Then why is it that relatively unbridled capitalism, as compared to those socialist countries, lifted more people out of poverty, resulted in less unemployment, and made the USA the most powerful country in the world?
I have no problem with roads. I do have a problem with an administration running ads to promote getting more people to apply for food stamps. See the difference?
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for those services privately, where I have a choice as to whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide them. How about we have govt provide dinner for you every night and you eat what they give you. Sound good?
Obviously you have no understanding of what conservative means today in the USA. Hint: It's not about preserving the status quo.
Who leaked the Michelle Obama second term plan?
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus
Yes it does, because I would much prefer to pay for those services privately, where I have a choice as to whether I want them or not and who I choose to provide them. How about we have govt provide dinner for you every night and you eat what they give you. Sound good?
LOL. That's a good one. Actually we're already heading in that direction. Bloomberg in NYC has banned transfats in restaurants, banned sodas over 16 ounces in restaurants, delis, pushcarts, etc. And he's pressured restaurants to remove salt shakers from tables and reduce the amount of salt they put in food. Allowed to go unchecked, you can see where this process will take us.
And they conveniently forget that often their thinking of the day was completely wrong. The best example of that is transfats. In the 70s and 80s we were told to replace butter, which was supposed to be bad, with margarine, which was made from transfats and was supposed to be healthy. Now they find out that it's actually the transfat that is bad and in turn ban that. Go figure.
harry, no one gives a rat's ass what you think about American politics. ...or anything else, for that matter.
Federal dollars *SHOULDN'T* go for anything in that list except the military.
It's a forced, direct, transfer of money from one citizen to another. It should come under the fourteenth, if not a dozen other places in the Constitution.
Today's conservative is yesterday's (classical) liberal.
You work for the Queen (much less than nothing).
wrote
Obviously you have no understanding of how to read because I wasn't talking about what conservative means in the USA at all. I was talking about how a socialistic country such as Australia could have a conservatrive government that is trying to keep the status quo, that is, socialist policies. I wasn't addressing the USA at all.
1) The basic presumption that government somehow owes people a minimum wage is nutty That really is not and should never be the role of a government 2) People have faced "outrageous medical bills before this century" The notion that I should pay for some stranger's medical care, in part or in whole, because such as you declare that (magically) they have a right to any an all medical care that they need no matter the cost is outrageous. If you feel some duty in that regard, go for it But don't force others to live up to it too
When you're done spewing ignorant propaganda, do come back You might have something worth reading
wrote
Good luck with that. What happens when the high-wattage streetlamp outside your home costs about $300 a year to power and maintain? Are you going to pay for it ALL out of your own pocket, or are you going to join with your neighborhood in providing streetlamps for the entire neighborhood?
So many rightwingers have no idea how much it costs to provide the services they take for granted and that there's no way they'd ever pay for them out of their own pockets.
Oh, it's happened many times where governments have gone broke, such as the town of Hollister here in California. Sure, people mowed the lawn in front of the library FOR A WHILE, then got tired of it and stopped. So, for some time the grass was growing tall and brown, creating a fire hazard. I believe they finally passed a tax increase to allow the town to provide at least some fundamental services.
Turn that around Why should they be ? And where do you actually stop extending those services ?
Nope What makes it socialist is that the government has defined that EVERYONE has a right to it, no matter what they cost, and everyone else, at least the taxpayers MUST pay for it.
Personally, I don't see why I should pay for medical services provided to anyone else, PARTICULARLY when there is no built-in penalty against those who choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle You want to get fat, not exercise, eat junk food, smoke, drink, do drugs, pump out babies to collect more welfare YOU pay for the consequences.
wrote
When you think of socialist countries you think of dictatorships such as the USSR, China, and Cuba.
When I think of socialist countries I think of democratic socialist societies such as Italy, France, Germany, the UK, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and many other countries. So, the argument isn't against socialism, it's against dictatorships.
I have many friends from other countries. They prefer to live in those countries and only visit the USA on occasion. My friend, Neil, has excellent health care in Canada. Werner has no worries in Germany about his health care, his employment, his home, anything. It goes on like that...
wrote
I'm wondering how you see Obama as a liberal. He's more conservative than Richard Nixon or George Bush the first ever were. Obama is a pragmatist, not a liberal. He has not expanded government; in fact, he's reduced it. Education is a good thing; you should try it some time.
"Bob Barker" wrote
Again, "From each according to ability; to each according to need." Teachers, police, military, and fire fighters are all provided under a socialist model.
Remember that there are communities where the government does NOT provide fire righters. Instead people organize volunteer fire departments or pay a subscription fee to have fire protection for themselves. The volunteer fire departments have pretty much gone away because people no longer want to volunteer to help out their community. So, most of these have been taken over by the counties in which they were located.
And as for private fire protection, we all know how THAT comes out, "The fire fighters watched the house burn down because the home owner hadn't paid for service."
Funny how idiots like to come out with phrases like "unbridled capitalism" Too bad it's a TOTAL CROCK, and an OUTRIGHT LIE to even try to imply it.
Socialist structures are very different from rampant socialism It's one of the way that socialists try to camouflage what they are doing The bottom line is where does one STOP using public money for the ALLEGED "public good"
And I won't even mention how MANY of the alleged "social structures" are done much better when they are NOT done with "public money" under DIRECT government control Look at USPS vs UPS, Fedex et all Look at private railroads vs government-run railroads Look at Government run communications vs privately operated communications
The government does much better when it limits itself to regulation environments instead of getting in to run them
I'd word that, "the population".... when government limits itself... "
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus
The government does much better when it limits itself to regulation environments instead of getting in to run them
Socialists blame capitalism when things go wrong, and credit government when a little this or that goes right. I wonder what's with socialists, who think government is better than free market?
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus
Funny how idiots like to come out with phrases like "unbridled capitalism" Too bad it's a TOTAL CROCK, and an OUTRIGHT LIE to even try to imply it.
You're a flamin' nutter!
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.