Does the US even have the necessary wiggleroom for medicare?

[Machjo]

In some ways I'm a social democrat myself, I suppose. Bear in mind though that, unlike labour socialism, it's more moderate and willing to find a middle ground between capitalism and socialism. In other ways I'm more libertarian though. It depends on the issue in question I suppose.
But I certainly don't view capitalism as all bad. There are good points in it and the baby should not be trhown out with the bathwater.

 

[darkbeaver]

In some ways I'm a social democrat myself, I suppose. Bear in mind though that, unlike labour socialism, it's more moderate and willing to find a middle ground between capitalism and socialism. In other ways I'm more libertarian though. It depends on the issue in question I suppose.
But I certainly don't view capitalism as all bad. There are good points in it and the baby should not be trhown out with the bathwater.

Capitalism does not suffer a middle ground, the rule is full spectrum domination. Capitalism is simply money earned on money with obsolutely no added value, it's gambling at best and mass fraud and mass murder at worst. You know socialism does not mean the abolition of profit or enterprise, but in most cases it does mean the subjugation of private wealth beneath the commonweal and it would mean uncircumventable limits to that private wealth, the only way to ensure socially constructive distribution. I intend to live to see the complete destruction of capitalism and I won't miss any aspect of it ever. If you leave them an inch they will have a mile, that's their vulgar appreciation of growth and developement, and it's exactly why capitalism is disasterous for the human species. Labour is exclusively productive, it is the only source of wealth, there is no other. Not democrat not capitalist not socialist or communist only labour, both intellectual and manual.

 

[Machjo]

Social democracy itself is not totally opposed to capitalist ideas. Yes, social democracy is fundamentally a socialist idea, but a moderate one that does incorporate some capitalist ideas. Sweden is a famous example.

 

[Machjo]

Sure, socialism is an effective way to redistribute wealth, but capitalism provides incentive. Too far to one extreme, and we have exploitation. Too far to another, and we remove incentive and everyone is poor, essentially a collapse of the system. Social democracy strives to find a happy medium.

 

[darkbeaver]

Social democracy itself is not totally opposed to capitalist ideas. Yes, social democracy is fundamentally a socialist idea, but a moderate one that does incorporate some capitalist ideas. Sweden is a famous example.

Capitalism is entirely incompatable with democracy, they are irreconcilably diametricly opposed. What you have in Sweden is a standoff that American capitalism would break in the first week. Why should labour compromize with its abusers? It is far more efficient and profitable just to eliminate them first thing. Capitalism hasn't got any new or valuable ideas. It has absolutly nothing to offer humanity except ruin poverty and war every time without exception. I plainly do not understand how you can argue for the worst, bar none, model humanity has ever entertained. I refuse to believe that the purpose of life on this planet is to elevate and maintain a bloated class of parrasiticle sociopaths at the top of the structure for no reason whatever other than their perpetual comfort. Be green recycle capitalists.;-)

 

[darkbeaver]

Sure, socialism is an effective way to redistribute wealth, but capitalism provides incentive. Too far to one extreme, and we have exploitation. Too far to another, and we remove incentive and everyone is poor, essentially a collapse of the system. Social democracy strives to find a happy medium.

Necessity provides incentive capitalism provides nothing. Hunger provides incentive, cold provides incentive, curiosity provides incentive love provides incentive, capitalism provides nothing zip nadda. Capitalists are not in the business of providing, they are only interested aquisition and nothing else but. Capitalists routinely control food shelter security and education all of which are used as exploitative incentive. Machjo you will make a very bad capitalist, you are not nearly mean and vicious enough and you'd probably be bothered destroying some village for the gold. We don't want a happy medium we want an intelligent benevolent large.:smile:

 

[gopher]

Let Bush pay for his war and we'll have another trillion that could be used for health care reform. It is not a matter of lacking the resources for it. It is just the lack of will on the part of certain vested interests.

 

[EagleSmack]

If you cut funding on arts and public projects you'll save squat.

Art was just one example. Clear the cobwebs out from between your ears for once.

All of your taxes go to the rich you get weapons and wars they get everything else.

Yeah... all of our taxes go to the rich. :roll:

Who do you think sent the industrial base overseas? The public?

The government...both the Dems and Republicans

Shake your head Smack you are targeting pissants and your own foot. Good art cannot be bought at any price it must be created from the heart, it must be inspired by light and bouquet and curve a rich man can't simply wave a wad and have good art delivered accross town. :smile:

Sure it can and good art is bought all the time and viewed all the time. The Govt shouldn't have to pay for Art Welfare.

 

[EagleSmack]

Let Bush pay for his war and we'll have another trillion that could be used for health care reform. It is not a matter of lacking the resources for it. It is just the lack of will on the part of certain vested interests.

