Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We need to increase taxes on the wealthy, cut overspending on the military, and establish government run businesses to compete with private industry, to 'keep them in line'. Government alternatives would go a long way to curb private industry abuse.
And for those who start crying about 'Communism', hell, we have allowed our corporations to outsource our manufacturing base to China. We already HAVE 'government alternatives', they just happen to be COMMUNIST government alternatives! We are all walking around in Communist clothing, playing with Communist toys, and eating Communist food. So at what point does that make YOU a Communist?
I used to work at United Healthcare, where the CEO received a 1 BILLION dollar bonus for one year. Read the book 'It's the Crude Dude' by Linda McQuaig to see how the oil industry is screwing you over. Government run businesses would provide a place where the unemployed could work, as well as those on the government dole.
I remember in Chicago when I was a cab driver with no health insurance. Found out that I had a hernia, and if I allowed my intestines to keep popping out, I could die. So I went to Cook County hospital and received a one time allowance for the surgery. I was in a big room where most of my fellow patients were gangbangers who had been shot. It got the job done. For Obama's manditory plan let there be a cheap plan to allow you to get emergency care in a government hospital. That's where the poor folk in Chicago go anyway.
and establish government run businesses to compete with private industry, to 'keep them in line'.
Venezuela nationalized their oil industry. The people that knew how operate that industry went elsewhere. The infrastructure is falling apart becsue they are investing it in things like 15 cent a gallon gasoline, it's bloated, environmental issues increased, worker safety decreased, production has plummeted...
There's a reason a country like China looks to a US corporation like Exxon to partner with when building a refinery.
I agree that EVERYONE needs to pay their fair share. How about a flat tax on EVERYONE, no exceptions except on welfare, unemployment, social security. You pay 17% or 21% or whatever whether you make 20,000 a year or 20,000,000 a year. Businesses, investments, interest all included. Then cut government accordingly.
we have allowed our corporations to outsource our manufacturing base to China
Agreed!! Start by repealing NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA.
let there be a cheap plan to allow you to get emergency care in a government hospital
Agreed!! There has to be a better way to cover the uninsured.
Let the guv do it!
Because the shortages and rationing its interference in the markets will cause are what consumers really want, they just don't know it yet.
P.S. There is no such thing as a "fair tax" levied on a persons labor, that's called slavery.
'Government alternatives'? We have a government healthcare system - it's called Medicare and Medicaid. How's that going? It's broke.
We have government educations programs - the public school system. How's that working out in the nation as a whole? We spend the most per student of any industrialized nation and have declining educational standards and results.
We have a government weather company - the National Weather Service/NOAA. Their models are beat out consistently by the European models - from a private company (ECMWF). (And yes, I am a huge supporter of the NWS for a number of factors and reasons, but their models are sub-par now).
Capitalism is by far the most powerful system that has promoted equality and freedom. Can it be abused? Absolutely, just like anything else. Should regulations be in place? Sure. But look at the history and see what capitalism has done in the last 200 years for making humankind much, MUCH better off than they were for the previous 1000 years.
Venezuela nationalized their oil industry. The people that knew how operate that industry went elsewhere. The infrastructure is falling apart becsue they are investing it in things like 15 cent a gallon gasoline, it's bloated, environmental issues increased, worker safety decreased, production has plummeted...
There's a reason a country like China looks to a US corporation like Exxon to partner with when building a refinery.
MOSCOW--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rosneft and ExxonMobil have agreed to expand their cooperation under their 2011 Strategic Cooperation Agreement to include an additional approximately 600,000 square kilometers (150 million acres) of exploration acreage in the Russian Arctic and potential participation by Rosneft (or its affiliate) in the Point Thomson project in Alaska. They have also agreed to conduct a joint study on a potential LNG project in the Russian Far East.
The agreements, which include plans to explore seven new blocks in the Chukchi Sea, Laptev Sea and Kara Sea, were signed by Igor Sechin, president of Rosneft, and Stephen Greenlee, president of ExxonMobil Exploration Company, in the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The license blocks include Severo-Vrangelevsky-1, Severo-Vrangelevsky-2 and Yuzhno-Chukotsky blocks in Chukchi Sea, Ust’ Oleneksky, Ust’ Lensky and Anisinsko Novosibirsky blocks in Laptev Sea and Severo Karsky block in Kara Sea, which are among the most promising and least explored offshore areas globally.
A separate Heads of Agreement was signed providing Rosneft (or its affiliate) an opportunity to acquire a 25 percent interest in the Point Thomson Unit, which covers development of a remote natural gas and condensate field on Alaska’s North Slope. It is estimated that Point Thomson contains approximately 25 percent of the known gas resource base in Alaska’s North Slope.
Rosneft and ExxonMobil also executed a Memorandum of Understanding to jointly study the economic viability of an LNG development in the Russian Far East, including the possible construction of an LNG facility. The companies will form a joint working group, which is expected to commence work in the coming weeks to study the viability of an LNG project using available natural gas resources.
