Btw isn't this topic more suited for random politics?
I don't think it's really too far off base, given Lordgrim's Sanders thread got nuked. We're basically discussing the opposite of Trump here, who has openly bragged about buying politicians. AKA, "why Trump isn't good."
Why not? I've never heard a single reason besides "we have 330 million people". We've also got more personal wealth than they do, it's just far more concentrated. So, the population thing is non-sequitur until you can quantify what effect that has on the model.
For one they were already socialist countries. It wasn't until recently they headed towards a more free market system with social aspects still remaining depending on sustainability. They're going from pure socialist to hybrid socialist / free market (read not capitalist).
Whereas you advocating the U.S. goes in the opposite direction with a very ineffective and inefficient governing body designed with capitalism in mind.
You would need a total rewrite of the Constitution and redesign of how the government operates otherwise you're heading the U.S. straight towards capital flight which will inevitably bankrupt the country.
Why not? I've never heard a single reason besides "we have 330 million people". We've also got more personal wealth than they do, it's just far more concentrated. So, the population thing is non-sequitur until you can quantify what effect that has on the model.
For one they were already socialist countries. It wasn't until recently they headed towards a more free market system with social aspects still remaining depending on sustainability. They're going from pure socialist to hybrid socialist / free market (read not capitalist).
Whereas you advocating the U.S. goes in the opposite direction with a very ineffective and inefficient governing body designed with capitalism in mind.
You would need a total rewrite of the Constitution and redesign of how the government operates otherwise you're heading the U.S. straight towards capital flight which will inevitably bankrupt the country.
A single payer healthcare system would definitely require a constitutional amendment to work well, this is true, but why are we all for constitutional amendments to define marriage or outlaw abortion but not to reverse the freefall down the ladder of public health and stop the singularly American medical bankruptcy? In addition, public financing of elections is ALREADY the constitutional standard. There's nothing to change besides building an expressed wall between private interests and politicians. Similarly, congressional term limits should have gone hand in hand with presidential ones. If the evils of one person occupying the white house for so long are obvious, why not so in congress?
I'd also like to know which countries you're saying were "already socialist".
Say all you want about "socialism" vs. "capitalism" vs. "communism," but what I know is that, as things stand, whether we're bankrupt as a country or whether everyone but a handful at the top are bankrupt, there's little difference in the day-to-day for the majority of the people.
And that sounds more like Stalin's Russia than anything to me: corruption at the top and misery everywhere else you look.
The difference between euro socialism and ussr socialism is simply a matter of time. The well intended monopoly on resources by the state has always eventually been twisted into a tool of individual oppression.
Yeah.
No individual oppression going on here in the U.S. Capitalism could never be twisted in that way. No-siree.
Sing yourself another lullaby.
The oppression you refer to is not capitalism. Nor has the U.S. ever really been fully capitalist. To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor. That is not capitalism, not even close.
To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor.
Blaming greed on taxes.
Cute.
It's so delightfully naïve of you to think that if taxes and regulations went away, the people at the bottom would be the ones with more in their pockets.
To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor.
Blaming greed on taxes.
Cute.
It's so delightfully naïve of you to think that if taxes and regulations went away, the people at the bottom would be the ones with more in their pockets.
The reason Comcast is one of a few if not the only internet provider for many people is in part because the government has over regulated the industry to the point where only the biggest whales can absorb the costs. That's in part how they manipulate the market.
There was no taxes reference in there at all, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from.
To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor.
Blaming greed on taxes.
Cute.
It's so delightfully naïve of you to think that if taxes and regulations went away, the people at the bottom would be the ones with more in their pockets.
The reason Comcast is one of a few if not the only internet provider for many people is in part because the government has over regulated the industry to the point where only the biggest whales can absorb the costs. That's in part how they manipulate the market.
There was no taxes reference in there at all, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from.
LOL, your comment is so full of ***it is hilarious.
Keeping pulling that *** line, we know it isn't true.
To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor.
Blaming greed on taxes.
Cute.
It's so delightfully naïve of you to think that if taxes and regulations went away, the people at the bottom would be the ones with more in their pockets.
The reason Comcast is one of a few if not the only internet provider for many people is in part because the government has over regulated the industry to the point where only the biggest whales can absorb the costs. That's in part how they manipulate the market.
