Socialism is more popular than Project 2025

[Stann]

Most of the Fortune 500 supported Kamala. Globalists in general despise Trump, and they are the ones that run most corporations.

If you're concerned about elites screwing us via corporations, then the first thing you should realize is that the social left in the West in general has been hijacked by them. Identity politics are the key to distracting people away from class conflict, and that's exactly what the elites want. Populism is what brings the focus back toward class. You may not like Trump's brand of populism, but he's just a right-oriented version of the same focus that Bernie has. I prefer right wing populism over left wing populism, because left wing populism tends to mistakenly think that the solution to government corruption is more government.

" Of the people , by the people , for the people." You initial conclusion about our government's role being limited is very wrong.

 

[dblack]

If the well being of the citizens isn't the business of government I would like to know what you believe it is.

The rights of the citizens.

 

[Stann]

Canadian drugs are way cheaper than here,

Why do you think that's the case?

Big pharma bought off Congress. They make their own rules. I worked for years as a nurse and you wouldn't believe all the medicines we had to destroy even though they were sealed and unused. Couldn't even credit them to the person's account. What a waste.

 

[Monoculturalist]

Maybe they saw the problems better back then. Corporations weren't so cut throat.

The Gilded Age was pretty rough in certain aspects, so I don't think they're less cutthroat today. I think it's just that the working class had more of a solidarity to it than today. It's weird to think about, but race relations in the 1890s were better than they would become in the 1910s and 1920s. Things were moving in a good direction in terms of improving standard of living up until certain groups like the KKK heightened tensions between blacks and whites.

 

[Mac-7]

Socialism, Communism, Marxism, and a full list of other isms are used interchangeably to indicate anything MAGAs don't like. My brother: God rest his soul, said red lights were socialist.

Socialism is not a fixed topic

You will of course present it in glowing terms

But it can have a dark side

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There are multiple factors. One is bulk discounts that their government negotiates with pharmaceutical companies. Another factor is the use of compulsory licensing when the need arises. One more factor is that we basically subsidize the cost of drugs for a lot of the world due to the massive amount of investment and research we do regarding drugs.

Personally, I would prefer the market to reset into a new equilibrium where the investment and research is more evenhanded, and drugs are more affordable here (and less affordable everywhere else).

One is bulk discounts that their government negotiates with pharmaceutical companies.

They negotiate a price to keep the meds in Canada.
Sending them back to the US violates the contract.

Another factor is the use of compulsory licensing when the need arises.

Please explain this further.

One more factor is that we basically subsidize the cost of drugs for a lot of the world due to the massive amount of investment and research we do regarding drugs.

Right.
So, we should force the US drug company to lose money by selling the drugs at a loss here?

Personally, I would prefer the market to reset into a new equilibrium where the investment and research is more evenhanded, and drugs are more affordable here (and less affordable everywhere else).

OK. How?

 

[Monoculturalist]

" Of the people , by the people , for the people." You initial conclusion about our government's role being limited is very wrong.

How so? Also, keep in mind that the Founders had a very different view of who should vote than the modern view. A lot of the rhetoric regarding our government has been reinterpreted over the years.

I personally agree with the Founders that voting was never meant to be a right. It's a privilege. There was a good reason we didn't have universal suffrage. In the beginning, only white male landowners could vote. I'm not saying we should return to that, but limiting voting to people with "skin in the game" is wise. If takers outnumber the makers in voting, then the public can vote to enrich itself through the funds of others, which is a lot of what is happening today.

The bigger government gets (and the broader voting becomes), the more corrupt and authoritarian it becomes. It also becomes more of a weapon for corporations to use against us.

 

[Monoculturalist]

One is bulk discounts that their government negotiates with pharmaceutical companies.

They negotiate a price to keep the meds in Canada.
Sending them back to the US violates the contract.

Another factor is the use of compulsory licensing when the need arises.

Please explain this further.

One more factor is that we basically subsidize the cost of drugs for a lot of the world due to the massive amount of investment and research we do regarding drugs.

Right.
So, we should force the US drug company to lose money by selling the drugs at a loss here?

Personally, I would prefer the market to reset into a new equilibrium where the investment and research is more evenhanded, and drugs are more affordable here (and less affordable everywhere else).

OK. How?

Currently, the negotiation involves that, but it's a contract that would be mostly unenforceable if our own Congress didn't create legal issues regarding the purchase of foreign drugs to begin with.

Compulsory licensing is when the government opens up a patent to allow other producers to make a drug when supply is scarce and need is dire for the public. So, a lifesaving medicine can temporarily be produced by competitors to serve the public's need. This has the added benefit of lowering the cost as well.

US drug companies would charge less for drugs here without any governmental intervention if we had the option of legally buying foreign drugs. They only charge what they do because of the limitations on this market established by government (both ours and foreign ones).

The market would naturally reset if any citizen of any country could buy drugs from any country. You would still see regional variances in the cost of drugs due to differences in currency and cost of living, but in general, drugs would be far cheaper here than they currently are.

 

[Monoculturalist]

The conservative Republican baby boomers don't care because they already "got theirs" so to hell with the Millennials and Zoomers. People are now going to get a taste of right-wing, crony-capitalist fascism. Hitler was a fascist, national socialist, hence he at least did care about German workers, and so did the Italian and Spanish fascists. They were pro-labor and forced capitalists to take care of their workers and serve the country with their businesses.

The type of fascism that we're going to experience under Trump and Elon, is going to be anti-worker, pro-elitist. He's going to flip the finger at the average Joe-American and make the country "Great Again" for the rich and powerful, to the detriment of the working class. We're now transitioning into techno-feudalism.

If that's the argument, then I don't see how you would believe the globalist Dems would care about workers either. The "feudalism" we're headed for stems from the WEF and UN. World government is what these elites want, and that would be the ultimate vehicle for authoritarian control of both personal choices and the economy in general.

