History Repeating Itself

Very few own enough that the stock is enough to survive on. Most people need jobs from corporations, and their stock holdings are miniscule, making the trend towards outsource more impactful than their meager holdings.

You don't know what you're talking about. Most 'multinationals' have thousands of stockholders, people who's 401ks are vested in their corporations, as well as the various support corporations who supply materials and services for the multinationals. You want to imagine these 'multinationals' as being person-less entities, but realizing just how stupid that is, you are now trying to argue it's just a small insignificant number of people... the truth is, it's thousands and thousands of people in a variety of industries, in various ways, tied to the success or failure of the 'evil' multinational.

and they outsourse as many of those functions as they can to overseas wage slaves.

They used to. But now they're outsourcing as many functions as possible.

Again, outsources happens because it is economically advantageous to do so. This effects profit and bottom line for the corporation, which is to the benefit of all those thousands and thousands associated with the corporation. And AGAIN, the alternative to outsourcing is to leave those "wage slaves" with absolutely no source of any income. Is that better? If you are broke, and someone gives you a dollar, that's not much money, but at least you can buy a double cheeseburger at McDonalds, and I bet that will taste better than ketchup soup made from a stolen condiment pack!

But you cited "providing tax revenu" as a benefit corporations provide back to the rest of society.

No, I said that was a residual benefit of corporations making money... I don't like corporate tax, I think it would be better not to have corporate tax. In fact, maybe that could be the 'magic potion' to realize your fantasy view, we tell American corporations, if you build production here and produce your product in America instead of other 'slave wage' countries, we will reward you by not making you pay corporate taxes!

Paying dictators to enslave their people is disruptive to the natural development of a balanced an sound economy, it puts american out of work too. The only people who win are multinational corporations.

Which are American people who own stock, 401ks, have financial investments and interests in the corporation and all of their support industries.

You can't develop a balanced economy in a country you don't control! NOTHING we can do about that, unless you want to go take over China! we can either do business with them or not, if we don't, the Russians will, they don't really give a shit what you think. What you are arguing, is like saying, if I see a homeless person, knowing that I can't buy them a house and make their situation markedly better, it's best for me to not even toss them a dollar! How does that HELP anything???

Paying dictators to enslave their people is disruptive to the natural development of a balanced an sound economy, it puts american out of work too. The only people who win are multinational corporations.

You're repeating your nonsense... like a goddamn parrot! LOL

They're a part of capitalism now, but they don't have to be, and they're not DEFINITIVE of, or crucial to the existence of capitalism. That's just something you keep meritlessly asserting.

No, they're not essential to capitalism, we could have a capitalist system where everyone operates a lemonade stand, would that be better for our economy?
 
You want to know what's so important to Liberals? It's being healthy. They want medical care just like a hungry person wants food. An ill person doesn't care how much a doctor is making any more than a hungry person cares how much a grocer is making.

HCR has nothing to do with jealousy or redistribution of wealth. It has to do with pain and illness and, ultimately, survival.

Was it really all that perplexing to you?

Perhaps an example will help. Let's say you required an operation and a government representative visited you and said, "Dixie, go to any doctor and have the operation and we will pay."

So, you check a couple of doctors. One will charge $10,000 for the operation and the other will charge $8,000. The doctor charging $10,000 has a much better reputation and his patients are more satisfied. Which doctor would you choose?

Would you go to the $8,000 doctor because you feel the one charging $10,000 is greedy and you want to teach him a lesson so you avoid him?

The only reason I would care how much a doctor charges is whether or not I could afford him but that's just me.


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Well Applehead, it seems you are under the delusion that conservatives don't care about being sick or having adequate health care. I can assure you, I hate to be sick as much as you do. I worry about catastrophic illness just the same as a liberal. Most of us conservatives don't have a private doctor living in our mansions, available for our every whim. I know that might be what your masters told you, but it's certainly not the case. We have to go to the doctor too, we have to pay high costs just like you do. They don't give conservatives a discount at the hospital.

The next major misconception you seem to have is, there is some way to provide a service free of charge to all. It's just not realistic. Someone will always have to pay for whatever you offer. ALWAYS! There is no such thing as FREE STUFF! Do you comprehend that, or are you in some fantasy liberal dream world, where you think that can be accomplished? Doctors are simply NOT going to provide their services for nothing, to ANYBODY! Just like a plumber or roofer isn't going to provide their services to anybody for free, it's just not a realistic premise.

Now... here is what we had... a system where we ALL collectively pay a little more for hospital stays and doctor visits, to compensate for those who can't afford to pay anything, like the poor and elderly. We established programs to cover those people, because it was so sad to see them suffer without any medical care. We did this decades ago, and have been doing that for all this time... Now, Obama comes along and changes the system, to offer free unlimited care to ALL people, a blank check, a free ticket, to go have anything you want in the way of health care at any time, and the cost will be absorbed by us all, which will have to increase, there is no other way... things aren't FREE!
 
Well Applehead, it seems you are under the delusion that conservatives don't care about being sick or having adequate health care. I can assure you, I hate to be sick as much as you do. I worry about catastrophic illness just the same as a liberal. Most of us conservatives don't have a private doctor living in our mansions, available for our every whim. I know that might be what your masters told you, but it's certainly not the case. We have to go to the doctor too, we have to pay high costs just like you do. They don't give conservatives a discount at the hospital.

