Why buying health care across state lines is a terrible, terrible idea.

yes, this is how we got Hilter, Stalin, Mao, the great 20th Century liberals. Jefferson saw them coming 200 years ago,( based on 3000 years of history) and so gave us freedom from all forms of central government going forward. Our goof liberals have lived through it and still they don't see that central government monopolies will be corrupt at best and genocidal on average.

Liberals should be illegal as the Constitution intended.

Here is your lesson for the day...

The antithesis of authoritarianism is liberalism.

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians

What Mao Zedong said about liberalism

mao.jpeg


革命的集体组织中的自由主义是十分有害的。它是一种腐蚀剂,使团结涣散,关系松懈,工作消极,意见分歧。它使革命队伍失掉严密的组织和纪律,政策不能贯彻到底,党的组织和党所领导的群众发生隔离。这是一种严重的恶劣倾向。

"Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.

Combat Liberalism - Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung

Was he referring to classic liberalism or modern liberalism?

I quite like Bfgrn's quote defining liberalism in opposition to authoritarianism. That's what it should be in my view. But, as you seem to be suggesting, many people who claim to hold liberal values seem ready, willing and able to indulge very authoritarian practices to achieve their goals.

I don't think, however, it's fair to condemn liberalism based on the actions of today's Democrats or Republicans, or of any specific leaders who claim to be liberals. It's a set of ideas and principles. I suppose the question is, what is included in the ideology. Being anti-authoritarian is a fine start, but it's easy to quickly load up liberalism goals and values that contradict that start.
 
Of course having more options creates more competition which helps teh consumer. The problem is, state government has less control over its citizens when they can buy for outside sources. The healthcare debate has never been about what is best for the consumer. All you have to do is look at Obamacare to see that.
 
When fascism comes to America is will be singing "Give Peace a Chance"

Sure, it makes marginal sense, but it's thought provoking
 
restricting competition over state lines is nothing short of helping health insurance companies to corner the market.....

But by the same token, replacing a fragmented regulatory system with a centralized regime simply makes it easier for them to corner the market - just at a higher level. It won't do much good break up the scheme at the state level if we simply replace it at that federal level, at that seems a very likely outcome given the limitless desire for control that comes out of Congress.
 
restricting competition over state lines is nothing short of helping health insurance companies to corner the market.....

But by the same token, replacing a fragmented regulatory system with a centralized regime simply makes it easier for them to corner the market - just at a higher level. It won't do much good break up the scheme at the state level if we simply replace it at that federal level, at that seems a very likely outcome given the limitless desire for control that comes out of Congress.

Bingo!:clap2:its called a monopoly
 
yes, this is how we got Hilter, Stalin, Mao, the great 20th Century liberals. Jefferson saw them coming 200 years ago,( based on 3000 years of history) and so gave us freedom from all forms of central government going forward. Our goof liberals have lived through it and still they don't see that central government monopolies will be corrupt at best and genocidal on average.

Liberals should be illegal as the Constitution intended.

Here is your lesson for the day...

The antithesis of authoritarianism is liberalism.

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians

What Mao Zedong said about liberalism

mao.jpeg


革命的集体组织中的自由主义是十分有害的。它是一种腐蚀剂,使团结涣散,关系松懈,工作消极,意见分歧。它使革命队伍失掉严密的组织和纪律,政策不能贯彻到底,党的组织和党所领导的群众发生隔离。这是一种严重的恶劣倾向。

"Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.

Combat Liberalism - Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung

Was he referring to classic liberalism or modern liberalism?

Either way, NEITHER are conservatives.


Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan
 
The antithesis of authoritarianism is liberalism.

how is that possible given that liberals openly want authoritarian government. Does BO want more or less authority over the health care industry and over the money we all earn????

See why we are 1000% positive liberals are slow?
 
What Mao Zedong said about liberalism

perfectly 100% stupid and perfectly 100% liberal.

Mao was a standard big government liberal using our definitions. When he used the term above he was using an entirely different meaning having to do with not arguing and accepting things that has no relation to the liberal/conservative split in modern America.

You are perfectly liberal and so cant grasp a thing!! Astounding!!!
 

Forum List

Back
Top