I am. Everytime the market drops, I am glad. They should be punished for this crap. Back to free capitalism.
The Obama administration will last 8 years. If he leaves with the economy in fairly good shape (whether or not it's thru no fault of his own), then maybe another 8 years of a progrssive liberal agenda- which includes a definitive shift towards socialism. Up or down, we may need to learn to live with it.
Which is why I hope it fails. Ughh...government involved in every aspect of our lives, no incentives to get ahead in life....just redistribution of wealth.
What's so bad about socialism, as long as they don't get carried away with taxing? If they keep it at the Clinton level tax rates, I don't see it being as a problem.
When you want to see a doctor and it's like the DMV, you may change your tune. It's really bad when they tell you where to go to get groceries and all they have is corn or potatoes.
I just don't agree with redistribution of wealth, government controlling our lives and a cascading taxation system.
I agree. There have been lengthy studies completed relating taxation & social spending and the direct effect on that and the rise & decline of countries. According to the studies, we're way over the top with too much taxation & social spending. And I would agree that our country is clearly on the decline.
I'm hoping for it to fail and I have no doubt that it will fail big time. It hasn't worked any place else. That is the only good thing about Obama winning over McCain. McCain isn't really my cup of tea and only his foreign policy is anything I like about him. I could see it possibly looking like Obama's socialism is working but it will not be good by the time he leaves in 8 years. IMO this will be the last of the Democrat presidents for a while after the 8 years of Obama.
There hasn't been "free capitalism" in the US for at least the last century-plus. And there isn't a democracy in the world that is pure capitalism. So, socialism won't fail, because it's proven to be a central desire for every democracy, at least in the modern era. As for specific socialistic policies, it's very much a case-by-case basis. I don't wish for pure socialism anymore than I wish for pure capitalism.
Socialism, capitalism, liberalism, conservatism....meh. I'm for whatever solution results in the highest degree of happiness for a society. It's funny how we spend so much time worrying about GDP, taxes, job numbers, etc., and so little time thinking about what makes Americans actually happy, and what policies are likely to make them more happy. If our newly socialized banking system fails, will it really lead to greater happiness? Maybe among a few smug free marketers, but for the rest of us the complete collapse of our financial institutions would be a disaster. I find it really hard to understand how anyone can hope for a massive depression just to make a point about Adam Smith and Karl Marx. Seems pretty petty.
We're probably very far along the road to complete collapse of our financial institutions and government. The amount of liabilities the govt. has taken on was over $50T before the financial bailout, and we have yet to see the full force of the baby boomers retiring and that effect on govt.'s ability to pay for Social Security and Medicare benefits. When all is said and done, we may not be one 50 state nation and FDR's societal engineering will be marked as the beginning of the end.
There are different levels of "socialism". Do you think that all people should not be entitled to health care? We are one of the one of the only countries that is considered modern, that everyone doesn't have good health care. Secondly in the europeans countries that I have visited, there is not a redistribution of wealth. There is a lot more government control, and a lot higher tax rate though. So I agree with you on those principles. But I have not observed in any redistribution of wealth. I met very wealthy individuals in europe, and all were citizens of so called "socialist" countries.
My biggest fear with all of this socialist talk and warning is the feeling that once we make steps in that direction, there is no going back. Once socialized healthcare is implemented, it WILL NOT be taken away. So, if it starts to fail and become inefficient, the only remedy will be to throw more money at it. This bank socialization will not be reversed. And, as it gets worse, we keep throwing more money at it. Socializing 401(k) plans (if this actually went through) would NOT be eliminated. And, once again, the solution becomes throwing more money at the problem. http://www.investmentnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081012/REG/310139971 We seem to refuse to really bring accountability into the schools/teaching system, so when improvements are needed, the talk turns to more funding instead of something creative, or incentive systems. Tax hikes / reductions are not permanent, as we have seen, so the tax issues are less scary to me. I wish we could put more effort into finding solutions for issues (education, healthcare, etc) that are creative, and aimed more at capitalism instead of trying to fix them with more money coming from the highest earners, and an equalization of the wealth.
Hah, I wonder which military I'd belong to. The Western States of America? Cascadia? Oregon? Maybe I'd be out of a job.
I wouldn't want to be staring at Russia either. Hawaii would definitely be a nation unto itself given any opportunity. Besides, they're Laker fans. Then again, so are many Californians. Gimme the Bay Area northward. British Columbia can join us too.
From what I understand of the current legislation is that the shares we are buying of banks now, the government is going to sell in the future. When that is, is anyones guess. Now that I think about it though, there have been several government programs in the past that really, already border on being socialist. Those being: 1. The US Postal Service. 2. Bonneville Power Administration. 3. The TVA project. They have been around for a long time, with lots of rumors years ago, of being turned into "Government corporations", but it never happened. I believe many folks thought that eventually the USPS would be phased out in favor of private carriers. BPA and TVA most folks figured would have been put out of business by energy corporations. When push comes to shove, they are still here because people whine when their prices go up, or law makers protected them from being torn down.
Did you see Obama's video regarding redistribution of wealth? Anytime you have a cascading taxation system, I consider that a redistribution of wealth since you are penalizing success and rewarding mediocrity. http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=308875581782856 And regarding Health Care, I believe more reform, not government control nor universal requirements. I favor a system where premiums are lowered, the system is privately run and government regulates, but doesn't control the system. I do not believe forcing everyone to have healthcare is proper or a universal system that is guaranteed by the Government. I would push for reform in providing better coverage and lower premiums, as well as additional "catasrophic" coverage for major, life-threatening situations.
Yea that is a dilemna. The only thing is, a lot of countries have socialized health care implemented successfully, and models could be built off of those successful prototypes. There are several advantages to such a system. 1.The first being everybody has health care. (huzzah!) 2. The second being that they put a lot more emphasis on preventative care, which is actually shown to be a lot more efficient than waiting for something bad to happen to you and then going to the doctor. (Think of it as getting the oil changed on your car. You do it so your motor doesn't blow up and leave you a big bill.) 3. Doctors no longer have to carry the high level of malpractice insurance, which also raises costs. There is always a good chance we could F it up, or that the model is only good for a country of a certain size, etc. and that we might outgrow it. Now on the other side of the coin, we have a Darwinist health care policy here in the USA. The only people who get coverage, are the ones that can afford it. That means only the rich live, while the poor get phased out, the hard way. The facts are I know more than one person who has had to declare bankruptcy because they could not afford health care. Secondly, their choice was to get the treatment, and then shaft the hospital that treated them, or die. And that, is wrong.
