quote:Originally posted by Rider Aldebaran: Yeah, the Democrats had the majority, but the problem is that they kept getting bulldozed by the GOP minority and folding to the GOP's wishes. Like the health care issue; I still can't believe that America is pretty much the only first-world country that does not have universal health care. That's a massive fail right there, as not everyone can afford health insurance, especially not in the current economy and with all the other things we have to pay for.
On your other points:
1. I honestly do feel that taxes should be increased a bit on the rich. I mean, if they're rich, then they should have no problem paying a little extra, since it won't make a dent in their income. Stop with the taxcuts for the corporations as well.
2. Oh, like the GOP doesn't try to increase its voter-base. But I'd rather have the Democrats instead of the GOP, who keep proving themselves to be out of touch with the real world. ...Not that the Democrats are innocent of that either, but the GOP seems more out-of-touch.
Bare in mind that I'm a moderate, but I lean more towards the Democrat/Liberal side of the political scale. While I have praised the Democrats a bit, the truth is that I feel that the whole government is messed up almost beyond repair at this point.
50% of people who file federal tax returns in the U.S. pay zero! That's your idea of common sense? Truly laughable. I can just see your retort: "But they don't make enough." Yet the majority make enough to have a cellphone (91% of the U.S. population owns one), almost all have cable/satellite tv, don't forget the big screen plasmas or LCDs hanging in their living rooms, and the 22 inch rims on their pimpmobiles. But they pay nothing in taxes, and therefore, should have absolutely no say in voting for the party that professes to give them even more breaks and/or handouts. Talk about a massively corrupt idea. And one born out of typically twisted liberal ideology.
You mention the GOP being "out of touch". But nobody's more out of touch than the party that promotes us becoming even more of a welfare state. "Vote for us, you lowest common denominators, and we'll gladly pass tax reform and put more of THEIR money into YOUR pocket." An excellent common sense idea, just ask any leech on society, no doubt they'll agree 100%.
The saying "paying your fair share" means one has to cover ALL their own/family's expenses - not just personal, but any benefit from services on the local, state, and national level; and that's being as non-political about it as one can be. It doesn't mean that we should rape the small business owner or the doctor down the street for just another $50 or 70K a year, because afterall, they can afford a "little more". If people want healthcare, pay for it. If you want to eat, pay for it. But do it with your own money - the money you earned at one, two, or however many jobs it takes for you to be self-sufficient.
Posts: 501 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Spruce314: Socialism on a large national scale (Postal Service, Social Security, Medicare etc) which is controlled by a distant central government full of bureaucracy is well proven not to work well or efficiently.
Proof?
I've lived in many countries in my currently short life and I've never, ever found a problem when postal services, medical services are performed by the government to some degree.
I don't know what it is with this, mostly, US-based mentality.
In the UK we pay a similar level of tax to some US states, which seems to cover everything just fine. The papers like to throw up problems but the people here are chugging along just fine. One time I broke my arm, I didn't pay a penny. Another time I needed some 6 month long health care, again I didn't pay a penny.
Whilst the NHS is good it can be slow. One time I found a lump and instead of "not paying a penny" I took the other option - paid for private healthcare. It wasn't anything serious and they treated it quickly.
This is what I don't understand. When you have options - where is the problem?
I've settled in the UK now because they've got pretty much everything right in terms of a balance between socialism and capitalism. I'm able to run a successful business and not be taxed to oblivion. Sure I'd have a bit more money if I ran it from the US... but the quality of life is great here and I'm earning more than enough for a very comfy life.
Greed isn't good.
---------
As for the Michelle Obama thing. Is that really what she's saying? These are highly intelligent people. Why would she say something to jeopardize her future and her husbands career in such a *very* public situation?
Posts: 219 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Spruce314: Socialism on a large national scale (Postal Service, Social Security, Medicare etc) which is controlled by a distant central government full of bureaucracy is well proven not to work well or efficiently.
Proof?
I've lived in many countries in my currently short life and I've never, ever found a problem when postal services, medical services are performed by the government to some degree.
I don't know what it is with this, mostly, US-based mentality.
In the UK we pay a similar level of tax to some US states, which seems to cover everything just fine. The papers like to throw up problems but the people here are chugging along just fine. One time I broke my arm, I didn't pay a penny. Another time I needed some 6 month long health care, again I didn't pay a penny.
Whilst the NHS is good it can be slow. One time I found a lump and instead of "not paying a penny" I took the other option - paid for private healthcare. It wasn't anything serious and they treated it quickly.
This is what I don't understand. When you have options - where is the problem?
I've settled in the UK now because they've got pretty much everything right in terms of a balance between socialism and capitalism. I'm able to run a successful business and not be taxed to oblivion. Sure I'd have a bit more money if I ran it from the US... but the quality of life is great here and I'm earning more than enough for a very comfy life.
Greed isn't good.
---------
As for the Michelle Obama thing. Is that really what she's saying? These are highly intelligent people. Why would she say something to jeopardize her future and her husbands career in such a *very* public situation?
I'm glad to hear from someone who lives in a country with universal healthcare. I had heard that it tended to be slow and antiquated compared to traditional private care. In my travels to Canada and Italy I noticed considerably higher gas prices than here in the US. Also, Canada has a flat 15% tax (at least Ontario) on every purchase. Somehow "free" government programs have to be paid for.
Okay, back on topic. That's what gets me about the Obamas. Before the election and since they can do no wrong in the medias eyes.
Posts: 602 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: So, what exactly is bad about socialism again?
That is has failed everytime it's been tryed on a national level..and this country is too broke. Oh and, the free market {u know that thing that helps put food on your grocery store shelves and gas in the pumps} was built on Capitolism and free market, not greedy big business though don't confuse the two.
Please note: this is neither an opinion for or against Socialism or Capitalism:
The "Free Market" is a mish-mash *of* Socialism and Capitalism. It wasn't built *on* capitalism at all.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
