Is it time for Universal Healthcare....and can it be done?

[francoHFW]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

 

[Rustic]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

Keep your socialism, leave the rest of us out of it. That’s the problem with socialism it forces everyone to be part of it whether they want to or not…

 

[dblack]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

Sorry. Your mis-conception of socialism ("fair capitalism") makes your points here meaningless. Read up on it. Stop typing and learn something.

 

[francoHFW]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

Sorry. Your mis-conception of socialism ("fair capitalism") makes your points here meaningless. Read up on it. Stop typing and learn something.

I am talking about the rest of the World's definition since at least World War II, and for well-traveled intelligent Democrats, certainly not brainwashed Republicans. I've talked about it with foreigners in England France and Spain and screw you, GOP dupe."We are all socialists now"--Finland prime minister when ACA passed. And I have a masters in history.

 

[francoHFW]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

Sorry. Your mis-conception of socialism ("fair capitalism") makes your points here meaningless. Read up on it. Stop typing and learn something.

Ever spent any time in Canada France any other developed country? They'll tell you...

 

[francoHFW]

The dictionary definition you dupes always bring up of socialism is ''where business and industry is owned or regulated by the community"... Repeat regulated regulated regulated...

 

[francoHFW]

The dictionary definition you dupes always bring up of socialism is ''where business and industry is owned or regulated by the community"... Repeat regulated regulated regulated...

If it's owned that is communism and that never happens without violent Revolution and dictatorship: pure socialism--everyone calls that communism.

 

[sakinago]

It is way past time for Universal Health Care. Why are we the only developed country without Healthcare daycare paid parental leave living wage cheap College and training good vacations Fair taxes on the rich national ID card to stop illegal immigration Etc etc etc? Scumbag GOP and silly dupes Like Norman...

The socialized medical care in other countries is only affordable now, because the United States spends our money to protect those countries. If they each had to pony up enough money to keep their countries safe, they couldn't afford their unaffordable healthcare. And if you look at their books... their health care systems are unsustainable, even with the U.S. protecting them.

Even then, affordable is a very subjective term. Affordable in relation to standard of living would be a better comparison. American standard of living is definitely up there, and our ability to climb up the economic ladder blows them out of the water. In Europe that ability is pretty much static. In those countries the few rich usually stay rich and the middle and lower class stay that way too. In America, such a higher percentage/average of people have a couple thousand sq ft house with a few cars etc, vs Europe the average is squeezing a family into a 900 sq ft apartment and sharing one old tiny Fiat. And in America, you may start out meagerly, but I think some 60 or 70% of the population will at one point reach the top 20%, 50% in the top 15%, 30% top 10...something along those lines. I’ll look it up and post it.

Almost all of the Nordic countries, that folks like Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez like to reference, are all economically freer than the US is. I think Norway is the one exception, and they have the advantage of vast oil resources (that their fed is merely a shareholder in, but not allowed to interfere in with policy). They are all capitalistic/free market countries, their taxes are jacked way up to pay for their social programs, but policy wise they are ranked economically freer than the US is. The US has social programs like Medicare social security, but that doesn’t make us a socialist country either. In fact, many of the Nordic countries have moved to the right in the past couple of years to shrink governments. They became wealthy before their installation of large social programs, went further and further left over the years, and are now trying to turn the ship around.

Another factor is that they are much smaller, and very culturally and racially uniform populations compared to the US. LA county alone is more heavily populated than most of these countries. LA county is an post-modern, abstract mosaic compared to the Nordic states that are just blank frames.

Of course you have no clue as to the facts... We now have the worst upward Mobility and most inequality of any developed country after the last 35 years of GOP give away to the rich. Dumbass dupe.

The myth of the 1% and the 99%

Going over the numbers there. 70% will wind up in the top 20%, 56% in the top 10%, and 11% in the top 1%...those are better numbers than even I cited. Upward mobility, in terms of poor moving out of poor is a problem, and is probably what you’re referring too (almost 3/4 of the country winding up in the top 20% is outstanding). But it’s a much more nuanced problem than “35 years of GOP giving money to the rich.” A. That’s a non-sequitur. B. That’s an extremely lazy non-sequitur, that I don’t even know where to begin. If you think you can sum up such a complex problem with a simple scape goat in “GOP does xyz,” you desparetaly need critical thinking skills.

Critical thinking - Wikipedia
Give that a review.

We’ve spent around 24 trillion in the war on poverty, the situation has only gotten worse, despite that ridiculous amount of injected capital. Maybe it’s more than just a “throw money at the poor problem” as you imply (it definitely is). There at least 30 other major factors to inject into that equation outside of money (which is an important factor, but not at all the only one). And everyone of those factors have their own nuances built in, nothing resembling any sort of one step solution, and most certainly many problems government isn't capable at taking on.