The next major misconception you seem to have is, there is some way to provide a service free of charge to all. It's just not realistic. Someone will always have to pay for whatever you offer. ALWAYS! There is no such thing as FREE STUFF! Do you comprehend that, or are you in some fantasy liberal dream world, where you think that can be accomplished? Doctors are simply NOT going to provide their services for nothing, to ANYBODY! Just like a plumber or roofer isn't going to provide their services to anybody for free, it's just not a realistic premise.

Now... here is what we had... a system where we ALL collectively pay a little more for hospital stays and doctor visits, to compensate for those who can't afford to pay anything, like the poor and elderly. We established programs to cover those people, because it was so sad to see them suffer without any medical care. We did this decades ago, and have been doing that for all this time... Now, Obama comes along and changes the system, to offer free unlimited care to ALL people, a blank check, a free ticket, to go have anything you want in the way of health care at any time, and the cost will be absorbed by us all, which will have to increase, there is no other way... things aren't FREE!

If those who couldn't afford to pay were being looked after then that's just what Obama wants so everyone should be happy. What do you mean by people going to the doctor for anything they want at any time? That's the whole idea behind medical care, being able to go to the doctor when necessary.

If you're concerned about people abusing doctor's visits by going to different doctors computerized files will solve that problem. Punch in a few numbers and the doctor will know what tests have been done. It will put an end to hypochondriacs abusing the system. Also, diseases caught early not only save money but save lives.

Think about a population where everyone who requires medical treatment receives it. Think how productive people are when healthy. The healthy person works and pays taxes. Everyone benefits.

You're right. Nothing is free but surely looking after our ill citizens is a reasonable expense, is it not?

I don't understand you, Dixie. Dozens of countries look after their ill citizens. Is it you don't think the US can do it or do you just not care about the ill?
 
yet-another-fail-meme-on-memegenerator-okay.jpg
 
If those who couldn't afford to pay were being looked after then that's just what Obama wants so everyone should be happy. What do you mean by people going to the doctor for anything they want at any time? That's the whole idea behind medical care, being able to go to the doctor when necessary.

If you're concerned about people abusing doctor's visits by going to different doctors computerized files will solve that problem. Punch in a few numbers and the doctor will know what tests have been done. It will put an end to hypochondriacs abusing the system. Also, diseases caught early not only save money but save lives.

Think about a population where everyone who requires medical treatment receives it. Think how productive people are when healthy. The healthy person works and pays taxes. Everyone benefits.

You're right. Nothing is free but surely looking after our ill citizens is a reasonable expense, is it not?

I don't understand you, Dixie. Dozens of countries look after their ill citizens. Is it you don't think the US can do it or do you just not care about the ill?

Let me explain YOU to YOU, because I do understand YOU... Being a fucktard liberal, you view doctors and medical professionals as people who have more than they deserve, while the sick who they mostly care for, have so little. To you, this is the Rich Greedy Doctors vs. The Poor Unfortunate Sick. When your masters tell you about 'universal health care' it appeals to your class envy, and you go out with your marching orders to advocate it, without any further consideration, or any intention to be reasonable about it. No matter what I say to you, no matter what statistics or data anyone shows you, it will not dissuade your campaign or change your mind, you are hell bent to do your best to "win" this one. It doesn't matter to you that what your leaders have done, is pass a law that no one but lawyers know what it does, and by every reasonable evaluation, will increase the cost of health care for everyone, while diminishing the quality and the availability... but you don't care, because this isn't really about helping the sick, as much as it's about making the rich doctors pay. It's all rooted in your jealous envy of rich doctors, and nothing more. You couldn't give two shits about sick people.
 
Let me explain YOU to YOU, because I do understand YOU... Being a fucktard liberal, you view doctors and medical professionals as people who have more than they deserve, while the sick who they mostly care for, have so little. To you, this is the Rich Greedy Doctors vs. The Poor Unfortunate Sick. When your masters tell you about 'universal health care' it appeals to your class envy, and you go out with your marching orders to advocate it, without any further consideration, or any intention to be reasonable about it. No matter what I say to you, no matter what statistics or data anyone shows you, it will not dissuade your campaign or change your mind, you are hell bent to do your best to "win" this one. It doesn't matter to you that what your leaders have done, is pass a law that no one but lawyers know what it does, and by every reasonable evaluation, will increase the cost of health care for everyone, while diminishing the quality and the availability... but you don't care, because this isn't really about helping the sick, as much as it's about making the rich doctors pay. It's all rooted in your jealous envy of rich doctors, and nothing more. You couldn't give two shits about sick people.


Actually dixie, if you dig the idiot wax out of your ears, you would know that most liberals villainize insurance companies, and you would also know that most doctors hate insurance companies.

How come as you get stupider and more desperate your posts get longer?
 
Let me explain YOU to YOU, because I do understand YOU... Being a fucktard liberal, you view doctors and medical professionals as people who have more than they deserve, while the sick who they mostly care for, have so little. To you, this is the Rich Greedy Doctors vs. The Poor Unfortunate Sick. When your masters tell you about 'universal health care' it appeals to your class envy, and you go out with your marching orders to advocate it, without any further consideration, or any intention to be reasonable about it. No matter what I say to you, no matter what statistics or data anyone shows you, it will not dissuade your campaign or change your mind, you are hell bent to do your best to "win" this one. It doesn't matter to you that what your leaders have done, is pass a law that no one but lawyers know what it does, and by every reasonable evaluation, will increase the cost of health care for everyone, while diminishing the quality and the availability... but you don't care, because this isn't really about helping the sick, as much as it's about making the rich doctors pay. It's all rooted in your jealous envy of rich doctors, and nothing more. You couldn't give two shits about sick people.

