They are talking Impeachment!

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I think the reality is, though, that if the world economy ever got to the point of desperation, powerful countries such as the US, UK, and Germany could simply refuse to pay off debts, whereas countries such as Greece would be screwed.

A sovereign nation can pretty much always default on its debt with little threat of retribution. The problem with that, though, is that you're going to scare off any investors in your country for the next few decades. In some cases, though, it can become the best economic decision, and that's why countries that are thought likely to default aren't going to be able to get credit at anything approaching a low interest rate. The market at least does not consider the US likely to default, and that's why we can get credit at some of lowest interest rates in the world. It would be the dumbest idea in the world for a country with such secure finances to portray itself as horribly risky and schizophrenic for the next generation by defaulting on the debt when it's not a significant burden on our economy.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

The glaring truth of this and that it is so glibly ignored by liberals due to party affiliation can make one despair~~~

The executive branch has the right to decide what level of enforcement is necessary. The legislative branch has given the president the technical legal language allowing him to take extremist steps on the border, but it has not required him to do so, and it's certainly taken no steps to demand that the venture be funded (if they wanted it so much, they could easily form an independent executive agency to fasciscize the border and fund it through earmarks).

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I have no idea what you mean.

Do you also hang around Australian or Japanese politics chatrooms?

I'm subscribed to r/ukpolitics and r/canada.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

good question

imo, it is silly to call for his impeachment right now...he has done nothing to truly deserve impeachment, don't like him and his policies or majorities in congress....get out the vote

this kind of politics does nothing but divide america, i don't like it when libs do it and i don't like it when cons do it

Liberals should pursue dividing politics just as much as conservatives do. We should use equal retribution, thus neutering the effectiveness of the strategy and returning us to peaceful talk. Obama's initial strategy of unilateral disarmament was naive and just left us open to attack from the animals on the right, who may now claim that any step Obama takes to defend himself is in contradiction to his naive and idiotic campaign rhetoric.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Shut up fool!

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Shut up fool!

I'm sorry, I do not talk to animals.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I'm sorry, I do not talk to animals.

Not even when you're fucking them? How cold!

 

[Sammy Jankis]

The US has to export products, otherwise, there is a trade imbalance. Whatever jobs are kept here producing a product paying an artificially high wage that is one product that can't be exported.

The whole economy is artificial. Money is created out of thin air, the fiat currency armies are used to sculpt events to control and manipulate commodities prices. the first world is used to subsidize the third world regularly. Now all the sudden americans need to be cut out of the global supply chain?

Consumer Nation is not a long term viable comaparative advantage.

Forcing consumers to buy a product made here at a higher price so someone can have a job is nothing more than "redistributing the wealth". Not only is that a socialist policy but it doesn't make any sense.

it does make sense. It keeps americans employed, the economy stimulate, the country self reliant with a diversified manufacturing base in case of global political breakdown. there are many instrinsic values you're leaving out to make your case for the destruction of the american worker.

Let's take the "shoes example" I gave in msg. 53. Why pay $100 for a pair of shoes so Mr. Smith can have a job? Pay $25 for a pair of shoes and give Mr. Smith the extra $75.

And i'm the socialist? Just keeping the job here is a better option. Then he will still be working. People need to be productive and contribute.

The same can be said for appliances and other consumer products.

And those utterances are also wrong headed and retarded.

The reason behind people having a job is so they have money. Why pay more a product to have someone make it here? Buy the product made elsewhere and use the savings to help Mr. Smith get training for a job that is required to be done here.

What job is required to be done here?

A change in mentality is required. Why would someone pay a higher price so Mr. Smith has a job but object to simply giving Mr. Smith the extra savings?

A natural loyalty between citizens.

There is no difference from a consumer standpoint, however, there is a huge difference as far as Mr. Smith is concerned.

Mr. Smith can be retrained or he can work as a volunteer at, say, a hospital and still collect money to live on.

or monkeys can fly out of your butt.

As companies move overseas and products come down in price, be it TV sets or cars, consumers are saving money. Let's say the average family man buys a new car every five years. If he can purchase a car that's $5,000 cheaper than one made here that means he can afford to pay $1,000 more in taxes per year.

Whether the family guy buys a car made here or gives the money directly to a former car company employee what's the difference?

The maintenance of a diversity of skillsets in america.

