Topic: If any of you have been paying attention

[nickpapageorgio81]

This is true, but there are different ways of taking liberty, and lumping them all together does more harm than good.  Knowing the difference between Facism and Communism will allow you to deal with both, lumping them into the same pile allows you to focus on one while the other happen.  You keep talking about worrying about the next Hitler, guess how he came to power?  He got everyone so worked up over the commies they didn't see the Fascists taking control.

Anita Dunn said she was a Maoists.  Van Jones said he is a Marxist.And Obama is trying to nationalize everything like a Fascists.  Hmmmmmm

[nickpapageorgio81]

Interesting conversation Blackshirts..... I have to go to work now.  Talk to  you guys later.

[Blackshirts]

You mean when Hitler was ELECTED chancellor he was hiding the fact he was repping the Nazi party?  

Look again, he never got elected to office once, he was appointed chancellor.

[NebraskaVol]

That's what I said, Hindenburg elected him chancellor!

[mpalmer4]

Both sides of the spectrum have their own idiotic ideas.  Unfortunately 99% of our elected officials think like COWBOYS in that if everyone doesn't agree with them it is just flat out wrong. 

[nickpapageorgio81]

Blackshirts.... in your opinion, what form of tyranny are we under threat from???  You said it.  We need to make the distinction of what it is.  So is it: Maoism, Marxism, Totaliarian Fascism, etc.

[Blackshirts]

Corporatocracy

[nickpapageorgio81]

Do you mean oligarchy?

[Blackshirts]

No I mean Corproratocracy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

The issue is trying too hard to prevent a Corporatocracy leaves you with communism, which I also don't want (although I will say good in theory, except it doesn't take into account that people are lazy bastards).  So like everything you have to walk a fine line.

[nickpapageorgio81]

Okay.  We have had an oligarchy or Corproratocracy for awhile.  I am a capitalist and I will admit this is not capitalism.  What happens when you have Corproratocracy and a President comes along and attempts to take everything over.  Obama has nationalized a few auto companies, a few banks, is trying to nationalize healthcare and is now looking to nationalize the student loan program.

[Blackshirts]

Oligarchy != Corporatocracy

An Oligarchy is a ruling few, While we do have some major families in politics I do not think they have enough power or could gain enough to form an Oligarchy.

Corporatocracy is being ruled by businesses, and we are close to that with the way banks operate.  If Republicans had their way with extreme deregulation this is what would happen.

Nationalizing is on the other end of the spectrum and is not what want or need either.  It is really a fine line to walk to have enough regulation to keep big companies in control and not too powerful but at the same time allowing smaller companies to grow and flourish.

[nickpapageorgio81]

Oligarchy != Corporatocracy

An Oligarchy is a ruling few, While we do have some major families in politics I do not think they have enough power or could gain enough to form an Oligarchy.

Corporatocracy is being ruled by businesses, and we are close to that with the way banks operate.  If Republicans had their way with extreme deregulation this is what would happen.

Nationalizing is on the other end of the spectrum and is not what want or need either.  It is really a fine line to walk to have enough regulation to keep big companies in control and not too powerful but at the same time allowing smaller companies to grow and flourish.

Then maybe it is a good thing we are in a stalemate.  The only deregulation I want is to allow insurance companies to cross state lines.  It would open up competition and be a good short term fix.  With it the bill would only need 2 pages.

[nickpapageorgio81]

Also....one of the main reasons we need regulation in the first place stems from our monetary system.

[Blackshirts]

1.) Short term fixes lead to long term problems, that is why we are where we are today, too many "short term fixes"
2.) Health insurance needs to lose their anti-trust protection, this is a must
3.) What about the 20 million who could still not afford insurance, better yet what about their kids?  They will still be forced to go to the ER for a case of the sniffles and that will still drive up your's and my healthcare costs and leave us in the same boat.

[Blackshirts]

Also....one of the main reasons we need regulation in the first place stems from our monetary system.

No just like pure communism pure capitalism cannot work.

Pure communism would work if people weren't lazy ass's and would all pull together
Pure capitalism would work if people did not exploit the power of money to gain control

[nickpapageorgio81]

1.) Short term fixes lead to long term problems, that is why we are where we are today, too many "short term fixes"
2.) Health insurance needs to lose their anti-trust protection, this is a must
3.) What about the 20 million who could still not afford insurance, better yet what about their kids?  They will still be forced to go to the ER for a case of the sniffles and that will still drive up your's and my healthcare costs and leave us in the same boat.

Link that says 20 million CITIZENS are not insured.  Allowing insurance companies to go accross state lines would drop premiums significantly.  Then you kill any program that allows companies to go to other countries, keeping jobs here.  Globalisation is also to blame.  Then you would see what would happen if politicians actually gave a poop about the American people to do these.  Kill pre existing conditions while you are at it.  Take a regulation away to add another

[Blackshirts]

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/014227.html

Meanwhile, the number of people without health insurance coverage rose from 45.7 million in 2007 to 46.3 million in 2008, while the percentage remained unchanged at 15.4 percent.

Sorry you're right 45 million

[nickpapageorgio81]

Question I have is....If Medicare is so good, why not drop the qualifying age to 30 and allow their children to piggyback?  Obama has told over 100,000 Vets (ageism=eugenics) he cant afford to cover them anymore.  If that is the case, how is he going to cover "20 million?"  Taxes of course but if you haven't noticed our governments from federal to city like to spend more than they take in.

[nickpapageorgio81]

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/014227.html

Meanwhile, the number of people without health insurance coverage rose from 45.7 million in 2007 to 46.3 million in 2008, while the percentage remained unchanged at 15.4 percent.

Sorry you're right 45 million

So 15% citizens and non citizens.  What is our unemployment?  Non workers AND those not working full time?

[Blackshirts]

You realize we are already paying that tax right?  those uninsured who go to the ER and have to get treatment, guess who pays for them?  So we are already paying for them at a rate 5 times what normal cost is, why not cover them and get them real treatment?

[Blackshirts]

So 15% citizens and non citizens.  What is our unemployment?  Non workers AND those not working full time?

Seeing as this was done in 2008 the unemployment rate was between 5.4 and 7.1%, and held steady from '07 when it was between 4.1 to 5.1%

[nickpapageorgio81]

You realize we are already paying that tax right?  those uninsured who go to the ER and have to get treatment, guess who pays for them?  So we are already paying for them at a rate 5 times what normal cost is, why not cover them and get them real treatment?

It is not a tax, it is hidden costs at the office.  Why not drop the qualifying age to 30 and allow them to piggyback their children.  I say yes to constitutional reform and no to unconstitutional takeover.  I will always look towards anarchy rather than tyranny.

[Blackshirts]

It is not a tax, it is hidden costs at the office.  Why not drop the qualifying age to 30 and allow them to piggyback their children.

...Isn't that what is being suggested for the most part?

And it is a tax, it just doesn't go to the government.

[nickpapageorgio81]

...Isn't that what is being suggested for the most part?

And it is a tax, it just doesn't go to the government.

No.  that is not being suggested.  What is being suggested is a whole new program that gives government more power.  I gave you a chance to answer.  Medicare sucks.  You don't want to admit it because it would kill any argument for being a proponent for government run healthcare.  Medicare is going bankrupt therefore so would government run healthcare.

Oh.  unemployment is 10% nonworkers and 7% non full time.  Which puts it around 17%.  When you are ONLY losing 36,000 jobs Harry Reid, it still means those jobs are lost while none are created.

[Blackshirts]

Yes that is todays data, the numbers I gave were from '08 15% no insurance and around 6% unemployed

But I forgot if someone is unemployed conservatives don't think they count