Dixie, people in countries with a universal medical plan do not care how much a doctor makes. The discussion seldom comes up. It is not a topic that interests many people. The fact is most people have absolutely no idea how much a doctor costs or how much a hospital stay costs because they don't even see a bill, let alone pay one.

Try to grasp the difference between systems. When you drive down a road and see repair crews with trucks full of asphalt and steam rollers and other equipment do you concern yourself with how much each person is making and how much it costs to repair that section of road? Most people just keep driving and never give it a thought even though they use that road every day.

Nobody is jealous of the guy spreading the asphalt. Nobody is thinking the guy who drives the steam roller is rich and they want to take his money. They don't care how much money he is making. They just want the road fixed the same way a sick person wants their body fixed.

That's the problem with opponents of universal health care. They can't grasp the concept. It has absolutely nothing to do with envy or jealousy or class warfare.

When it comes to statistics and data do some research on countries with universal plans. There is not one country that reverted to the old "pay or suffer" system and every single country started out with one. There is not one country that has a prominent politician campaigning on changing to a "pay or suffer" system. The citizens in every country demand the system not be dismantled. Those are the statistics and data.

Why do you fight against it?
 
When I was in high school, it often perplexed me, why were so many millions of people living in socialist-communist systems around the world? I realized that in most cases, it wasn't by choice really, they didn't have democracy or political freedom like us, and were basically oppressed by communist political leaders. But still, how did this manage to happen to so many people? I remember watching the Tienanmen Square incident, wondering if the people would be able to rise up and defeat their oppressors. I would later watch them tear down the Berlin Wall, and celebrate some semblance of victory over oppression, but the question still nagged me... how had all of these millions of people gotten so far off track? How did an elite few in the ruling class, manage to override the human spirit of millions? So I began to read and study up on Socialism and Communism, Marxist and Leninist philosophies, and how they evolved. This wasn't stuff we ever really learned in school, in fact, most of my schooling consisted of anti-communist propaganda, and a really slanted picture of how it was presented. You could look at the pictures from Russia and Cuba, and it was easy to see these people had much less than a typical American. Was this the best Communism had to offer? It seemed clear to me, American capitalism and freedom was much more desirable, so why had so many people limited their potential with another ideology? Didn't the leaders understand their people would be better off in a capitalist system? None of it made much sense to me, until I began to read and study the history.

What is ironic, is the way in which Communist Marxist ideals were initially founded. It's precisely what we see happening across America today! The elite class played on the emotions of the working class. First, by generating envy and resentment between those who have and those who have not. They formed coalitions under the banner of the "workers party" and established a template of representing the "working class" under the premise of delivering a better way of life. Many bold promises were made, the "workers party" was going to make life better for everyone, at the expense of the wealthy and elite. Envy is one of the easiest human emotions to stir, it's easy to conjure resentment for those who have more than you, and easy to imply the reason is because they took advantage of you in some way to get more than you unfairly. Thus, it stands to reason, you are justified in taking back that wealth and redistributing it to the masses. Communism/Marxism relies on this class envy, and it was wildly popular among the people. Over time, the ideology permeates its way into the political structure, and a sort of "deal with the devil" is struck. People sacrifice their liberty and freedom in exchange for a promise of a better life, and it is done incrementally over time.

The first phase is relatively easy, but it's the linchpin for the entire philosophy. It all hinges on "responsibilities" of the individual. Taking away your 'responsibilities' is easy to do, no one likes to be responsible, for anything. As you willingly cede your responsibilities to the government, more and more of your personal freedoms become irrelevant. But people don't care because "no responsibilities" sounds like such a good thing. This is what happened, this is how so many millions of people fell into the trap of Communist-Socialist-Marxism. Once the steel jaws of the trap close, it's over, you're trapped, you become a subordinate of the state, and all your personal freedoms are gone forever. The next impetus of the philosophy is destroying faith, we curiously also see this happening across America. All-out war on Christian beliefs, Jewish beliefs, any religious beliefs... under the insidious guise of some mythical "separation of church and state" which liberals have conveniently interpreted for us. You see, removing religious faith is crucial to implementation of Communism, because the people must have only one entity in which to have faith in, the state. The state can not compete with God, therefore, God has to be eradicated from society. Once the people only have the government to rely on, it makes implementation of the ideology much easier.

Many very smart and intellectual people, will look at Socialism in its purest form, and estimate it to be a significantly better system for everyone, because it fosters a more equal distribution of wealth and prosperity. But the historical failures of this system have always been apparent when practiced. There is a difference between what looks good on paper, and what works practically in a society. A Communist-Socialist-Marxist type system, is totally and completely controlled by a central governing body, or "ruling class" elite. Because of the nature of human nature, and the attribute of human greed, this always ends up resulting in massive corruption and graft. Those who are of the "ruling class" have considerably more than the "average worker" in the end, because they control all the power. Over time, this obvious imbalance begins to weigh on the psyche of the "working class" and something interesting starts to happen. Productivity begins to decline rapidly, as people are faced with the dismal prospects of never having anything more in life, regardless of how hard they work or what they do. This sense of hopelessness and despair perpetuates itself, and eventually, the economical aspects of the society collapse, as the state has no ability to raise spirits and increase productivity. Through the centuries, the "ruling class" has tried a number of measures to induce enthusiasm in this environment, most notably, by military aggression and wars.

