Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Someone should create a poll to find out how many Americans don't understand the meaning of "temporary."
We already covered that. It's the primary description of every socialist system.
The poll should also encompass the number of Americans who don't understand the meaning of "socialism."
Yeah, I agree completely.I doubt many on this forum, including the one I'm responding to, knows what it means.
It does not mean what you think it means.
Someone should create a poll to find out how many Americans don't understand the meaning of "temporary."
We already covered that. It's the primary description of every socialist system.
The poll should also encompass the number of Americans who don't understand the meaning of "socialism."
Yeah, I agree completely.
It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.Someone should create a poll to find out how many Americans don't understand the meaning of "temporary."
We already covered that. It's the primary description of every socialist system.
The poll should also encompass the number of Americans who don't understand the meaning of "socialism."
Yeah, I agree completely.
It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.We already covered that. It's the primary description of every socialist system.
The poll should also encompass the number of Americans who don't understand the meaning of "socialism."
Yeah, I agree completely.
It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.The poll should also encompass the number of Americans who don't understand the meaning of "socialism."
Yeah, I agree completely.
It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
Norway is not Socialist.
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.Yeah, I agree completely.
It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
Norway is not Socialist.
Right. In the strictest sense.
They have had some pretty socialistic governments at times. They certainly follow some of the more common practices of Europe that would be considered socialist in nature (universal health care....mandatory vacation....).
The U.S. isn't socialist in a strict sense.
But it is more socialistic now than 30 years ago.
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.It does not mean what you think it means.
I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
Norway is not Socialist.
Right. In the strictest sense.
They have had some pretty socialistic governments at times. They certainly follow some of the more common practices of Europe that would be considered socialist in nature (universal health care....mandatory vacation....).
The U.S. isn't socialist in a strict sense.
But it is more socialistic now than 30 years ago.
I'm not sure in what way you would consider them socialist.
If the socialists here in the US, intended to adopt the policies of Norway in the US, here is what they would need to do....
If this is what it means to be socialist, then I'm for it.
- Lower corporate tax rates.
- Lower taxes on dividends and capital.
- Lower top marginal tax rates on the wealthy.
- Increase tax rates on the middle class.
- Remove progressive taxes and implement a largely flat tax.
- Put in place a massive sales tax.
- Eliminate the Estate and Inheritance tax completely.
- Reduce regulations on private business.
- Make it easier for corporations to grow.
- Lower tariffs on imports, and open domestic business to foreign competition.
- Reduce eligibility for welfare, even if you increase the amount given.
- Require immigrants to take 400 hours worth of classes, that they pay for, to learn how to be Norwegian.
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
. That's it. That's as far their mental process goes.
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
Your grave mistake is in assuming you are dealing with rational, thinking people. I've learned to assume the wingnutters to be most predictable when treated as animals with strong pavlovian responses to key words.
Obamacare...Plan...Fail -
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.I'll trust dictionary.com more than Arianrhod the internet poster. Thanks. It's not like any of the posts you have created thus far, have built your credibility with anyone that matters.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
Norway is not Socialist.
Right. In the strictest sense.
They have had some pretty socialistic governments at times. They certainly follow some of the more common practices of Europe that would be considered socialist in nature (universal health care....mandatory vacation....).
The U.S. isn't socialist in a strict sense.
But it is more socialistic now than 30 years ago.
I'm not sure in what way you would consider them socialist.
If the socialists here in the US, intended to adopt the policies of Norway in the US, here is what they would need to do....
If this is what it means to be socialist, then I'm for it.
- Lower corporate tax rates.
- Lower taxes on dividends and capital.
- Lower top marginal tax rates on the wealthy.
- Increase tax rates on the middle class.
- Remove progressive taxes and implement a largely flat tax.
- Put in place a massive sales tax.
- Eliminate the Estate and Inheritance tax completely.
- Reduce regulations on private business.
- Make it easier for corporations to grow.
- Lower tariffs on imports, and open domestic business to foreign competition.
- Reduce eligibility for welfare, even if you increase the amount given.
- Require immigrants to take 400 hours worth of classes, that they pay for, to learn how to be Norwegian.
Agreed.
Socialism isn't necessarily a huge state.
They are more "collective" in their approach and hence my characterization.
I have always felt places like Norway were pretty cool (pardon the pun).
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
Your grave mistake is in assuming you are dealing with rational, thinking people. I've learned to assume the wingnutters to be most predictable when treated as animals with strong pavlovian responses to key words.
Obamacare...Plan...Fail -
Oh, I know. I'm not actually responding to them with my posts. My goal is to showcase them as reactive and uninformed, to say to the rational posters: "See, there are two sides in this discussion. There's the one that can cite factual information and have a conversation without freaking out and flaming, and...well, the other side. Glad I could help clarify that for you. If you have any questions, please ask."
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
Your grave mistake is in assuming you are dealing with rational, thinking people. I've learned to assume the wingnutters to be most predictable when treated as animals with strong pavlovian responses to key words.
Obamacare...Plan...Fail -
Oh, I know. I'm not actually responding to them with my posts. My goal is to showcase them as reactive and uninformed, to say to the rational posters: "See, there are two sides in this discussion. There's the one that can cite factual information and have a conversation without freaking out and flaming, and...well, the other side. Glad I could help clarify that for you. If you have any questions, please ask."
When exactly, have you ever cited "factual information" in your posts? Or were you merely pointing out that other don't, while excusing yourself from this requirement?