There was no taxes reference in there at all, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from.
And the government financing 90% of the infrastructure and surrendering ownership to the last mile providers without enforcing any fair business or anti-trust laws or collecting any taxes has allowed them to eliminate costs. They've eliminated competition, cost, and accountability with the government's help because they are allowed to lobby and otherwise coerce politicians into taking the teeth out of the agencies that are specifically designed to stop that.
This circular logic always leads back to the same place, people with lots of money getting more votes than the rest of the people.
European socialism works better because the populations are smaller and more homogeneous. We're talking about countries that are roughly about the size of larger American cities.
The whole advent of Trump still being news is because there's a segment of people who want to see government burn.
European socialism works better because the populations are smaller and more homogeneous. We're talking about countries that are roughly about the size of larger American cities.
European socialism works better because the populations are smaller and more homogeneous. We're talking about countries that are roughly about the size of larger American cities.
To the extent that corporations oppress people it is because the central authority manipulates the market in their favor.
Blaming greed on taxes.
Cute.
It's so delightfully naïve of you to think that if taxes and regulations went away, the people at the bottom would be the ones with more in their pockets.
The reason Comcast is one of a few if not the only internet provider for many people is in part because the government has over regulated the industry to the point where only the biggest whales can absorb the costs. That's in part how they manipulate the market.
There was no taxes reference in there at all, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from.
And the government financing 90% of the infrastructure and surrendering ownership to the last mile providers without enforcing any fair business or anti-trust laws or collecting any taxes has allowed them to eliminate costs. They've eliminated competition, cost, and accountability with the government's help because they are allowed to lobby and otherwise coerce politicians into taking the teeth out of the agencies that are specifically designed to stop that.
This circular logic always leads back to the same place, people with lots of money getting more votes than the rest of the people.
I don't know what taxes or infrastructure you're referring to. But generally, infrastructure isn't built for use only by the largest corporations.
Money makes the world go round bro. The more you have the more people you can get your message to. Bribing politicians is not the same thing as promoting your message. Whos fault is it that the politicians they elect are limp wristed pushovers?
European socialism works better because the populations are smaller and more homogeneous. We're talking about countries that are roughly about the size of larger American cities.
That was shared several months back. The full article is bullcrap anyway. The author lives in the "Yankeedom" section and shows obvious bias towards it throughout the article.
European socialism works better because the populations are smaller and more homogeneous. We're talking about countries that are roughly about the size of larger American cities.
The whole advent of Trump still being news is because there's a segment of people who want to see government burn.
Population isn't relevant unless you can quantify what difference it makes. Less homogeneous only affects public opinion, which is a really poor metric for how something works. Objective metrics are more useful, and none of them indicate that those systems wouldn't work in America.
Trump still being news is more of an indication of the quality of news than how many people want to see the government burn. Our media serves up exactly what viewers want, confirmation of their personal biases with total disregard to facts.
"Europeans systems can't work here."
"Socialism becomes Communism"
"Taxes and regulation create monopolies"
Always reminds me of this...
"A lie told often enough becomes the truth" -V.I.Lenin
Right, Star Trek utopia here we come. Any society that uses money is feudalism. So euro socialism is feudalism too right?
That's about as likely as actually seeing Picard duke it out with Vader.
Keeping money out of politics is one of the fundamental principles of a democratic republic. If you can't see the problem with someone buying candidates (or "influence") and the problem that causes for the layfolk the government is supposed to represent then perhaps you might want to look at that.
You'll never rid the process of corrupting elements but we're getting damn close to power coalescing and democracy being ceremonial.
US TV network NBC is cutting ties with Donald Trump over "recent derogatory statements" that the veteran businessman made about immigrants.
NBC said the company would now not be airing the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants that are co-owned by Mr Trump.
Responding to the announcement, Mr Trump said he would consider suing NBC.
Earlier this month, he accused Mexicans of adding drugs and crime to the US as he announced he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination.
"They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some I assume are good people, but I speak to border guards, and they tell us what we are getting," he said in his speech on 16 June.
He also pledged to build a "great wall" on the US border with Mexico and insisted it would be paid for by Mexicans.
He later insisted he was criticising US lawmakers, not Mexican people.