Nationalism is a tool developed by Socialists to attempt bringing the human spirit back into play, and increase economic productivity from the masses. It often works for short periods of time, but ultimately fails because most of the human spirit is broken, realizing the stark reality of the dismal course in life they have set for themselves. The promise of "Hope and Change" are unfulfilled, and Nationalism is merely another ploy to further exploit the people, and the people begin to realize that. In all of human history, this idea of statism, communist socialist Marxism, has failed time and time again. It keeps being repackaged and redistributed to a new generation of uninformed people, who don't have the capacity to understand or comprehend history. Humans continue to become emotionally dependent on this failed ideology, over and over again, because of one primary thing... human greed and envy.

Now, we see this everyday in America. The HCR issue has perplexed me, trying to understand why it's so damn important to the liberals, but I think I can see what the motivation is, and again, it is rooted in class envy. People see doctors making exorbitant amounts of money, living plush opulent lifestyles, and they know of some Aunt or Uncle who is faced with medical bills they can't possibly pay, and it's the same old jealousy and envy tugging at their emotional heartstrings. They view HCR as a way of punishing the rich greedy doctors, while rewarding the "working class" through 'redistribution' of wealth. We see the insidious and seemingly attractive notion of relieving us from responsibilities, in exchange for a "more fair" system. All the while, inching us closer and closer to total Communism. Oh, they will become all offended that I dare use the word "communist" to describe their plans, because they know and understand most intelligent people simply don't believe in it, or think it's best for America. It's become too stigmatized to ever fly in America, so anyone who dares to suggest that is what is happening, is marginalized and made out to be a kook, a nutcase, someone who is being hyper-extreme and ignorant. Yet, that is the road we are traveling down, just like millions of other people around the world have done in the past, and lived to regret. The question is, do we realize this yet?

:rant:
 
Oppression has come primarily due to premises you champion, Dixie. That is, you continually argue that the majority has a moral right to pass whatever law it wants upon the people. Your collectivist ideals are old and were not born with socialism.

Liberty is a rather new idea and is based on the idea that individuals have certain rights that should be safeguarded from the reach of the state. Where freedom has taken root it has primarily done so due to courts based on English common law and extending due process rights to all. Democratic processes are helpful but not nearly as important. You rail against the extension of due process and any limit on the powers of the state.
 
Oppression has come primarily due to premises you champion, Dixie. That is, you continually argue that the majority has a moral right to pass whatever law it wants upon the people. Your collectivist ideals are old and were not born with socialism.

Liberty is a rather new idea and is based on the idea that individuals have certain rights that should be safeguarded from the reach of the state. Where freedom has taken root it has primarily done so due to courts based on English common law and extending due process rights to all. Democratic processes are helpful but not nearly as important. You rail against the extension of due process and any limit on the powers of the state.

But you're not an anarchist. And you obviously believe in a state strong enough to enforce laws. Who should make the laws if not democratic representatives of the people?
 
Hey bravo, if you have something to add, bring your coward little ass onto the thread instead of neg repping me and making incoherent grunts in the neg-rep comment line. Ok, bitch?
 
We'll just chalk up my neg for how ignorantly you responded to Stringy. Democracy = infinitely less important than civil liberties, which is the point he was making.
 
Just because I love pointing out how stupid you are....

If those who couldn't afford to pay were being looked after then that's just what Obama wants so everyone should be happy.

We have passed laws in every state, mandating that hospitals care for the indigent. Do you understand, indigent people are those who can't afford to pay? We also have health care provisions for people who depend on Social Security, it is called Medicare and Medicaid. These have been around for nearly half a century. This is probably why you find it hard to show me examples of these people "dying in the streets" due to lack of health care. We fixed that problem years ago, and it's not a problem. States even built thousands of health clinics all over the country, back when Johnson was president, it was all part of his liberal spendfest, and we continue to pay for that. Obamacare actually 'steals' some of the money from these programs, which it never really explains how it compensates for that, and both Medicaid and Medicare are financially insolvent already... but that was the plan.


What do you mean by people going to the doctor for anything they want at any time? That's the whole idea behind medical care, being able to go to the doctor when necessary.

No, the idea behind 'medical care' is treating people who are legitimately sick or in need of medical care. We already do that, have been doing it for half a century. What your idea is, the Doctor's Office is like a big Candy Store, and all us kids should be able to go there and fill our bags with whatever we want, anytime we want, and the magical government fairy will pay for it! And while I think it is really a "swell" idea, I don't see how it doesn't bankrupt the country while destroying the most advanced and best medical care in the world.

If you're concerned about people abusing doctor's visits by going to different doctors computerized files will solve that problem. Punch in a few numbers and the doctor will know what tests have been done. It will put an end to hypochondriacs abusing the system. Also, diseases caught early not only save money but save lives.

First, I am concerned with ANYONE being able to "push a few buttons" and obtain my medical history... SORRY! ...I'm just a little bit uncomfortable with that. And what I am concerned with, is widespread abuse of a "free health care" system, and you've not given me any assurance that wouldn't be the case. I have an experiment for you, if you'd like to prove this to yourself... make some sandwiches and leave them on your kitchen counter tomorrow, then put a sign in your front yard that says: House is Open-- Free Sandwiches for the Hungry Inside! ...You want to feed the hungry, right? So, we'll see tomorrow night, how little "abuse of the system" you encountered upon your return home.