In my view the difference is the former employee is not wasting his time doing something that someone else can do cheaper. The former employee can put his time to better use.

Green jobs? A youth green militia rivalling the size and capability of the american military?

So, as certain companies move overseas those terminated employees should have access to funds for retraining and basic living expenses. There are companies seeking qualified employees. Let's spend the money retraining people for those jobs.

I would prefer our workers be more oriented around real good and needs, instead of put inside a fully propagandized reality where their deeds and actions are completely disconnected from the actual value chain of life.

 

[Jarod]

By screaming impeachment over this type of silly shit the Republicans are making themselves look like fools who are playing politics.

Go for it, impeachment backfired last time, try it again... Heck, get Newt Gengrich to lead it again!

 

[WinterBorn]

I am surprised no one has mentioned the best reason for not impeaching Obama.


President Biden?

 

[apple0154]

(Apple)The US has to export products, otherwise, there is a trade imbalance. Whatever jobs are kept here producing a product paying an artificially high wage that is one product that can't be exported.

The whole economy is artificial. Money is created out of thin air, the fiat currency armies are used to sculpt events to control and manipulate commodities prices. the first world is used to subsidize the third world regularly. Now all the sudden americans need to be cut out of the global supply chain?

Consumer Nation is not a long term viable comaparative advantage.

Either we find ways to product products more economically such as by robotic means or we create new products. If not, we won't be supplying anything.

What will we trade for oil? What value will the Greenback have if everything produced in the US is more expensive? If oil is $100/barrel and China produces the same quality shoes as the US and charges $25/pair it will require 4 pairs of shoes for one barrel of oil. If the US charges $100/pair nobody is going to trade a barrel of oil for one pair of shoes.

Forcing consumers to buy a product made here at a higher price so someone can have a job is nothing more than "redistributing the wealth". Not only is that a socialist policy but it doesn't make any sense.

it does make sense. It keeps americans employed, the economy stimulate, the country self reliant with a diversified manufacturing base in case of global political breakdown. there are many instrinsic values you're leaving out to make your case for the destruction of the american worker.

Then the US becomes a closed society and becomes poorer. They will have nothing to trade for goods from other countries. Why do you want to drag the US down?

Let's take the "shoes example" I gave in msg. 53. Why pay $100 for a pair of shoes so Mr. Smith can have a job? Pay $25 for a pair of shoes and give Mr. Smith the extra $75.

And i'm the socialist? Just keeping the job here is a better option. Then he will still be working. People need to be productive and contribute.

Ahhh, now we're seeing the true reason. It's got nothing to do with what's financially beneficial because my idea is financially equal to yours. The difference is you want Mr. Smith to work regardless of whether it's necessary or not. It's that old "can't get something for nothing" mentality.

Rather than waste his time making shoes which can be purchased much cheaper from elsewhere maybe Mr. Smith can volunteer at a hospital. Or retrain. Or even if he sits at home and does nothing at least he is not wasting gas going to a job which is artificially propped up.

The same can be said for appliances and other consumer products.

And those utterances are also wrong headed and retarded.

It's the same logic. Why pay someone to produce a product when someone else can produce it cheaper? That's illogical.

The reason behind people having a job is so they have money. Why pay more a product to have someone make it here? Buy the product made elsewhere and use the savings to help Mr. Smith get training for a job that is required to be done here.

What job is required to be done here?

Are you saying there's nothing to be done here? We must live in the perfect society.

A change in mentality is required. Why would someone pay a higher price so Mr. Smith has a job but object to simply giving Mr. Smith the extra savings?

A natural loyalty between citizens.

Natural loyalty? You mean natural envy. Jealousy. We want to see Mr. Smith get up in the morning and go to work regardless of how unnecessary and illogical that is.

There is no difference from a consumer standpoint, however, there is a huge difference as far as Mr. Smith is concerned.

Mr. Smith can be retrained or he can work as a volunteer at, say, a hospital and still collect money to live on.

or monkeys can fly out of your butt.

Now that's a well thought out response.

As companies move overseas and products come down in price, be it TV sets or cars, consumers are saving money. Let's say the average family man buys a new car every five years. If he can purchase a car that's $5,000 cheaper than one made here that means he can afford to pay $1,000 more in taxes per year.

