intervention starting around the turn of the last century (The Fed) started causing the distinct boom/bust cycles in the economy, and eventually the depression. Then even *more* government was instituted (government handouts ect.) made the Depression even worse. Progressives took control and haven’t given up since. Bush (George Walker) was a progressive. So is Obama. We’re in the boat we’re in because of this form of Progressivism that has been a long time coming. Blame whoever, but socialism (which we’ve had pretty much since FDR) has not worked. Putting a cap on failure and success makes people not want to succeed. This leads to economic collapse.
OK that’s my political rant :p
. . . “turn of the last century” . . . as in the year 2000?
If you’re talking about the Depression of the 30s, the government safety net that was instituted did NOT make the Depression worse! Have you read ANY history at all? The unemployment was more than 3x what it is today . . . the WPA put people to work and built infrastructure, gave them purpose, hope, and food for their families.
George W. Bush is NOT a Progressive. Not at all. A New Right Chickenhawk, but not a progressive (small “p” or big “P”).
We have NOT had socialism since FDR. We’ve instituted some social safety nets, and put into places some restrictions on business, but it’s just rules in place to protect us from unfettered, morality-free, pure capitalism. Most of the people whining about socialism on this forum haven’t a CLUE what real socialism is. Even justacarolinian, above, can post a definition, but he doesn’t seem to understand it. Or maybe he only takes from it what he wants to take—I dunno. We in the US reeeaaally need to stop being so utterly uninformed about other countries on this planet, and learn about their forms of government and economic systems. Most of us are hopelessly out-of-touch. So we get people on this forum, flinging words back and forth like frightened children; words, the meaning of which most don’t even understand, and on which most can’t agree. It IS really senseless.
On that, I agree with another poster.
Naoyusimi, I think the question is “Have YOU read any history.” You sure are a hard core arrogant ASS to anyone who doesn’t agree with you. And you still can’t place socialisim in the Constitution.
You also keep trying to call it an economic system. You seem to be willingly stupid. Baaaaaaa, another sheeple eating the hay of big government.
Seems you are too stupid to read the above definition. And too much a coward to answer my questions. I am in the US and most likely traveled to more nations than you can name. Get in touch with something other than your liberal sexual fantasy of utopia. It doesn’t exist.
You seem to be the only frightened poster. Afraid of some one that doesn’t bow to your thinking.
I tried being nice, but you just can’t have an honest conversation.
—-
“Political arguments over the internet are serious business, yeah?”
—–
“One small thread creates the usual debate of politics. :-/ And the graph creator knew this and decided to be an attention whore anyway. Nobody ever wins the debates and it’s kind of funny to watch the fights to begin with. Especially the lot of you who are so sure you’ve got the iron-clad definition of socialism between your belts.”
—-
“It IS really senseless.
On that, I agree with another poster.”
—-
I’m done here. I’m tired of wasting so much time. You won’t change your mind. I’m not changing mine. Aren’t you tired of wasting time?
It’s summertime. Go outside and soak up the sun while we have it.
Wow. You want some cheese to go with that whine?
I post the definition of socialism, and it ain’t your inbred version, so you cry and give up. I haven’t wasted any time, I have exposed you for what you are. You can’t answer without resorting back to the strawman argument of your own definition of socialism. Never mind what it has meant for more than 100 years. You deflect, divert, change the subject. Anything but answer a question. You seem to have been in the sun too long. Go inside and read the Constitution, and maybe the Federalist papers.
And you’re a jerk. And an ignorant ass, whose lack of formal education has apparently been supplanted with some reading, but your ability to read words on the page, without any guidance whatsoever, has left you unable to understand them.
You say I won’t answer a question, but I’m too tired to sort through your volumes of ranting to figure out your DEMANDS. I thought you might understand I’m not here for your amusement.
GET. A. LIFE.
I have one, and I’m going back to it.
You assume too much. I am educated, though not indoctrinated by the world social order so prevalent in the colleges of today.
You call me ignorant, but yet I seem to know so much more than you. I knew the actual meaning of words that you chose to mean what you wanted them to.