Do you understand what a Hypochondriac is? It's a person with a disorder that makes them constantly believe they have something wrong with them. Nothing you can do, even computerized networks and such, will stop them from creating new ailments to go see the doctor about, and each time, the taxpayers will have to pay for a doctor to see this person and listen to their problem. Over and over, for years and years, until they eventually die. There are probably several hundred thousand Americans who are clinical hypochondriacs. Then you have the Druggies... how many of them do you suppose we have? People who want to go to the doc and see what cool shit they can score? I bet some people might even go to the doctor when they didn't really need a thing, just to get the 'scripts... do you know what an Oxycontin prescription sells for on the streets these days? You just made that whole scam a very lucrative black market business, all at taxpayer expense, of course.

Think about a population where everyone who requires medical treatment receives it. Think how productive people are when healthy. The healthy person works and pays taxes. Everyone benefits.

Again.... Medicare... Medicaid... Indigent Care Laws... State Health Clinics... Everyone who requires medical care in America, GETS IT ALREADY!!!

You're right. Nothing is free but surely looking after our ill citizens is a reasonable expense, is it not?

**sigh** Yes, but that is why we thought about this a very LONG time ago, and passed laws to address these things, so we wouldn't all be stumbling over the sick people dying in the streets. We already provided medical care, for virtually everybody in America. We even provide emergency treatment for people who aren't Americans, but happen to be across our border for whatever reason... We already pay for this!

I don't understand you, Dixie. Dozens of countries look after their ill citizens. Is it you don't think the US can do it or do you just not care about the ill?


We look after our ill better than most of those other countries already.

Dixie, people in countries with a universal medical plan do not care how much a doctor makes. The discussion seldom comes up. It is not a topic that interests many people. The fact is most people have absolutely no idea how much a doctor costs or how much a hospital stay costs because they don't even see a bill, let alone pay one.

Yep, and the government decides who is worth living and dying, who is worth treating or discarding. It works well for them, but they don't have American Constitutional rights, and we do. They also have a different legal system, with regard to suing doctors and hospitals for malpractice and stuff, have you looked into all of that? They don't complain because it doesn't do any good, they don't have US Constitutional rights, and their government isn't going to adopt them.

Try to grasp the difference between systems. When you drive down a road and see repair crews with trucks full of asphalt and steam rollers and other equipment do you concern yourself with how much each person is making and how much it costs to repair that section of road? Most people just keep driving and never give it a thought even though they use that road every day.

Nobody is jealous of the guy spreading the asphalt. Nobody is thinking the guy who drives the steam roller is rich and they want to take his money. They don't care how much money he is making. They just want the road fixed the same way a sick person wants their body fixed.

But shouldn't we tell the roadwork crews they need to fix ALL roads? It's not fair that some roads get new asphalt while other have to do without, is it? We should just tell those guys to work harder for the same amount of money, and get all the roads fixed across America... just think of how much nicer that will be? I bet at least half of them wouldn't quit and do something else for living, don't you? ...fucking retard!

That's the problem with opponents of universal health care. They can't grasp the concept. It has absolutely nothing to do with envy or jealousy or class warfare.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it! That's what is driving it, I am convinced! Nothing else even makes any rational sense. You're not trying to get help for the poor and elderly who already had it... even the indigent... there's no crisis of people dying in the streets... no state health clinics being closed, even out in California, and they're broke! It's not to make the quality or availability better, because HCR makes those worse... so it has to be class envy, there is nothing else left.
 
We'll just chalk up my neg for how ignorantly you responded to Stringy. Democracy = infinitely less important than civil liberties, which is the point he was making.

Big boy can answer on his own, butt-underling..

WHo should make our laws, stringfield?
 
When I was in high school, it often perplexed me, why were so many millions of people living in socialist-communist systems around the world? I realized that in most cases, it wasn't by choice really, they didn't have democracy or political freedom like us, and were basically oppressed by communist political leaders. But still, how did this manage to happen to so many people? I remember watching the Tienanmen Square incident, wondering if the people would be able to rise up and defeat their oppressors. I would later watch them tear down the Berlin Wall, and celebrate some semblance of victory over oppression, but the question still nagged me... how had all of these millions of people gotten so far off track? How did an elite few in the ruling class, manage to override the human spirit of millions? So I began to read and study up on Socialism and Communism, Marxist and Leninist philosophies, and how they evolved. This wasn't stuff we ever really learned in school, in fact, most of my schooling consisted of anti-communist propaganda, and a really slanted picture of how it was presented. You could look at the pictures from Russia and Cuba, and it was easy to see these people had much less than a typical American. Was this the best Communism had to offer? It seemed clear to me, American capitalism and freedom was much more desirable, so why had so many people limited their potential with another ideology? Didn't the leaders understand their people would be better off in a capitalist system? None of it made much sense to me, until I began to read and study the history.