Whether the family guy buys a car made here or gives the money directly to a former car company employee what's the difference?

The maintenance of a diversity of skillsets in america.

I'd say we lost the skill sets required to make horse whips and buggy wheels. So what?

In my view the difference is the former employee is not wasting his time doing something that someone else can do cheaper. The former employee can put his time to better use.

Green jobs? A youth green militia rivalling the size and capability of the american military?

Just about anything. If you've ever been unemployed I'm sure you realized you required less money to live. No gas. Little car maintenance. No work clothes, be them suits or coveralls. Also, frequently people who work all week want to go out Friday or Saturday and spend money. Sort of a reward.

Insisting people work when not necessary is a waste of money and human potential. It's just silly.

So, as certain companies move overseas those terminated employees should have access to funds for retraining and basic living expenses. There are companies seeking qualified employees. Let's spend the money retraining people for those jobs.

I would prefer our workers be more oriented around real good and needs, instead of put inside a fully propagandized reality where their deeds and actions are completely disconnected from the actual value chain of life.

The value chain has been altered. We don't require people digging gardens. Machines do that. That is the reason for progress. The goal is to be free from the necessity of doing jobs related to the value chain of life.

Having people doing jobs just for the sake of having a job makes as much sense as putting the unemployed in a field with shovels.

The work week has generally shrunk to 35 hours from 40 or even 60 hours. As progress continues it will become less and less necessary to do the basic jobs required to live just as people do not have to cut their own trees to build a house. A certain percentage of the population will be unemployed due to the lack of necessity to work. Stated another way it is no longer necessary for everyone to work. The problem is how do we manage that.

It is human nature to improve ones lot in life. If a job will add to their income they will work, however, it is not necessary to have people living in abject poverty just because they do not have a job.

Orphanages, old folks homes, hospitals....just a few places where volunteers are highly regarded. If an unemployed person volunteers at one of those places increase their income. Don't just have them doing any job just to say they're working. That is such a waste.

 

[Damocles]

What a fool you are if you think this has a snowball's chance in hell.

Only in your racist fantasy will the first Black president suffer any sort of approbation.

Tancredo himself says that it won't happen while the Ds are in majority and thinks it unlikely. However, Tom thinks that it should be talked about.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

The whole economy is artificial. Money is created out of thin air, the fiat currency armies are used to sculpt events to control and manipulate commodities prices. the first world is used to subsidize the third world regularly. Now all the sudden americans need to be cut out of the global supply chain?

Consumer Nation is not a long term viable comaparative advantage.

Either we find ways to product products more economically such as by robotic means or we create new products. If not, we won't be supplying anything.

That's only true if we stay on our idiot globalization course.

Protectionism is a valid tool of statecraft.

What will we trade for oil? What value will the Greenback have if everything produced in the US is more expensive? If oil is $100/barrel and China produces the same quality shoes as the US and charges $25/pair it will require 4 pairs of shoes for one barrel of oil. If the US charges $100/pair nobody is going to trade a barrel of oil for one pair of shoes.

We will use our own resource kept off the market. and we will use nukers.

it does make sense. It keeps americans employed, the economy stimulate, the country self reliant with a diversified manufacturing base in case of global political breakdown. there are many instrinsic values you're leaving out to make your case for the destruction of the american worker.

Then the US becomes a closed society and becomes poorer. They will have nothing to trade for goods from other countries. Why do you want to drag the US down?

We can produce all we need. Why do you seek dependancy on foreign states? Though i do not espouse pure autarky.

And i'm the socialist? Just keeping the job here is a better option. Then he will still be working. People need to be productive and contribute.

Ahhh, now we're seeing the true reason. It's got nothing to do with what's financially beneficial because my idea is financially equal to yours. The difference is you want Mr. Smith to work regardless of whether it's necessary or not. It's that old "can't get something for nothing" mentality.

No. You're requires a massive central bureacracy, and faith that the government checks keep coming. We need to maintain our place in the real actual supply chain, not just believe government lies of perpetual funding.

Rather than waste his time making shoes which can be purchased much cheaper from elsewhere maybe Mr. Smith can volunteer at a hospital. Or retrain. Or even if he sits at home and does nothing at least he is not wasting gas going to a job which is artificially propped up.

It's a bad idea to allow ones self to be put out of the real supply chain and go on the dole, trusting checks to mysteriously arrive.