I don't agree that temporary describes socialist programs.
Many European countries have been working programs for 100 years.
Our Social Security system is coming up on 100 years.
The problem with Socialist systems is that they are not temporary. And that is what makes them so dangerous. The thriving lower class (many of them being leftists) grab on and protect them with full effort. They become their lifelines.
Our country is now a split system with some kind of strange belief that we are one or the other.
A socialist system in Norway is fine....Norway is socialist.
A socialist system in the U.S. is always going to get beat up and beat down. Because (as shown by S.S.), there is not full support and people will gut the system (and I will help them where I can) thus causing it to degrade at a faster rate.
Things like the exchanges failing is not because the system is socialist, it is because it is stupid (just like the morons who post in favor of it).
Norway is not Socialist.
Right. In the strictest sense.
They have had some pretty socialistic governments at times. They certainly follow some of the more common practices of Europe that would be considered socialist in nature (universal health care....mandatory vacation....).
The U.S. isn't socialist in a strict sense.
But it is more socialistic now than 30 years ago.
I'm not sure in what way you would consider them socialist.
If the socialists here in the US, intended to adopt the policies of Norway in the US, here is what they would need to do....
If this is what it means to be socialist, then I'm for it.
- Lower corporate tax rates.
- Lower taxes on dividends and capital.
- Lower top marginal tax rates on the wealthy.
- Increase tax rates on the middle class.
- Remove progressive taxes and implement a largely flat tax.
- Put in place a massive sales tax.
- Eliminate the Estate and Inheritance tax completely.
- Reduce regulations on private business.
- Make it easier for corporations to grow.
- Lower tariffs on imports, and open domestic business to foreign competition.
- Reduce eligibility for welfare, even if you increase the amount given.
- Require immigrants to take 400 hours worth of classes, that they pay for, to learn how to be Norwegian.
Agreed.
Socialism isn't necessarily a huge state.
They are more "collective" in their approach and hence my characterization.
I have always felt places like Norway were pretty cool (pardon the pun).
Give me an example of what you mean by them being "more collective in their approach"?
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
Your grave mistake is in assuming you are dealing with rational, thinking people. I've learned to assume the wingnutters to be most predictable when treated as animals with strong pavlovian responses to key words.
Obamacare...Plan...Fail -
Oh, I know. I'm not actually responding to them with my posts. My goal is to showcase them as reactive and uninformed, to say to the rational posters: "See, there are two sides in this discussion. There's the one that can cite factual information and have a conversation without freaking out and flaming, and...well, the other side. Glad I could help clarify that for you. If you have any questions, please ask."
When exactly, have you ever cited "factual information" in your posts? Or were you merely pointing out that other don't, while excusing yourself from this requirement?
If you actually want an answer, feel free to read every post I've ever made in this forum. Or just ask me a genuine question requiring an informed answer about the PPACA or any related topic.
Otherwise it seems as if you're just grandstanding.
Norway is not Socialist.
Right. In the strictest sense.
They have had some pretty socialistic governments at times. They certainly follow some of the more common practices of Europe that would be considered socialist in nature (universal health care....mandatory vacation....).
The U.S. isn't socialist in a strict sense.
But it is more socialistic now than 30 years ago.
I'm not sure in what way you would consider them socialist.
If the socialists here in the US, intended to adopt the policies of Norway in the US, here is what they would need to do....
If this is what it means to be socialist, then I'm for it.
- Lower corporate tax rates.
- Lower taxes on dividends and capital.
- Lower top marginal tax rates on the wealthy.
- Increase tax rates on the middle class.
- Remove progressive taxes and implement a largely flat tax.
- Put in place a massive sales tax.
- Eliminate the Estate and Inheritance tax completely.
- Reduce regulations on private business.
- Make it easier for corporations to grow.
- Lower tariffs on imports, and open domestic business to foreign competition.
- Reduce eligibility for welfare, even if you increase the amount given.
- Require immigrants to take 400 hours worth of classes, that they pay for, to learn how to be Norwegian.
Agreed.
Socialism isn't necessarily a huge state.
They are more "collective" in their approach and hence my characterization.
I have always felt places like Norway were pretty cool (pardon the pun).
Give me an example of what you mean by them being "more collective in their approach"?
I believe they have state run health care.
Another ignorant thread ignoring the fact that the co-ops were merely a stopgap and were never meant to be permanent.
Your grave mistake is in assuming you are dealing with rational, thinking people. I've learned to assume the wingnutters to be most predictable when treated as animals with strong pavlovian responses to key words.
Obamacare...Plan...Fail -
I can smell the trolls.
If you smelt it, you dealt it.
I can smell the trolls.
If you smelt it, you dealt it.
Really? This is you showing us your 'factual' posts? If you can't actually make an argument, then I'll be going. I'm not hanging around to be bored out of my mind by 4-grader talk. Later.
Number 16 to now shut its doors. Another collapse in the long string of failures known as ObamaCare
Sixteen Obamacare co-ops have now failed. Illinois announced that Land of Lincoln Health, a taxpayer funded Obamacare co-op, would close its doors, leaving 49,000 without insurance. The co-op now joins a list of 15 other Obamacare co-ops that have collapsed since Obamacare has been implemented. Failed co-ops have now cost taxpayers more than $1.7 billion in funds that may never be recovered.
Illinois Obamacare Co-op Becomes 16th to Collapse
He's calling for Public Option:
Obama Concedes Shortcomings of Obamacare, Proposes ‘Public Option’