Can you actually give a nuanced response that’s required with such a complicated subject?

Also you’ve merely objected to ONE of my points, that I feel as though I defended. What else did I say that’s makes me a “dumbass dupe” in you’re opinion (seriously grow up).

I never said giving money to the rich I said giveaway to the rich. The richest now pay less than Many in the middle class in taxes percentage wise. Basically we have a flat tax now here... Guess what? Everyone figured out a long time ago that is a prescription for disaster
Except for your mega rich brainwashers, of course.

It is way past time for Universal Health Care. Why are we the only developed country without Healthcare daycare paid parental leave living wage cheap College and training good vacations Fair taxes on the rich national ID card to stop illegal immigration Etc etc etc? Scumbag GOP and silly dupes Like Norman...

The socialized medical care in other countries is only affordable now, because the United States spends our money to protect those countries. If they each had to pony up enough money to keep their countries safe, they couldn't afford their unaffordable healthcare. And if you look at their books... their health care systems are unsustainable, even with the U.S. protecting them.

Even then, affordable is a very subjective term. Affordable in relation to standard of living would be a better comparison. American standard of living is definitely up there, and our ability to climb up the economic ladder blows them out of the water. In Europe that ability is pretty much static. In those countries the few rich usually stay rich and the middle and lower class stay that way too. In America, such a higher percentage/average of people have a couple thousand sq ft house with a few cars etc, vs Europe the average is squeezing a family into a 900 sq ft apartment and sharing one old tiny Fiat. And in America, you may start out meagerly, but I think some 60 or 70% of the population will at one point reach the top 20%, 50% in the top 15%, 30% top 10...something along those lines. I’ll look it up and post it.

Almost all of the Nordic countries, that folks like Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez like to reference, are all economically freer than the US is. I think Norway is the one exception, and they have the advantage of vast oil resources (that their fed is merely a shareholder in, but not allowed to interfere in with policy). They are all capitalistic/free market countries, their taxes are jacked way up to pay for their social programs, but policy wise they are ranked economically freer than the US is. The US has social programs like Medicare social security, but that doesn’t make us a socialist country either. In fact, many of the Nordic countries have moved to the right in the past couple of years to shrink governments. They became wealthy before their installation of large social programs, went further and further left over the years, and are now trying to turn the ship around.

Another factor is that they are much smaller, and very culturally and racially uniform populations compared to the US. LA county alone is more heavily populated than most of these countries. LA county is an post-modern, abstract mosaic compared to the Nordic states that are just blank frames.

Of course you have no clue as to the facts... We now have the worst upward Mobility and most inequality of any developed country after the last 35 years of GOP give away to the rich. Dumbass dupe.

The myth of the 1% and the 99%

Going over the numbers there. 70% will wind up in the top 20%, 56% in the top 10%, and 11% in the top 1%...those are better numbers than even I cited. Upward mobility, in terms of poor moving out of poor is a problem, and is probably what you’re referring too (almost 3/4 of the country winding up in the top 20% is outstanding). But it’s a much more nuanced problem than “35 years of GOP giving money to the rich.” A. That’s a non-sequitur. B. That’s an extremely lazy non-sequitur, that I don’t even know where to begin. If you think you can sum up such a complex problem with a simple scape goat in “GOP does xyz,” you desparetaly need critical thinking skills.

Critical thinking - Wikipedia
Give that a review.

We’ve spent around 24 trillion in the war on poverty, the situation has only gotten worse, despite that ridiculous amount of injected capital. Maybe it’s more than just a “throw money at the poor problem” as you imply (it definitely is). There at least 30 other major factors to inject into that equation outside of money (which is an important factor, but not at all the only one). And everyone of those factors have their own nuances built in, nothing resembling any sort of one step solution, and most certainly many problems government isn't capable at taking on.

Can you actually give a nuanced response that’s required with such a complicated subject?

Also you’ve merely objected to ONE of my points, that I feel as though I defended. What else did I say that’s makes me a “dumbass dupe” in you’re opinion (seriously grow up).

Wake up and smell the coffee..
Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = The Fed - Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

I never said middle class Americans were keeping more of their labor earnings. Again, you need to be more nuanced. I agree that the amount they’re able to keep, in relation with inflation has been going down or stagnant. My point, which was clear, was that 70% make it to the top 20%, while some 53% of those at some point are starting from the bottom or near bottom. That’s still tremendous movement. I think the lack of wage growth is a problem too, i would’ve preferred a tax cut centered around the middle class. But you’re having a completely different conversation than the argument I am making.