Commenting on the agreements signed, Igor Sechin said, “The agreements signed today bring the already unprecedented scale of the Rosneft and ExxonMobil partnership up to a completely new level. The acreage in the Russian Arctic subject to geological exploration and subsequent development increased nearly six-fold. That means the enormous resource potential of Russian Arctic offshore fields will be explored and developed in the most efficient manner with the application of cutting-edge technologies and expertise of our strategic partner, ExxonMobil, and using state-of-the-art environmental protection systems. Participation in the Point Thomson project will increase Rosneft’s access to the latest gas and condensate field development technologies used in harsh climatic conditions.â€
Stephen Greenlee said the agreements build on the ongoing successful cooperation between the companies. “This expansion is an illustration of the strength of the partnership that exists between ExxonMobil and Rosneft,†said Greenlee. “We look forward to working together on these new projects.â€
The companies are committed to using global best practices and state-of-the-art safety and environmental protection systems for the Arctic operations. The work will be supported by the recently signed Declaration on the Russian Arctic Shelf Environmental protection. Also, ExxonMobil and Rosneft will work together through an Arctic Research Center to provide a full range of research and design services to support their cooperation on Arctic projects.
Rosneft and ExxonMobil continue to implement a program of staff exchanges of technical and management employees to help strengthen relationships between the companies. Rosneft and ExxonMobil Expand Strategic Cooperation | ExxonMobil News Releases
No China is the one that buys the LNG and Oil from Russia, Canada a or the U.S. if you decide to export Oil but so far China gets their stable LNG and Oil from Russia and Canada but due to Canada having to get the ok from the U.S. to build the Keystone XL pipeline.
How much protesting would their be if we built Nuclear powered ice breakers like Russia is doing and massive offshore drilling platforms to start exploring our untapped Artic reserves.
How much protesting would their be if we built Nuclear powered ice breakers like Russia is doing and massive offshore drilling platforms to start exploring our untapped Artic reserves.
If I recall correctly the refinery in China was done deal in 2 years. Something like that here would take a decade if not longer.
We need to increase taxes on the wealthy, cut overspending on the military, and establish government run businesses to compete with private industry, to 'keep them in line'. Government alternatives would go a long way to curb private industry abuse.
No. We could do that. But we don't need to do that. Nor should we.
Government businesses do not compete with private industry. Government gets its funding from taxes and therefore has no incentive to be efficient or effective, provide good customer service, or innovate. Government run businesses aren't fair competition because they do not rely on the need to be profitable. Government run businesses aren't effective competition because they do not rely on the need to be competitive.
You should look into some actual economics before proposing sweeping revisions to the economy. Your goal here is praiseworthy, but the unintended consequences of actually implementing your means of achieving that goal would not only fail to achieve it, but result in doing major harm. Government would waste large amounts of resources and money on products and services the public doesn't want or need. After all, your entire goal here isn't to have government actually provide the goods and services but just provide the competition that would drive private sector businesses to improve. And in the process it will destroy legitimate businesses by driving them out of the market through unfair advantages with access to government resources that the private sector does not have.
Quote:
And for those who start crying about 'Communism', hell, we have allowed our corporations to outsource our manufacturing base to China. We already HAVE 'government alternatives', they just happen to be COMMUNIST government alternatives! We are all walking around in Communist clothing, playing with Communist toys, and eating Communist food. So at what point does that make YOU a Communist?
Never.
Quote:
I used to work at United Healthcare, where the CEO received a 1 BILLION dollar bonus for one year. Read the book 'It's the Crude Dude' by Linda McQuaig to see how the oil industry is screwing you over. Government run businesses would provide a place where the unemployed could work, as well as those on the government dole.
We could also just shoot all the people on the government dole and cancel the food stamp program entirely. Problem solved. Permanently!
Your argument here is nonsensical. We could do this, therefore we should? That doesn't work. Yes, we could confiscate your boss's bonus and use it to create government jobs for unemployed people. That doesn't mean we should do it, any more than the fact that we could execute all poor people and save the cost of providing them with a safety net means we should do it.
How about we reduce regulations, lower corporate tax rates, get rid of barriers on returning overseas profits to the United States, and create a stable political climate where businesses aren't unable to invest or hire due to not being able to forecast since they never know what new scheme Obama is going to pull out of his rear end next that will impact their operations? That way we get economic growth back on track, increase liberty and confidence, maintain the profit motive to increase efficiency, lower unemployment, save billions in taxes, and don't need a failed trillion dollar stimulus that we will be paying off for decades?
Quote:
I remember in Chicago when I was a cab driver with no health insurance. Found out that I had a hernia, and if I allowed my intestines to keep popping out, I could die. So I went to Cook County hospital and received a one time allowance for the surgery. I was in a big room where most of my fellow patients were gangbangers who had been shot. It got the job done. For Obama's manditory plan let there be a cheap plan to allow you to get emergency care in a government hospital. That's where the poor folk in Chicago go anyway.
And I remember a while back when I was between jobs and was turned down by every insurance company I applied at because I had a pre-existing condition. I was without any insurance until I got a new job. And even though it would have helped me if it was in place back then, I still oppose Obamacare. Because even though it will achieve some good effects, it is not a good way to achieve them. You should think about that. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Think about whether your solution to a problem is actually the best way to solve that problem, and consider whether your solution might create new problems in the process.
How about we institute reforms to fill in some of the cracks in our existing healthcare system, then work on getting government out of the healthcare market so that costs will go down to affordable levels the way they were for the 200 years before government involvement caused prices to skyrocket? That way people get the care they need, get to make their own choices instead of having bureaucrats at Health & Human Services make the choices for them, and we save hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars.
I think that's a hugely better solution than simply taxing more money from the rich and throwing it at clinics. That will only serve to keep overall healthcare costs to society high even if it does provide affordable care to certain poor people. There is a general rule that holds true in nearly every circumstance "if you tax something you will get less of it and if you subsidize something you will get more of it". Paying the medical bills of poor people constitutes reinforcing the high cost of healthcare by subsidizing it. It will only cause the healthcare costs for everyone to keep increasing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
