We get to pay for student loans. Great.

[Dragonlady]

Oh ok. I’m supposed to feel bad because it’s not enough money being thrown on the backs of people who never took out the loans or paid theirs off. What I really enjoy doing is paying taxes so these poor college kids can skip out on paying their frat dues and beer tabs.

I don’t think you’re helping here.

You sound angry and bitter that you didn't go to college. You need help with that. It's eating at you.

 

[Mac-7]

We have a right to have what we want here too, and you're not going to stop it. You can try and point that gun at us, but it won't work. Government is a social apparatus organized by the people to manage their large-scale socioeconomic civil affairs and projects. It does what we want it to do. It will serve the public good, not the vested interests of the rich at the expense of the poor. Those who want cradle-to-grave privileges are the rich, not the working class. The rich capitalists are the parasites, not the workers.

Biden better hurry and slip this slush fund past the voters before they wake up

Because the number of people demanding free money is pretty small compared to the number of voters being asked to open their wallets and give their money away

 

[SweetSue92]

Europe has public health care, and that cut the cost of heath care by half.
They pay half the amount we do in our health insurance rates, by directly paying for public health care in their taxes.
And it is not just "Europe".
Almost the whole world does it.
We are about the only idiots who do not.

Well the NHS is about to go belly up as I type this

 

[SweetSue92]

You sound angry and bitter that you didn't go to college. You need help with that. It's eating at you.

I would take 10 "uneducated" Mikes over one "educated" miserable Canadian

Anyday. Everyday.

 

[SweetSue92]

We don't have to move there, this is our home and country. We will have tuition-free education and vocational training here in the US. You'll see it's coming.

Sorry, no. Communism is not "our country". If you want that, move.

 

[Red Front]

Of course we're going to stop it. It's called voting.

The rich have no use for cradle-to-grave government. Only parasites like you do.

Now grow up and learn to accept personal responsibilities.

The rich need the government to bail them out every few years at the expense of the working-class. The government provides the private sector with needed infrastructure, grants, contracts, facilities, and expertise while many billionaires refuse to pay their fair share in taxes. Some of them don't pay a penny in federal income taxes. More, they have an army of lobbyists in the halls of government bribing politicians to pass laws that serve their vested interests, often at the expense of the public. Their super PACs and all of their money and power undermine our democracy. The real leeches and tyrants are the privileged wealthy class, not the working class. We want a government that serves the public interest, not the interest of the rich at the expense of everyone else.

 

[Red Front]

Sorry, no. Communism is not "our country". If you want that, move.

You move, I will stay and vote for leftist policies. I'm an activist for the true left.

 

[SweetSue92]

The rich need the government to bail them out every few years at the expense of the working-class. The government provides the private sector with needed infrastructure, grants, contracts, facilities, and expertise while many billionaires refuse to pay their fair share in taxes. Some of them don't pay a penny in federal income taxes. More, they have an army of lobbyists in the halls of government bribing politicians to pass laws that serve their vested interests, often at the expense of the public. Their super PACs and all of their money and power undermine our democracy. The real leeches and tyrants are the privileged wealthy class, not the working class. We want a government that serves the public interest, not the interest of the rich at the expense of everyone else.

His every post:

Life is not fair.

We have Utopia.

It's never worked before, but it will this time.

We promise.

Dude, if you're anywhere upwards of 20 years old I will be shocked. I get it. The optimism of youth. But save yourself some typing and us some reading and just type the above for every post.

 

[Rigby5]

What put us ahead of the world is our Constitution, capitalism, and freedom.

College is an investment. An investment is when you spend YOUR OWN MONEY hoping to get it back plus a profit. Our federal government should not be funding investments of any kind.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

Wrong.
We were not ahead of the rest of the world until after WWII, when we sent all those soldiers to college and made tuition cheap or free for everyone.
It is only then that the US started out producing everyone else.
The constitution not only had almost no impact, but we totally ignore it these days, with the BATF, DEA, FDA, etc.

And the reason for any US success has always been from government investment, like Hoover dam, TVA, the St. Lawrence Seaway, etc.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Evening commrade...OK lets get started here

You move, I will stay and vote for leftist policies.

because you can't do that in leftist countries

I'm an activist for the true left.

as opposed to the lying left?