Another problem with your point is you’re just comparing America to America over time. I was comparing it to Europe. Are you better off poor in these European countries with heavy redistribution, on some levels yes. But a lot of that is done by paying bottom level waste management workers the same as teachers for example. Doesn’t sound all that fair to me, especially considering those teachers are spending time and money to be educated for their jobs. Not saying that waste managment isn’t hard, dirty, necessary work, but I wouldn’t be too happy about that as a teacher. However, this is still a different issue from mobility from class to class.

 

[sakinago]

It is way past time for Universal Health Care. Why are we the only developed country without Healthcare daycare paid parental leave living wage cheap College and training good vacations Fair taxes on the rich national ID card to stop illegal immigration Etc etc etc? Scumbag GOP and silly dupes Like Norman...

The socialized medical care in other countries is only affordable now, because the United States spends our money to protect those countries. If they each had to pony up enough money to keep their countries safe, they couldn't afford their unaffordable healthcare. And if you look at their books... their health care systems are unsustainable, even with the U.S. protecting them.

Even then, affordable is a very subjective term. Affordable in relation to standard of living would be a better comparison. American standard of living is definitely up there, and our ability to climb up the economic ladder blows them out of the water. In Europe that ability is pretty much static. In those countries the few rich usually stay rich and the middle and lower class stay that way too. In America, such a higher percentage/average of people have a couple thousand sq ft house with a few cars etc, vs Europe the average is squeezing a family into a 900 sq ft apartment and sharing one old tiny Fiat. And in America, you may start out meagerly, but I think some 60 or 70% of the population will at one point reach the top 20%, 50% in the top 15%, 30% top 10...something along those lines. I’ll look it up and post it.

Almost all of the Nordic countries, that folks like Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez like to reference, are all economically freer than the US is. I think Norway is the one exception, and they have the advantage of vast oil resources (that their fed is merely a shareholder in, but not allowed to interfere in with policy). They are all capitalistic/free market countries, their taxes are jacked way up to pay for their social programs, but policy wise they are ranked economically freer than the US is. The US has social programs like Medicare social security, but that doesn’t make us a socialist country either. In fact, many of the Nordic countries have moved to the right in the past couple of years to shrink governments. They became wealthy before their installation of large social programs, went further and further left over the years, and are now trying to turn the ship around.

Another factor is that they are much smaller, and very culturally and racially uniform populations compared to the US. LA county alone is more heavily populated than most of these countries. LA county is an post-modern, abstract mosaic compared to the Nordic states that are just blank frames.

Of course you have no clue as to the facts... We now have the worst upward Mobility and most inequality of any developed country after the last 35 years of GOP give away to the rich. Dumbass dupe.

The myth of the 1% and the 99%

Going over the numbers there. 70% will wind up in the top 20%, 56% in the top 10%, and 11% in the top 1%...those are better numbers than even I cited. Upward mobility, in terms of poor moving out of poor is a problem, and is probably what you’re referring too (almost 3/4 of the country winding up in the top 20% is outstanding). But it’s a much more nuanced problem than “35 years of GOP giving money to the rich.” A. That’s a non-sequitur. B. That’s an extremely lazy non-sequitur, that I don’t even know where to begin. If you think you can sum up such a complex problem with a simple scape goat in “GOP does xyz,” you desparetaly need critical thinking skills.

Critical thinking - Wikipedia
Give that a review.

We’ve spent around 24 trillion in the war on poverty, the situation has only gotten worse, despite that ridiculous amount of injected capital. Maybe it’s more than just a “throw money at the poor problem” as you imply (it definitely is). There at least 30 other major factors to inject into that equation outside of money (which is an important factor, but not at all the only one). And everyone of those factors have their own nuances built in, nothing resembling any sort of one step solution, and most certainly many problems government isn't capable at taking on.

Can you actually give a nuanced response that’s required with such a complicated subject?

Also you’ve merely objected to ONE of my points, that I feel as though I defended. What else did I say that’s makes me a “dumbass dupe” in you’re opinion (seriously grow up).

I never said giving money to the rich I said giveaway to the rich. The richest now pay less than Many in the middle class in taxes percentage wise. Basically we have a flat tax now here... Guess what? Everyone figured out a long time ago that is a prescription for disaster
Except for your mega rich brainwashers, of course.

What?? No we do not basically have a flat tax or anything close to a flat tax. In fact it’s gotten more progressive. That’s just silly. And I terms of INCOME taxed that may be true, but many of the rich, aren’t making INCOME like you or I. They’re gains on investment, totally different issue.