What is ironic, is the way in which Communist Marxist ideals were initially founded. It's precisely what we see happening across America today! The elite class played on the emotions of the working class. First, by generating envy and resentment between those who have and those who have not. They formed coalitions under the banner of the "workers party" and established a template of representing the "working class" under the premise of delivering a better way of life. Many bold promises were made, the "workers party" was going to make life better for everyone, at the expense of the wealthy and elite. Envy is one of the easiest human emotions to stir, it's easy to conjure resentment for those who have more than you, and easy to imply the reason is because they took advantage of you in some way to get more than you unfairly. Thus, it stands to reason, you are justified in taking back that wealth and redistributing it to the masses. Communism/Marxism relies on this class envy, and it was wildly popular among the people. Over time, the ideology permeates its way into the political structure, and a sort of "deal with the devil" is struck. People sacrifice their liberty and freedom in exchange for a promise of a better life, and it is done incrementally over time.

The first phase is relatively easy, but it's the linchpin for the entire philosophy. It all hinges on "responsibilities" of the individual. Taking away your 'responsibilities' is easy to do, no one likes to be responsible, for anything. As you willingly cede your responsibilities to the government, more and more of your personal freedoms become irrelevant. But people don't care because "no responsibilities" sounds like such a good thing. This is what happened, this is how so many millions of people fell into the trap of Communist-Socialist-Marxism. Once the steel jaws of the trap close, it's over, you're trapped, you become a subordinate of the state, and all your personal freedoms are gone forever. The next impetus of the philosophy is destroying faith, we curiously also see this happening across America. All-out war on Christian beliefs, Jewish beliefs, any religious beliefs... under the insidious guise of some mythical "separation of church and state" which liberals have conveniently interpreted for us. You see, removing religious faith is crucial to implementation of Communism, because the people must have only one entity in which to have faith in, the state. The state can not compete with God, therefore, God has to be eradicated from society. Once the people only have the government to rely on, it makes implementation of the ideology much easier.

Many very smart and intellectual people, will look at Socialism in its purest form, and estimate it to be a significantly better system for everyone, because it fosters a more equal distribution of wealth and prosperity. But the historical failures of this system have always been apparent when practiced. There is a difference between what looks good on paper, and what works practically in a society. A Communist-Socialist-Marxist type system, is totally and completely controlled by a central governing body, or "ruling class" elite. Because of the nature of human nature, and the attribute of human greed, this always ends up resulting in massive corruption and graft. Those who are of the "ruling class" have considerably more than the "average worker" in the end, because they control all the power. Over time, this obvious imbalance begins to weigh on the psyche of the "working class" and something interesting starts to happen. Productivity begins to decline rapidly, as people are faced with the dismal prospects of never having anything more in life, regardless of how hard they work or what they do. This sense of hopelessness and despair perpetuates itself, and eventually, the economical aspects of the society collapse, as the state has no ability to raise spirits and increase productivity. Through the centuries, the "ruling class" has tried a number of measures to induce enthusiasm in this environment, most notably, by military aggression and wars.

Nationalism is a tool developed by Socialists to attempt bringing the human spirit back into play, and increase economic productivity from the masses. It often works for short periods of time, but ultimately fails because most of the human spirit is broken, realizing the stark reality of the dismal course in life they have set for themselves. The promise of "Hope and Change" are unfulfilled, and Nationalism is merely another ploy to further exploit the people, and the people begin to realize that. In all of human history, this idea of statism, communist socialist Marxism, has failed time and time again. It keeps being repackaged and redistributed to a new generation of uninformed people, who don't have the capacity to understand or comprehend history. Humans continue to become emotionally dependent on this failed ideology, over and over again, because of one primary thing... human greed and envy.

Now, we see this everyday in America. The HCR issue has perplexed me, trying to understand why it's so damn important to the liberals, but I think I can see what the motivation is, and again, it is rooted in class envy. People see doctors making exorbitant amounts of money, living plush opulent lifestyles, and they know of some Aunt or Uncle who is faced with medical bills they can't possibly pay, and it's the same old jealousy and envy tugging at their emotional heartstrings. They view HCR as a way of punishing the rich greedy doctors, while rewarding the "working class" through 'redistribution' of wealth. We see the insidious and seemingly attractive notion of relieving us from responsibilities, in exchange for a "more fair" system. All the while, inching us closer and closer to total Communism. Oh, they will become all offended that I dare use the word "communist" to describe their plans, because they know and understand most intelligent people simply don't believe in it, or think it's best for America. It's become too stigmatized to ever fly in America, so anyone who dares to suggest that is what is happening, is marginalized and made out to be a kook, a nutcase, someone who is being hyper-extreme and ignorant. Yet, that is the road we are traveling down, just like millions of other people around the world have done in the past, and lived to regret. The question is, do we realize this yet?

...
 