 

[Rigby5]

No Rigby because the US federal government can't go insolvent, due to being the exclusive issuer of the currency. Watch this:

​

Wrong.
While it is true the government can not go insolvent, that does not mean our income is not reduced and our taxes increased, until we pay for any deficit.
You totally miss the point.
When government reduces the value of the dollar by printing more, borrowing, etc., we all become poorer.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

We were not ahead of the rest of the world until after WWII, when we sent all those soldiers to college and made tuition cheap or free for everyone.

and when did that change?

 

[Rigby5]

His every post:

Life is not fair.

We have Utopia.

It's never worked before, but it will this time.

We promise.

Dude, if you're anywhere upwards of 20 years old I will be shocked. I get it. The optimism of youth. But save yourself some typing and us some reading and just type the above for every post.

Not true.
Communism has a history of success for millions of years.
Socialism obvious works much better than pure capitalism, and the US is about half and half.

 

[Red Front]

His every post:

Life is not fair.

We have Utopia.

It's never worked before, but it will this time.

We promise.

Dude, if you're anywhere upwards of 20 years old I will be shocked. I get it. The optimism of youth. But save yourself some typing and us some reading and just type the above for every post.

Life can be fairer, and better, not necessarily utopian or perfect. It's up to us whether life is fairer or not. As far as your claim that it hasn't worked before, it has, but the enemies of socialism have done everything possible to destroy it, even today they continue to attack socialist economics with economic sanctions, threats of war..etc. Your argument is quite disingenuous because just because an economic or political system didn't work in the past, doesn't imply it won't in the future. Capitalism didn't replace slavery and feudalism overnight or in a few years or decades, it took centuries for the merchants to become industrialists and overpower the kings and nobles, and establish capitalist, industrialized Republics. It was a very long and bloody process. You sound like one of the feudal lords of the 17th century arguing as to why the merchants will never overpower feudalism and monarchy.

Socialism and then high communism is inevitable due to advanced technology. As technology advances, replacing wage-labor, production by necessity becomes socialized and democratized. We will eventually not produce the goods we consume for a profit, but rather to simply consume them. The profit motive, money, markets, all of that will collapse as a result of advanced technology. Before high communism, there is a process of socialism, and that is about twenty years away. It might even be ten years away, but I'm being conservative. Mass unemployment will soon force society to adopt socialism, it's inevitable.

 

[Rigby5]

and when did that change?

Not sure.
I think the US started going down hill in the late 1990s, when we started offshoring jobs to China and started raising tuition.

 

[Rigby5]

Well the NHS is about to go belly up as I type this

That makes no sense.
The NHS was never supposed to make a profit, so was always technically "belly up".
Does not matter.
If people like it, they will keep paying for it no matter what it costs.

{...
The National Health Service (NHS) is the publicly funded healthcare system in England, and one of the four National Health Service systems in the United Kingdom. It is the second largest single-payer healthcare system in the world after the Brazilian Sistema Único de Saúde. Primarily funded by the government from general taxation (plus a small amount from National Insurance contributions), and overseen by the Department of Health and Social Care, the NHS provides healthcare to all legal English residents and residents from other regions of the UK, with most services free at the point of use for most people. [4] The NHS also conducts research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).[5]

Free healthcare at the point of use comes from the core principles at the founding of the National Health Service. The 1942 Beveridge cross-party report established the principles of the NHS which was implemented by the Labour government in 1948. Labour's Minister for Health Aneurin Bevan is popularly considered the NHS' founder,[6][7][8] despite never formally being referred to as such. In practice, "free at the point of use" normally means that anyone legitimately and fully registered with the system (i.e., in possession of an NHS number), available to legal UK residents regardless of nationality (but not non-resident British citizens), can access the full breadth of critical and non-critical medical care, without payment except for some specific NHS services, for example eye tests, dental care, prescriptions and aspects of long-term care. These charges are usually lower than equivalent services provided by a private provider and many are free to vulnerable or low-income patients.[9][10]

The NHS provides the majority of healthcare in England, including primary care, in-patient care, long-term healthcare, ophthalmology and dentistry. The National Health Service Act 1946 came into effect on 5 July 1948. Private health care has continued parallel to the NHS, paid for largely by private insurance: it is used by about 8% of the population, generally as an add-on to NHS services.