And those utterances are also wrong headed and retarded.

It's the same logic. Why pay someone to produce a product when someone else can produce it cheaper? That's illogical.

Because you want the money to say in our domestic economy.

What job is required to be done here?

Are you saying there's nothing to be done here? We must live in the perfect society.

Name one thing that can't be outsourced.

A natural loyalty between citizens.

Natural loyalty? You mean natural envy. Jealousy. We want to see Mr. Smith get up in the morning and go to work regardless of how unnecessary and illogical that is.

No, It's because we know that state dependancy is precarious and degrading.

or monkeys can fly out of your butt.

Now that's a well thought out response.

Equal in quality to your best so far, for sure.

The maintenance of a diversity of skillsets in america.

I'd say we lost the skill sets required to make horse whips and buggy wheels. So what?

But those are actually archaic technologies. Our alleged outdatedness is just a phantom of a manipulated cost of living.

Green jobs? A youth green militia rivalling the size and capability of the american military?

Just about anything. If you've ever been unemployed I'm sure you realized you required less money to live. No gas. Little car maintenance. No work clothes, be them suits or coveralls. Also, frequently people who work all week want to go out Friday or Saturday and spend money. Sort of a reward.

So we shouldn't try to keep jobs here, we should just give people money and and trust they will find word at anything?

Insisting people work when not necessary is a waste of money and human potential. It's just silly.

You're silly for wanting to outsource actual work and using the savings to keep americans idle. What a foolish plan. You're a fool.

I would prefer our workers be more oriented around real good and needs, instead of put inside a fully propagandized reality where their deeds and actions are completely disconnected from the actual value chain of life.

The value chain has been altered. We don't require people digging gardens. Machines do that. That is the reason for progress. The goal is to be free from the necessity of doing jobs related to the value chain of life.

But using overseas corporatist slave labor to glut the world labor pool and put free people out of work is just stupid.

Having people doing jobs just for the sake of having a job makes as much sense as putting the unemployed in a field with shovels.

But slightly more sense than paying them for nothing.

The work week has generally shrunk to 35 hours from 40 or even 60 hours. As progress continues it will become less and less necessary to do the basic jobs required to live just as people do not have to cut their own trees to build a house. A certain percentage of the population will be unemployed due to the lack of necessity to work. Stated another way it is no longer necessary for everyone to work. The problem is how do we manage that.

A population control holocaust?

It is human nature to improve ones lot in life. If a job will add to their income they will work, however, it is not necessary to have people living in abject poverty just because they do not have a job.

Orphanages, old folks homes, hospitals....just a few places where volunteers are highly regarded. If an unemployed person volunteers at one of those places increase their income. Don't just have them doing any job just to say they're working. That is such a waste.

They can actually still be producing needed goods, just not at a salary artificially lowered by allowing overseas slavery into the international labor pool.

The prices of overseas products should include the cost of the military machine needed to keep the world open for slave labor, but they don't. Opening the world for slavery by force is sold to the people as something that beneits them. But it only benefits shareholders and employees in mulitnational corporations. The rest of americans are screwed. Putting the price of the world military in the products would might level the playing fields for local businesses that don't depend on the military to secure their slave laborers.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

A certain percentage of the population will be unemployed due to the lack of necessity to work. Stated another way it is no longer necessary for everyone to work. The problem is how do we manage that.

It is human nature to improve ones lot in life. If a job will add to their income they will work, however, it is not necessary to have people living in abject poverty just because they do not have a job.

Orphanages, old folks homes, hospitals....just a few places where volunteers are highly regarded. If an unemployed person volunteers at one of those places increase their income. Don't just have them doing any job just to say they're working. That is such a waste.

I think you must be the stupidest person in America. I've never read anything that made as little sense as the garbage you write. It's almost as if you are too stupid to be real.

One fundamental thing that American freedom enables, is entrepreneurial spirit. Thousands of people come here every year to realize their dream of owning their own business, and believe it or not, most of them achieve that dream. You see, in Socialist countries, like you want to turn America into, there is no such dream, it has been replaced by dependency on the state. This is why Socialism fails every time it has been tried. So people flock to America, many times, with just the clothes on their back and a dream, looking for the freedom to reach their full potential.