You don't know what you're talking about. Most 'multinationals' have thousands of stockholders, people who's 401ks are vested in their corporations, as well as the various support corporations who supply materials and services for the multinationals. You want to imagine these 'multinationals' as being person-less entities, but realizing just how stupid that is, you are now trying to argue it's just a small insignificant number of people... the truth is, it's thousands and thousands of people in a variety of industries, in various ways, tied to the success or failure of the 'evil' multinational.
You said this before. Even these support industries outsource as much as possible. You're like a goddamn parrot. And few stockholders own enough to the point that they don't also need a job. And jobs are being sent overseas. This is how globalization is destroying the middle class.
Again, outsources happens because it is economically advantageous to do so. This effects profit and bottom line for the corporation, which is to the benefit of all those thousands and thousands associated with the corporation.
But more and more, those savings are due to laying off americans. And that's a disadvantage which you refuse to quantify..
And AGAIN, the alternative to outsourcing is to leave those "wage slaves" with absolutely no source of any income. Is that better? If you are broke, and someone gives you a dollar, that's not much money, but at least you can buy a double cheeseburger at McDonalds, and I bet that will taste better than ketchup soup made from a stolen condiment pack!
Their home economies are wrecked by a myriad of measures, so they are made more desperate and have no choice but to work for pennies a day. Or they are placed in corporate work camps by dictators. Neither of these are better than being left alone.
No, I said that was a residual benefit of corporations making money... I don't like corporate tax, I think it would be better not to have corporate tax.
So you believe that one of the benefits that justifies multinational corporations should not exist. You're a twit.
In fact, maybe that could be the 'magic potion' to realize your fantasy view, we tell American corporations, if you build production here and produce your product in America instead of other 'slave wage' countries, we will reward you by not making you pay corporate taxes!
IF that was the case i might also agree with you.
Which are American people who own stock, 401ks, have financial investments and interests in the corporation and all of their support industries.
But few own enough stock to not need a job as well.

The number of americans who benefit from multinationals is becoming smaller and smaller over time, due to globalization stupidity.
You can't develop a balanced economy in a country you don't control! NOTHING we can do about that, unless you want to go take over China! we can either do business with them or not, if we don't, the Russians will, they don't really give a shit what you think. What you are arguing, is like saying, if I see a homeless person, knowing that I can't buy them a house and make their situation markedly better, it's best for me to not even toss them a dollar! How does that HELP anything???
We can refuse to incentivize production of their slave wares by cutting trade relations, and we should do so.
You're repeating your nonsense... like a goddamn parrot! LOL



No, they're not essential to capitalism, we could have a capitalist system where everyone operates a lemonade stand, would that be better for our economy?

But you said they were essential to capitalism. So you admit you're wrong. Good for you. Now move on to admitting the other points on which you're wrong. The more you admit your idiocy, the faster you will become a better person.
 
Last edited:
But you're not an anarchist. And you obviously believe in a state strong enough to enforce laws.

I am an anarchist that obviously believes in a state strong enough to enforce laws? LOL.... Don't forget, I am also internationalist nationalist.

Who should make the laws if not democratic representatives of the people?

I am not arguing against democratic representatives, moron. Just pointing out that the right to vote does almost nothing to ensure freedom or the absence of oppression. Who makes the law is a less important question than how far the law should reach.
 
I am an anarchist that obviously believes in a state strong enough to enforce laws? LOL.... Don't forget, I am also internationalist nationalist.
I said you're NOT an anarchist. Go reread if you must. Purposefully misreading things is pretty lame.

I also said you're an internationalist FASCIST.
The most recent variant of fascism is internationalist in nature.
I am not arguing against democratic representatives, moron. Just pointing out that the right to vote does almost nothing to ensure freedom or the absence of oppression. Who makes the law is a less important question than how far the law should reach.

You were saying due process is more important than a democratic legislative process.

Who makes the laws is very important.

Would you be in favor of an enlightened dictatorship, dick 'tater?
 
JWe have passed laws in every state, mandating that hospitals care for the indigent. Do you understand, indigent people are those who can't afford to pay? We also have health care provisions for people who depend on Social Security, it is called Medicare and Medicaid. These have been around for nearly half a century. This is probably why you find it hard to show me examples of these people "dying in the streets" due to lack of health care. We fixed that problem years ago, and it's not a problem. States even built thousands of health clinics all over the country, back when Johnson was president, it was all part of his liberal spendfest, and we continue to pay for that. Obamacare actually 'steals' some of the money from these programs, which it never really explains how it compensates for that, and both Medicaid and Medicare are financially insolvent already... but that was the plan.
Do you own a house or a car? If you notice something requires attention, say a possible roof leak or the car isn’t running well, do you wait until your home floods or your car stalls on the highway? That is the current way medical is run.
People are admitted to hospital after they’ve had an illness for a period of time and it’s become life-threatening. Not only does it cost much more to deal with the illness but the person has had to live with the pain unnecessarily.
Aches and pains are nature’s way of telling us there is something wrong. To have a medical “policy” that encourages people to wait until major damage occurs is just plain dumb and you and everyone else know that.

No, the idea behind 'medical care' is treating people who are legitimately sick or in need of medical care. We already do that, have been doing it for half a century. What your idea is, the Doctor's Office is like a big Candy Store, and all us kids should be able to go there and fill our bags with whatever we want, anytime we want, and the magical government fairy will pay for it! And while I think it is really a "swell" idea, I don't see how it doesn't bankrupt the country while destroying the most advanced and best medical care in the world.
A candy store? Do you know anyone who has said, “I’m so happy! I’m going to the doctor today. Whoopee!” Do your friends say that? Your co-workers? You?
The last thing a doctor’s visit can be compared to is going to a candy store unless the local doctor is known as the “candy man”. J
First, I am concerned with ANYONE being able to "push a few buttons" and obtain my medical history... SORRY! ...I'm just a little bit uncomfortable with that. And what I am concerned with, is widespread abuse of a "free health care" system, and you've not given me any assurance that wouldn't be the case. I have an experiment for you, if you'd like to prove this to yourself... make some sandwiches and leave them on your kitchen counter tomorrow, then put a sign in your front yard that says: House is Open-- Free Sandwiches for the Hungry Inside! ...You want to feed the hungry, right? So, we'll see tomorrow night, how little "abuse of the system" you encountered upon your return home.
I suppose there are men who get off on rectal probes and having their testicles held while coughing or women feeling the hot breath of the doctor on their thigh but I don’t think those numbers would bankrupt the country.

