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.
You said my post was stupid and had no value. Then went on to tell me how I should act in condescending fashion. I take that as an attack on me no matter how you want to describe your actions. I assume the moderator felt the same way and closed the thread.
They closed the thread because it was about the forum itself rather than the election. I've had a similar thread of mine closed in the past for that very reason.
I did say your post was stupid and had no value. That is not an attack on you. That is an attack on your post.
I went on to explain why I thought your post was stupid. I never said anything about you. But again, my apologies -- I was not intending to personally insult you.
Says who? The donor class? You? The donor class, big pharma drug cartels and big insurance love the idea of "state issues" because they know it will make it impossible to create a good health care system for the 99% under a "states rights" system. Any sick person can just move to another state and healthy people can move to a state that offers nothing to anyone and move back to a state with a safety net when he or she needs it.
Thats why they are against Medicare and love the thought of millions of Americans dying as a result of pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps on care in the name of big profits.
Because "In 1869, the United States Supreme Court cemented state-based insurance regulation as the law of the land when it ruled in Paul v. Virginia[8] that the issuance of a policy of insurance was not the transaction of commerce, and therefore beyond the scope of federal legislation.[9]"..............
No doubt gaming the system has taken place and will continue.
I also have no idea how a food shortage would occur if I am banning the most wasteful food production process known to man.
I would of course not implement any of these objectives overnight, and I don't know why you think I would be against free speech or the second amendment. I didn't mention either of those.
My rub with religious freedom in its current state is that the extension of rights to religious folks is itself an endorsement of religion. Let's say you are Jewish and don't eat pork for religious reasons. If your employer asks you to plan a company BBQ, you have a legitimate legal backing to ask for a religious exemption. Your employer must make a reasonable accommodation for you. However, if you don't eat pork simply because you know that pigs are as intelligent as dogs and you find the practice morally abhorrent, you have no legal backing to request an exemption from your employer. It seems as though the government is then protecting beliefs that have a supernatural element while not protecting very similar beliefs that are held for non-supernatural or religious reasons. That doesn't seem justified.
You're going to "drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions" which will cause energy prices to skyrocket (sorry, solar and wind are still embryonic and will be until a storage method and peak load process is developed. Water generation is being gotten rid of due to environmental regulations dealing with wildlife and scenic rivers) causing a recession. Which always results when energy prices go up.
Food shortages will develop due to the energy costs you've imposed as well as your mistaken belief that small scale agriculture is efficient or cost effective. I grew up on a small scale farm and it was neither. One reason I'm not a farmer.
You've shown your antipathy to those who disagree with you on the threads as well as your hoplophobia so that takes care of freedom of speech and the 2nd Amendment.
Because "In 1869, the United States Supreme Court cemented state-based insurance regulation as the law of the land when it ruled in Paul v. Virginia[8] that the issuance of a policy of insurance was not the transaction of commerce, and therefore beyond the scope of federal legislation.[9]"..............
No doubt gaming the system has taken place and will continue.
Who cares about what those puppets in 1869 said? Do you think they represent you or do you think they represented their financial overlords?
We already have Medicare and it should be expanded to everyone to finally get a national health care system. I dont care what happens to the big pharma drug cartels and the big insurance corporations that are ripping off the American people.
Who cares about what those puppets in 1869 said? Do you think they represent you or do you think they represented their financial overlords?
We already have Medicare and it should be expanded to everyone to finally get a national health care system. I dont care what happens to the big pharma drug cartels and the big insurance corporations that are ripping off the American people.
I understand, however, the link I provided explains why insurance regulation is extremely complicated, is primarily a state by state issue, which, in my observations, also includes county by county within a given state, or more like a form of gerrymandering that crosses county lines, a kind of boundary created in order to decrease risk thus increase profits... leading my train of thought of as "gaming the system", altimately for the benefit of shareholders.
FDR was a progressive who violated the constitution, bullied the courts, and sold out the American people.
He did not respect the Constitution nor believe in the foundations of liberty and freedom.
His policies are the single reason as to why the depression lasted as long as it did.
For the love of sanity the idiot endorsed Mussolini and was a fan of his policies.
FDR and Wilson are one of the key reasons this country is so throughly messed up.
Progressives love him because they love socialism/communism and so did FDR and Wilson.
Readers: Just reverse everything the quoted poster wrote, and you'll come close to the truth about FDR.
OP: What are your sources for such beliefs? Have you read much about FDR, the Depression, the WPA, CCC, and similar organizations, and about WWII? Have you read newspapers and news magazines from the years FDR was in office? Have you read sound biographies of FDR and sound histories of the Depression and World War II?
Or are your information sources limited to far right delusional and paranoid ranters, which your above post certainly implies? Revisionism is one thing - but what you wrote is far, far removed from reality, and I hope you'll make an honest, open-minded effort to fully educate yourself about what actually happened in the 1930s and1940s, and FDR's role in it.
BTW, when did "progressive" become a pejorative? It means one who is in favor of progress, and while we can disagree about just what "progress" might be, surely being in favor of progress is not a bad thing.
You're going to "drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions" which will cause energy prices to skyrocket (sorry, solar and wind are still embryonic and will be until a storage method and peak load process is developed. Water generation is being gotten rid of due to environmental regulations dealing with wildlife and scenic rivers) causing a recession. Which always results when energy prices go up.
First, me driving down greenhouse gas emissions could cause energy prices to drop. You're assuming that I am regulating the supply, but it's possible that regulating demand would be more effective. Second, energy prices have gone up many times without a recession. 1998-2006 saw oil prices nearly triple, yet it was a time of massive economic expansion.
The only reason you don't support a drastic cut on greenhouse gas emissions is because you don't properly appreciate the magnitude of climate change. Even if cutting greenhouse gases resulted in a recession, we should do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person
Food shortages will develop due to the energy costs you've imposed as well as your mistaken belief that small scale agriculture is efficient or cost effective. I grew up on a small scale farm and it was neither. One reason I'm not a farmer.
When did I say anything about small scale agriculture? I'm referring to the factory farming of meat. That is the least efficient thing in America in terms of nutrient efficiency. Growing corn to feed to cows to feed to humans yields about 3% of the calories that simply growing food to feed to humans would. My goal would be to make meat production more expensive. That, coupled with incentives for companies to innovate non-animal products including in vitro meat, would result in a more ethical society and a lower carbon footprint for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person
You've shown your antipathy to those who disagree with you on the threads as well as your hoplophobia so that takes care of freedom of speech and the 2nd Amendment.
The rest makes no sense. A BBQ?
How does me disagreeing with people on this thread imply that I would be opposed to freedom of speech? And when have I ever shown an aversion to weapons? I own weapons!
The rest made perfect sense. Did you even read it? I was giving an example of how religious freedom in this country results in special treatment of religious folks who hold virtually the same beliefs as non-religious folks. I would seek to remedy that.
Well,now that i have seen some out there ideas,i just want to say 1 thing
Many want to make marijuana legal.
Great,except that is still unfair.
Make all of them legal,including cocaine,PCP,and heroin.
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.