Volunteer work is great, we certainly do need volunteers, but we don't PAY volunteers, hence the NAME! You are advocating the taking of monies from taxpayers, to subsidize volunteer work, and that makes it, by definition, NOT volunteer work anymore! Instead, it is taxpayer subsidized work programs for people who are bored with collecting a welfare check! This is exactly the kind of shit we need to get away from, and discourage in America. One of the other key fundamentals in American freedom, is Charity... volunteer work! People elect to do the work, not for a paycheck, but because it fulfills them. You wish to take that away as well!

Here's how we manage the problem of not having enough jobs... We encourage the entrepreneurial spirit present in man, we make it easier to start a business, we relax regulation and taxation on those who are trying to realize their dream. We get the government out of the way, and let capitalism and free market forces work. With the freedom and liberties enjoyed in America, innovative minds will create new jobs and new need for a workforce.

The most obvious flaw in your idea, is how it can sustain itself over time. As more and more people stopped working to take a "paid-volunteer" job, the less tax revenues you will collect to subsidize the "paid volunteers!" We can certainly borrow or print more money, but this is a temporary solution to the problem, as we become increasingly in debt and devalue our currency to the point it becomes worthless. You've obviously not thought this through, and like most nitwit pinheads, you assume money just exists in the government coffers, and will never run out. Anytime we need something or want something, we go to the big pile of endless money in Washington, and we get it! But that isn't a reality-based world you're living in, that's Willy Wonka Land!

 

[Canceled1]

I think you must be the stupidest person in America. I've never read anything that made as little sense as the garbage you write. It's almost as if you are too stupid to be real.

One fundamental thing that American freedom enables, is entrepreneurial spirit. Thousands of people come here every year to realize their dream of owning their own business, and believe it or not, most of them achieve that dream. You see, in Socialist countries, like you want to turn America into, there is no such dream, it has been replaced by dependency on the state. This is why Socialism fails every time it has been tried. So people flock to America, many times, with just the clothes on their back and a dream, looking for the freedom to reach their full potential.

Volunteer work is great, we certainly do need volunteers, but we don't PAY volunteers, hence the NAME! You are advocating the taking of monies from taxpayers, to subsidize volunteer work, and that makes it, by definition, NOT volunteer work anymore! Instead, it is taxpayer subsidized work programs for people who are bored with collecting a welfare check! This is exactly the kind of shit we need to get away from, and discourage in America. One of the other key fundamentals in American freedom, is Charity... volunteer work! People elect to do the work, not for a paycheck, but because it fulfills them. You wish to take that away as well!

Here's how we manage the problem of not having enough jobs... We encourage the entrepreneurial spirit present in man, we make it easier to start a business, we relax regulation and taxation on those who are trying to realize their dream. We get the government out of the way, and let capitalism and free market forces work. With the freedom and liberties enjoyed in America, innovative minds will create new jobs and new need for a workforce.

The most obvious flaw in your idea, is how it can sustain itself over time. As more and more people stopped working to take a "paid-volunteer" job, the less tax revenues you will collect to subsidize the "paid volunteers!" We can certainly borrow or print more money, but this is a temporary solution to the problem, as we become increasingly in debt and devalue our currency to the point it becomes worthless. You've obviously not thought this through, and like most nitwit pinheads, you assume money just exists in the government coffers, and will never run out. Anytime we need something or want something, we go to the big pile of endless money in Washington, and we get it! But that isn't a reality-based world you're living in, that's Willy Wonka Land!

Apple is Canadian

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Apple is Canadian

Perhaps that explains it!

 

[Canceled1]

Perhaps that explains it!

Soon they will be whining like the UK is doing now over the abysmal failure of socialized medicine that The Obama wants to shove down our throats.

 

[apple0154]

I think you must be the stupidest person in America. I've never read anything that made as little sense as the garbage you write. It's almost as if you are too stupid to be real.

One fundamental thing that American freedom enables, is entrepreneurial spirit. Thousands of people come here every year to realize their dream of owning their own business, and believe it or not, most of them achieve that dream. You see, in Socialist countries, like you want to turn America into, there is no such dream, it has been replaced by dependency on the state. This is why Socialism fails every time it has been tried. So people flock to America, many times, with just the clothes on their back and a dream, looking for the freedom to reach their full potential.