Do you understand what a Hypochondriac is? It's a person with a disorder that makes them constantly believe they have something wrong with them. Nothing you can do, even computerized networks and such, will stop them from creating new ailments to go see the doctor about, and each time, the taxpayers will have to pay for a doctor to see this person and listen to their problem. Over and over, for years and years, until they eventually die. There are probably several hundred thousand Americans who are clinical hypochondriacs.
As you just admitted it is a disorder, an illness, a dis-ease which can be controlled/cured by psychological counseling. Do you think such a person performs their job well? Raises children well? Makes a good husband/wife/mother? Wouldn’t everyone, including the person themselves, be better off if the condition was addressed and corrected?
Then you have the Druggies... how many of them do you suppose we have? People who want to go to the doc and see what cool shit they can score? I bet some people might even go to the doctor when they didn't really need a thing, just to get the 'scripts... do you know what an Oxycontin prescription sells for on the streets these days? You just made that whole scam a very lucrative black market business, all at taxpayer expense, of course.
My doctor and I have had more than one conversation about Oxys. He explained that the Feds not only “audit” the doctors who prescribe them but occasionally “shadow” the recipient. While some people do abuse them it is not all that easy to get a narcotic prescription and even more difficult to get ongoing refills. You can take my word on that.
Thankfully, I have a good doctor.
Again.... Medicare... Medicaid... Indigent Care Laws... State Health Clinics... Everyone who requires medical care in America, GETS IT ALREADY!!!
Great! Then nothing will change. J
**sigh** Yes, but that is why we thought about this a very LONG time ago, and passed laws to address these things, so we wouldn't all be stumbling over the sick people dying in the streets. We already provided medical care, for virtually everybody in America. We even provide emergency treatment for people who aren't Americans, but happen to be across our border for whatever reason... We already pay for this!
Again, GREAT! If there’s already supply medical care for everyone then nothing will change. There will be no more hypochondriacs or druggies than there were before so you can rest easy.
We look after our ill better than most of those other countries already.
That’s great. Then nothing will change.
Yep, and the government decides who is worth living and dying, who is worth treating or discarding. It works well for them, but they don't have American Constitutional rights, and we do. They also have a different legal system, with regard to suing doctors and hospitals for malpractice and stuff, have you looked into all of that? They don't complain because it doesn't do any good, they don't have US Constitutional rights, and their government isn't going to adopt them.
You don’t understand how universal medical works. It’s not the same as an insurance company. The government is not involved in decisions between the doctor and patient. If a doctor and patient decide on a certain procedure the procedure is done and the government pays the doctor. The government does not decide on who gets the procedure or whether the procedure is necessary.

As for suing the doctor, yes, countries have tort. Countries such as Sweden and France and Canada. Please, educate yourself.
But shouldn't we tell the roadwork crews they need to fix ALL roads? It's not fair that some roads get new asphalt while other have to do without, is it? We should just tell those guys to work harder for the same amount of money, and get all the roads fixed across America... just think of how much nicer that will be? I bet at least half of them wouldn't quit and do something else for living, don't you? ...fucking retard!
Now don’t go raising your blood pressure. You know that’s not good for you.
First of all, according to you, everyone is covered for medical anyway so, in that case, all the roads will be fixed anyway. You see, as Joe Wilson said, “You lie!” Everyone is not covered just as all the roads will not be fixed.
So, the solution? Either hire more road workers or get the current ones to work overtime. In the beginning it will cost more money, however, just as filling pot holes before further damage occurs treating illness in the beginning stages will save lots of money later on.
Surely you’re bright enough to understand that, aren’t you?
It has EVERYTHING to do with it! That's what is driving it, I am convinced! Nothing else even makes any rational sense. You're not trying to get help for the poor and elderly who already had it... even the indigent... there's no crisis of people dying in the streets... no state health clinics being closed, even out in California, and they're broke! It's not to make the quality or availability better, because HCR makes those worse... so it has to be class envy, there is nothing else left.

So why are people complaining about medical care? Why can some folks not afford medical care? Where did this problem come from? Are you suggesting people can afford a doctor but prefer to suffer?

Sometimes, Dixie, I wonder about you.
 
I said you're NOT an anarchist. Go reread if you must. Purposefully misreading things is pretty lame.

Oops, my bad. No, it was not some sort of intentional plot, you nutcase.

I also said you're an internationalist FASCIST.
The most recent variant of fascism is internationalist in nature.

Fascists are nationalists, like you. They support trade barriers and many of their policies are influenced by extreme xenophobia, like you. They oppose individual rights, like you. You are a fascist, who thinks if you can somehow change the labels it will make a difference. But, it won't. Your views are still stupid, unworkable and morally offensive.

You were saying due process is more important than a democratic legislative process.

Who makes the laws is very important.

Would you be in favor of an enlightened dictatorship, dick 'tater?

Nothing but dishonest spin.

Free elections are, without a doubt, preferable and some day I hope they come to the US. You can pretend I am making an argument against democracy all you like, but you are just full of shit.

Again, the point is that due process is THE key ingredient for liberty and Ditzy is opposed to it.
 
Back
Top