You haven’t been too tired for 2 days now to fling insults, and run a dead horse in the ground. And all that time you can’t show us socalisim any where in the Constitution. Not because you are tired, but because it doesn’t exist.
I’m not a jerk, I simply shut down your hard core name calling when I differed with your opinion.
The more you talk, the more you fit the liberal elitist stereotype.
Name call, redirect, change the subject, but never have an honest discussion. Seems that life of yours is demanding others see things the way you want them.
Where can I mail the cheese to go with your whine?
Justacarlinion, High five to reducing his arguments to “Get a life” and “You’re ignorant.”
And he has no clue about any history anywhere. The New Deal was an Epic Fail. Saint FDR actually worsened economic conditions, and imprisoned 150,000 legal Asian-American citizens during WWII. He clearly has no idea that socialism doesn’t work, and capitalism is the system that gave the world modern medicine and the light bulb. Sucks to be a liberal when facts and logic are involved.
Just for everyone out there socialism does not equal Communism. The New Deal was not an Epic fail; it was by no means perfect. However, people now argue that it was actually WWII that got us out of the depression. Now lets see what we did during WWII, oh we spent a gigantic amount of money to help fund the war which created jobs. Now cut to today, what are we doing? We are spending a massive amount of money, and saving jobs in the process. Now I do not entirely agree with bailing out companies; however, people seem to forget that the government is not buying the companies; simply investing in them, giving them a capital loan so that they may stay afloat, and when profits resume then the companies will be expected to pay off the loan that the government gave them. By no means is the government owning the companies. Also just a side note, socialized medicine works. I’ve lived in several countries that have socialized medicine and you do not have to wait for a doctor or anything like that and the treatment is good and guess what its free.
Also i find it funny that when the republicans were in power they called all of the liberals whiners etc because they were upset with the state of the country. Now we have the liberals in power and the republicans are whining. The two party system is the worst piece of crap that was ever invented. Washington was right to fear that it would split the country in two, because it has; he had the foresight to see it and we should have listened to it.
God, this discussion makes my brain hurt… Idiots on both sides of the discussion
This graph is dumb. The coverage of Obama first off mostly surrounds his dog. But also there is a massive amount of talk about how he is socializing the country, Fox news (faux sorry) constantly talks about it and many of the other networks also discuss it as well.
Mac, Mac, Mac don’t you see? It was actually a return to a free market system that got us out of the depression. Look it up (not on wikipedia)
Crap.
You’re an effing LIAR.
Here’s some REAL advice, Mac. TALK to someone in their 70s, 80s, or 90s–they were THERE. I have. Get the truth, and get multiple perspectives. Don’t listen to this B.S.
I think we’re not socialist enough. The reason our economy collapsed is because all of the money being profited was being pocketed by the business owners, rather than going to the workers who earned it. That quickly makes the economy unstable. They gamble it on the stock market, and the workers who think they have money because of the media’s image of “We’re Rich!” encourages them to spend what they don’t have. Then the stock market crashes and we the middle and low class get screwed. Socialism taxes that money to the lower class who then need welfare because they’re starving for one and for two, welfare is that hole that reaches through the hoarded money that the rich have saved up. I personally work my ass off and like having more money. All of you rich bastards can call the president what you want (that is your right.) You’re just sore losers. If you hate him so much, gtfo.
English Fail
Socialize: to take part in social activities; interact with others; “He never socializes with his colleagues”; “The old man hates to socialize”
To train for a social environment; “The children must be properly socialized”
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
I don’t think that was the word you were looking for
You know, I can’t BELIEVE I didn’t even catch that myself. I was so determined to correct the OTHER nonsense that I—many of us, I’m sure, who know better—missed that all together!
A lot of animal stuff and scandal by those PETA guys…
Oh god, for PETA, looking at an animal is abuse, killing a disease transmitting bug is abuse, say YOU FREAKING (animal) is abuse, EVERY FREAKING THING IS ABUSE FOR THEM, hitting hurt an animal in a severe way IS abuse.