Yes, their full potential. Let's take a closer look at how many reach their "full potential". Obviously you never watched the video "The Warning" http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/ Take two minutes and watch from 16:00 minutes to 18:00 minutes.

Alan Greenspan felt the market would look after the fraudsters and there was no need to prosecute fraud. That, in large measure, is what the free enterprise system has become.

As I've noted a person can open a business, rip off people, use the income they receive to buy a car or pay a mortgage then declare the business bankrupt. Many companies being LLC means only the company assets can be confiscated to pay the ripped off folks. The money the guy/gal made ripping off folks and used to buy assets such as a car or house can not be touched. How many people do you think got away with that in the late 1700/early 1800?

Volunteer work is great, we certainly do need volunteers, but we don't PAY volunteers, hence the NAME! You are advocating the taking of monies from taxpayers, to subsidize volunteer work, and that makes it, by definition, NOT volunteer work anymore! Instead, it is taxpayer subsidized work programs for people who are bored with collecting a welfare check! This is exactly the kind of shit we need to get away from, and discourage in America. One of the other key fundamentals in American freedom, is Charity... volunteer work! People elect to do the work, not for a paycheck, but because it fulfills them. You wish to take that away as well!

I was referring to those who lost jobs due to businesses moving overseas. To keep jobs here and compel citizens to pay higher prices for goods they can purchase made elsewhere is charity for the employees. It is a make-work project. People are subsidizing jobs.

Here's how we manage the problem of not having enough jobs... We encourage the entrepreneurial spirit present in man, we make it easier to start a business, we relax regulation and taxation on those who are trying to realize their dream. We get the government out of the way, and let capitalism and free market forces work. With the freedom and liberties enjoyed in America, innovative minds will create new jobs and new need for a workforce.

Sure. Just like the credit default swaps and other financial instruments. In case you're not aware the current financial problem is a direct result of "government getting out of the way".

The most obvious flaw in your idea, is how it can sustain itself over time. As more and more people stopped working to take a "paid-volunteer" job, the less tax revenues you will collect to subsidize the "paid volunteers!" We can certainly borrow or print more money, but this is a temporary solution to the problem, as we become increasingly in debt and devalue our currency to the point it becomes worthless. You've obviously not thought this through, and like most nitwit pinheads, you assume money just exists in the government coffers, and will never run out. Anytime we need something or want something, we go to the big pile of endless money in Washington, and we get it! But that isn't a reality-based world you're living in, that's Willy Wonka Land!

Then tell me the difference between forcing people to pay higher prices for goods so someone can have a job or forcing people to pay taxes so we can retrain those people. Obviously it is you who never thought this through. Keep the shoe factory open so people have jobs but consumers have to pay more for shoes? Employees retire, others take their place and consumers continue to subsidize people who make shoes. Or close the shoe factory and retrain the present staff and/or subsidize their wages if they take another job. By following the latter course there is an end in sight. Keeping the factory open means citizens will continue to subsidize those jobs from generation to generation.

 

[apple0154]

Soon they will be whining like the UK is doing now over the abysmal failure of socialized medicine that The Obama wants to shove down our throats.

There's not one political party that dares touch the medical plan. The Conservative government floated the idea a few years back. The Liberals, NDP and the Bloc Québécois made it very clear they would kick the government out of office.

The Canadian political system requires governments to table budgets. If the budget does not pass it's referred to as a non-confidence vote. Basically it's a one strike/you're out deal.

While elections are every 4 years budgets are at least once a year, if not more often. That's how the government is kept in check.

Socialized medicine has been in Canada for over 40 years. Not a bad record for something that supposedly doesn't work.

 

[charver]

There's not one political party that dares touch the medical plan. The Conservative government floated the idea a few years back. The Liberals, NDP and the Bloc Québécois made it very clear they would kick the government out of office.

The Canadian political system requires governments to table budgets. If the budget does not pass it's referred to as a non-confidence vote. Basically it's a one strike/you're out deal.

While elections are every 4 years budgets are at least once a year, if not more often. That's how the government is kept in check.

Socialized medicine has been in Canada for over 40 years. Not a bad record for something that supposedly doesn't work.

Likewise, there isn't a political party in the UK who would win an election on a promise to dismantle the NHS.

Strange how this thing that everybody apparently hates seems so important to people.