I see that the guy you quoted made mention of Trump discussing "elite theory", but this concept extends far beyond Marx. Marx certainly wasn't the first person to realize how elites run things. Humans are hierarchical by nature, so inevitably, the few will rule the many. Most people are followers, not leaders, and frankly, that's a good thing to a certain extent. If we were all leaders, we'd never agree to get anything done.

That being said, the sheepish nature of the public necessitates a certain amount of elitism in authority. The problem is not that elites run things but that the globalist elite are nihilists that only care about money and power. Their complete lack of morals and principles is why they foster the Western mindset of the "world citizen" and why they shun nationalism. Any adherence to cultural values outside of the platitudes of "tolerance" is a hindrance to them. They want unfettered access to cheap labor, and that is why the West is plagued with endless waves of migrants. Human trafficking makes a lot of money for various NGOs that dress it up as "aiding refugees."

So again, if the rights of workers are really your concern, then the wage depression caused by migrants should be high on your list of priorities. The only way to counter that is through deportation and maintaining border security (along with prosecuting employers of illegals).

 

[BULLDOG]

Socialism is not a fixed topic

You will of course present it in glowing terms

But it can have a dark side

Of course it can have a dark side. Anything can have a dark side if it is taken to unmoderated It is also a way to advance us all by helping he least of us catch up and become contributing individuals.

 

[Mac-7]

Of course it can have a dark side. Anything can have a dark side if it is taken to unmoderated It is also a way to advance us all by helping he least of us catch up and become contributing individuals.

As Phil Gramn used to say “a hand up, not a hammock”

You have to be very careful about wiping every nose

 

[BULLDOG]

As Phil Gramn used to say “a hand up, not a hammock”

You have to be very careful about wiping every nose

We became great by helping those that couldn't help themselves. Sure, you can't help everybody, and you should make sure those getting help actually need it, but heartless disregard is not what this country was built on.

 

[Monoculturalist]

We became great by helping those that couldn't help themselves. Sure, you can't help everybody, and you should make sure those getting help actually need it, but heartless disregard is not what this country was built on.

I agree. That's what charities and fraternal organizations are for. Voluntary help is the key, rather than coercion by government via theft (taxation).

 

[gtopa1]

Big pharma bought off Congress. They make their own rules. I worked for years as a nurse and you wouldn't believe all the medicines we had to destroy even though they were sealed and unused. Couldn't even credit them to the person's account. What a waste.

What were the issues with the drugs? Out of date??

Greg

 

[Hector12]

Sorry to hear that, but what makes America great is not the government nor insurance nor healthcare. Freedom does. I

What good is the freedom to die because you can't afford health care?

 

[Monoculturalist]

What good is the freedom to die because you can't afford health care?

Much of the reason for why healthcare is expensive here is because of government. Allow medicine to be a freer market, and a lot of it will be much more affordable.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Much of the reason for why healthcare is expensive here is because of government. Allow medicine to be a freer market, and a lot of it will be much more affordable.

BS.

It's ******* GREED by insurance companies, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and bribery of spineless politicians.

 

[Hector12]

Much of the reason for why healthcare is expensive here is because of government. Allow medicine to be a freer market, and a lot of it will be much more affordable.

Countries with socialized medicine have lower infant mortality rates and higher life expectancies than the United States. Health care in those countries is less expensive than in the United States. Health care in the United States is more expensive than in other affluent democracies because much of the money spent on health care goes to health insurance companies.

------------

US spends most on health care but has worst health outcomes among high-income countries, new report finds​

By Jacqueline Howard, CNN
5 minute read
Published 12:01 AM EST, Tue January 31, 2023

CNN —
The United States spends more on health care than any other high-income country but still has the lowest life expectancy at birth and the highest rate of people with multiple chronic diseases, according to a new report from The Commonwealth Fund, an independent research group.

The report, released Tuesday, also says that compared with peer nations, the US has the highest rates of deaths from avoidable or treatable causes and the highest maternal and infant death rates.

“Americans are living shorter, less healthy lives because our health system is not working as well as it could be,” the report’s lead author, Munira Gunja, senior researcher for The Commonwealth Fund’s International Program in Health Policy and Practice Innovation, said in a news release. “To catch up with other high-income countries, the administration and Congress would have to expand access to health care, act aggressively to control costs, and invest in health equity and social services we know can lead to a healthier population.”

People in the US see doctors less often than those in most other countries, which is probably related to the US having a below-average number of practicing physicians, according to the report, and the US is the only country among those studied that doesn’t have universal health coverage. In 2021 alone, 8.6% of the US population was uninsured.

“Not only is the U.S. the only country we studied that does not have universal health coverage, but its health system can seem designed to discourage people from using services,” researchers at the Commonwealth Fund, headquartered in New York, wrote in the report. “Affordability remains the top reason why some Americans do not sign up for health coverage, while high out-of-pocket costs lead nearly half of working-age adults to skip or delay getting needed care.”

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/31/health/us-health-care-spending-global-perspective/index.html

 

[Monoculturalist]

BS.

It's ******* GREED by insurance companies, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and bribery of spineless politicians.

Greed by insurance and big pharma, I can agree with you on. However, the insurance scam would have a lot less power if the government didn't force us to have it (whether it's the feds or state governments). Big Pharma also would have less power if we could buy foreign drugs, but again, government prevents that.

 

[Hector12]

Nobody is scared by socialism. That has been around in various forms for decades. It's Marxism that America first Republicans are against, and Harris-Walz are Marxists. MAGA

There are very few Marxists in the United States. I doubt Harris and Walz have even read The Communist Manifesto. If they did it was in civics class in high school, and they forgot most of it.