The NHS is largely funded from general taxation, with a small amount being contributed by National Insurance payments[11] and from fees levied in accordance with recent changes in the Immigration Act 2014.[12] The UK government department responsible for the NHS is the Department of Health and Social Care, headed by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. The Department of Health and Social Care had a £110 billion budget in 2013–14, most of this being spent on the NHS. ...}

 

[Red Front]

Wrong.
While it is true the government can not go insolvent, that does not mean our income is not reduced and our taxes increased, until we pay for any deficit.
You totally miss the point.
When government reduces the value of the dollar by printing more, borrowing, etc., we all become poorer.

Not if the money that is printed is invested in production/infrastructure/raw materials/machinery/employment/housing/social programs that contribute to public health..etc The GDP or production capacity/employment/consumption/trade defines the limits of the federal budget, not tax revenue. Taxes maintain the value of the dollar, but it doesn't fund the federal government. There is no national deficit or debt, in the same sense as household debt. You're confusing micro and macroeconomics.

 

[SweetSue92]

Not true.
Communism has a history of success for millions of years.
Socialism obvious works much better than pure capitalism, and the US is about half and half.

Communism might have limited success in....small communes.

Beyond that no.

 

[SweetSue92]

That makes no sense.
The NHS was never supposed to make a profit, so was always technically "belly up".
Does not matter.
If people like it, they will keep paying for it no matter what it costs.

{...
The National Health Service (NHS) is the publicly funded healthcare system in England, and one of the four National Health Service systems in the United Kingdom. It is the second largest single-payer healthcare system in the world after the Brazilian Sistema Único de Saúde. Primarily funded by the government from general taxation (plus a small amount from National Insurance contributions), and overseen by the Department of Health and Social Care, the NHS provides healthcare to all legal English residents and residents from other regions of the UK, with most services free at the point of use for most people. [4] The NHS also conducts research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).[5]

Free healthcare at the point of use comes from the core principles at the founding of the National Health Service. The 1942 Beveridge cross-party report established the principles of the NHS which was implemented by the Labour government in 1948. Labour's Minister for Health Aneurin Bevan is popularly considered the NHS' founder,[6][7][8] despite never formally being referred to as such. In practice, "free at the point of use" normally means that anyone legitimately and fully registered with the system (i.e., in possession of an NHS number), available to legal UK residents regardless of nationality (but not non-resident British citizens), can access the full breadth of critical and non-critical medical care, without payment except for some specific NHS services, for example eye tests, dental care, prescriptions and aspects of long-term care. These charges are usually lower than equivalent services provided by a private provider and many are free to vulnerable or low-income patients.[9][10]

The NHS provides the majority of healthcare in England, including primary care, in-patient care, long-term healthcare, ophthalmology and dentistry. The National Health Service Act 1946 came into effect on 5 July 1948. Private health care has continued parallel to the NHS, paid for largely by private insurance: it is used by about 8% of the population, generally as an add-on to NHS services.

The NHS is largely funded from general taxation, with a small amount being contributed by National Insurance payments[11] and from fees levied in accordance with recent changes in the Immigration Act 2014.[12] The UK government department responsible for the NHS is the Department of Health and Social Care, headed by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. The Department of Health and Social Care had a £110 billion budget in 2013–14, most of this being spent on the NHS. ...}

I mean to say it is not providing the services people pay for with their taxes. Like all govt programs, it is heavily funded and under-delivering. Badly.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

I think the US started going down hill in the late 1990s, when we started offshoring jobs to China and started raising tuition.

the 60's is when we started going downhill, it only appears to be the late 90's cuz there was 12-15 year respite after the 60'and 70's where everything was hunky dory...
... and as for tuition going up that's on the schools which is who really gets bailed out here, as long as the government keeps footing the bill the tuition increases are all but mandatory...
...the solution is to tell the schools to forgive the debt.