 

[dblack]

I am talking about the rest of the World's definition since at least World War II

No, you're redefining it. "Fair capitalism"? WTF? You're simply saying black is white. You're no better than the Trumpsters - blind as **** and trying to sell everyone else on your idiocy.

 

[dannyboys]

Visit any Socialist country on the planet and tell me how great Socialism is great for the average person.
EVERY Socialist country on the planet is in a financial death spiral. They can't 'borrow' any more money from their Capitalist country neighbors.
'Mother Russia' stopped propping up Castro's regime long ago.
Universal health care will cost 32 TRILLION tax payer dollars in ten years.
Open the borders and let all the millions of highly skilled Latino's take over the economy?

 

[bendog]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

It's the greatest generation that got rid of unions. That's the irony. And then they voted in Trump, for double irony. And Trump is the antithesis to Reagan, whom they voted in over unions.

 

[dblack]

Visit any Socialist country on the planet and tell me how great Socialism is great for the average person.

But this is a pointless exercise. It only exposes all the equivocation surrounding the debate. People will simply cherry-pick a country with a mixed economy and pretend it's a shining example of whichever side their own. The question is whether we want more socialism or less More state control over our economic decisions, or less.

 

[Rosy]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

Who needs healthcare in the rest of the universe, and why do I have to pay for this?

 

[francoHFW]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

It's the greatest generation that got rid of unions. That's the irony. And then they voted in Trump, for double irony. And Trump is the antithesis to Reagan, whom they voted in over unions.

Perhaps the Republican greatest Generation did... I don't believe in blaming any entire Generation 4 Reagan...

 

[bendog]

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

It's the greatest generation that got rid of unions. That's the irony. And then they voted in Trump, for double irony. And Trump is the antithesis to Reagan, whom they voted in over unions.

Perhaps the Republican greatest Generation did... I don't believe in blaming any entire Generation 4 Reagan...

I just find it ironic that the generation that retired on Soc Sec and Medicare oppose expanding govt services to current workers.

I'm leery of single payor, but the gop's inability to pass anything seems to make this inevitable.

 

[francoHFW]

Visit any Socialist country on the planet and tell me how great Socialism is great for the average person.
EVERY Socialist country on the planet is in a financial death spiral. They can't 'borrow' any more money from their Capitalist country neighbors.
'Mother Russia' stopped propping up Castro's regime long ago.
Universal health care will cost 32 TRILLION tax payer dollars in ten years.
Open the borders and let all the millions of highly skilled Latino's take over the economy?

For the billionth time that is communism, not socialism. Outside the GOP bubble of BS, communism is a dictatorship that owns business, socialism is democracy that regulates business.

 

[francoHFW]

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

It's the greatest generation that got rid of unions. That's the irony. And then they voted in Trump, for double irony. And Trump is the antithesis to Reagan, whom they voted in over unions.

Perhaps the Republican greatest Generation did... I don't believe in blaming any entire Generation 4 Reagan...

I just find it ironic that the generation that retired on Soc Sec and Medicare oppose expanding govt services to current workers.

I'm leery of single payor, but the gop's inability to pass anything seems to make this inevitable.

The Republican part of that generation obviously..

 

[francoHFW]

I hope we can rise above that, and avoid the mistakes of "every other country". But it seems unlikely, given that our nation is currently mulling over whether we want to give control to the socialists or the fascists. Both groups being very eager to control our health care.

By which you mean communism... Socialism is just fair capitalism and always democratic everywhere
...

No, I mean socialism, your attempts to redefine it notwithstanding. And here's something else you won't get: democracy is exactly the problem with socialism, in that it attempts to control our personal, economic decisions, democratically, through the state.

Just why Obama was right in ok not wanting a mandate. Most people don't need a mandate... How does the government in a socialist country do that? And forget the goddamn mandate LOL it's gone.

We need the government to press reform since we have gotten rid of unions and the greatest Generation died. Why are we the only developed country, which are all socialist, to not have a living wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap college and training good vacations, the rich paying more in taxes percentage wise -that is really stupid, good infrastructure...?

It's the greatest generation that got rid of unions. That's the irony. And then they voted in Trump, for double irony. And Trump is the antithesis to Reagan, whom they voted in over unions.

The greatest generation is dead.

 

[francoHFW]

Visit any Socialist country on the planet and tell me how great Socialism is great for the average person.
EVERY Socialist country on the planet is in a financial death spiral. They can't 'borrow' any more money from their Capitalist country neighbors.
'Mother Russia' stopped propping up Castro's regime long ago.
Universal health care will cost 32 TRILLION tax payer dollars in ten years.
Open the borders and let all the millions of highly skilled Latino's take over the economy?

Nobody is for open borders oh, that's just more garbage propaganda ... unbelievable.