It's Obama's war now and he is going forward full speed. How long are you going to bring up Bush? Obama went back on his campaign promise to end the Iraq War...how do you feel about that?

 

[Machjo]

It's Obama's war now and he is going forward full speed. How long are you going to bring up Bush? Obama went back on his campaign promise to end the Iraq War...how do you feel about that?

I'm not American so not necessarily my business, but he should be focussing on paying off that massive debt. Sure Bush started it, but now that Obama's at the helm, it's time to shift direction. You don't have the money for this kind of war anymore. California's government is screaming for funds and the US debt is still shooting through the roof. You're country will soo n have to increase taxes just to pay off interest.

 

[darkbeaver]

Art was just one example. Clear the cobwebs out from between your ears for once.



Yeah... all of our taxes go to the rich. :roll:



The government...both the Dems and Republicans



Sure it can and good art is bought all the time and viewed all the time. The Govt shouldn't have to pay for Art Welfare.

So if you want to be spared taxation why don't you stop paying the rich to conduct war which Americans are never going to be finished being taxed for. Like I said you're stepping on ants while the real bandits laugh at you all the way back to their gated castles. Soon you'll be completely assetless and they won't even bother to feed and water you. YOU don't have a government the rich own the one in office.

 

[gopher]

''Obama went back on his campaign promise to end the Iraq War...how do you feel about that?''


Look again at his actual words rather than allow anyone to read them for you.

What precisely did he say? He said it would take at least one full year before withdrawal and most likely 1 1/2 years. I already said on another thread that I want an IMMEDIATE withdrawal and to have the bill for its cost sent to Bush.


While you're at it, can you explain to me why you want to hold Obama to his word but never did the same to Bush?

 

[Machjo]

''Obama went back on his campaign promise to end the Iraq War...how do you feel about that?''


Look again at his actual words rather than allow anyone to read them for you.

What precisely did he say? He said it would take at least one full year before withdrawal and most likely 1 1/2 years. I already said on another thread that I want an IMMEDIATE withdrawal and to have the bill for its cost sent to Bush.


While you're at it, can you explain to me why you want to hold Obama to his word but never did the same to Bush?

He did keep his word:

YouTube - Freudian slip: Bush Threatening the United States

 

[gopher]

Yup. I remember that gem.

 

[Cannuck]

I already said on another thread that I want an IMMEDIATE withdrawal and to have the bill for its cost sent to Bush.

Why? You guys voted for him. In fact you reelected him after he started the Iraq war.

 

[EagleSmack]

''Obama went back on his campaign promise to end the Iraq War...how do you feel about that?''


Look again at his actual words rather than allow anyone to read them for you.

What precisely did he say? He said it would take at least one full year before withdrawal and most likely 1 1/2 years. I already said on another thread that I want an IMMEDIATE withdrawal and to have the bill for its cost sent to Bush.

Obama said one brigade a month will be withdrawn leading up to the DNC. Once he got the nomination he started changing his tune. Now he has made it clear that the US will be involved in Iraq for years.

While you're at it, can you explain to me why you want to hold Obama to his word but never did the same to Bush?

What promise was that?

 

[Niflmir]

I think that if you were to force everyone to buy into a public insurance in the US and leave behind their private insurance, people would actually gain money.

There were other threads here that showed it, but just look up "US health insurance administrative overhead" and you will find it pretty easily. Health insurance systems fail when healthy people don't buy into them; after all, if only the sick are paying, where is the "insurance" aspect? To entice the the healthy, the companies have to create endless variations of the same product, creating more overhead, or have to try to convince employers to buy plans for their employees to make sure the healthy pay in. All of this creates excess administration which is avoided in a single (public) insurance system. Who would have to pay more? The healthy people who are currently irresponsibly uninsured.

 

[gopher]

Why? You guys voted for him. In fact you reelected him after he started the Iraq war.

Not me. That crook never had me fooled for a minute.

 

[Cannuck]

Not me. That crook never had me fooled for a minute.

You are American. He was your guy.

 

[gopher]

''withdrawal''

Today it was reported that he said the withdrawal was going to be completed by the end of 2011, according to his campaign pledge. I don't honestly recall it that way -- I remember him saying by the end of 2010 at the latest. One thing is for sure: he did NOT say immediate withdrawal.

In any case, I want withdrawal NOW. Not tomorrow.

''What promise was that?''

Creation of millions of jobs, ''mission accomplished'', $ 2,000 tax credit per family for health care insurance (that's right - health care for everybody), ''I would be very careful to use our troops as nation builders'', and to smooth all partisanship hostilities.

Yeah, he sure did a marvelous job didn't he?

How do you feel about his failure to do all that?