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.
I’m the one who reported your post. You were way out of line, and still are now, antagonizing the guy you THOUGHT was guilty. You owe him an apology for your bolded snark above. Grow up.
No, no we can't. Not as long as liberals keep dragging this failed ideology off the scrap pile and trying to pawn it off as something other than the sh*t sandwich that it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouser
History has taught us a few valuable lessons
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity . . . . What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving . . . . The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else . . . .. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation . . . .You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
- Adrian Rogers, 1931
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
- Norman Thomas, former U.S. Socialist Presidential Candidate
“A Liberal Paradise would be a place where everybody
has guaranteed employment, free comprehensive healthcare,
free education, free food, free housing, free clothing, free utilities;
and only Law Enforcement has guns.
Such a place does exist.
It’s called prison.”
(Ayn Rand)
Great quotes. I'll add a couple more.
"Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others. Never under any circumstances admit that your own failure may be owing to your own weakness, or that the failure of anyone else may be due to his own defects - his laziness, incompetence, improvidence, or stupidity."
-Henry Hazlitt, 1966
"There are many socialists who have never come to grips in any way with the problems of economics, and who have made no attempt at all to form for themselves any clear conception of the conditions which determine the character of human society."
So right away, this comparison is complete bunk. You're comparing actual, sustained, out-of-pocket costs to a Canadian family of 12k a year to the projected costs incurred by an American family of four who get their insurance through their employer. The 28k figure includes the American family's premium payments, the employer's cost share, the family's deductibles and other out of pocket costs.
But the out of pocket costs for the American family are variable depending on whether or not medical services were used that year. 500 bucks a month out-of-pocket for the family doesn't add up to 28k a year, but this is the kind of argument the left promotes to show overall cost savings for medical care. They have to compare worst case scenarios in every instance to make the argument Brusan is making. And it just isn't accurate.
If a Canadian family makes more money, they pay more for the same health coverage they had last year or five years ago for that matter. And there's no opting out of a tax. It doesn't matter you haven't used your insurance in 10 years. In Canada, that family is still shelling out 12K a year. It's up to them to determine if they are getting value for their tax dollar. But, if they make less money, they pay less money.
This is collectivism wrapped in a flag. And the poster wonders if we are still talking about socialism. Sheesh.
It's hard to find the tax participation rate for Canada. The tax rates are also different across provinces. But it looks to be much higher than 50%, which is the approximate portion of the US citizenry that has an actual tax liability. The burden to pay will fall squarely on the American middle class.
Then Brusan goes on to suggest you could still pay a co-pay if you really wanted the illusion that you had any real control over your health care choices. Wow.
I don't think either system is utopian. But I believe in self-determination to the extent possible. Plus I don't think 180 million Americans are going to want to give up their insurance anyway.
Oh right; let's talk about only half the population and refer to my submission as "bunk".
You don't have any idea you're already paying for someone else's healthcare within your tax rates do you? How do you suppose Medicaid is funded ..unicorn poop?
Remember that google insult you threw at me, well here's where it helps:
Remember that family in Canada is shelling out less overall per year to cover every single citizen. I know you're a member of the "I've got mine fugg you" brigade so that argument will likely fall on deaf ears.
Self determination can be measured by willingly paying a reasonable tax to insure yourself and others are fully insured from cradle to grave with no third party dictating your coverage. That's self determination in a nutshell.
Oh, and in spite of all the "personal" insults that are fine and dandy for you and my personal groupie, I don't report to the mods either. Never have, never will.
This is correct. The word socialist should be used with regards to the economy (not libraries or roads, as AOC has ignorantly proclaimed). A socialist system is one where the economy is centrally planned and controlled, and where there is little private control.
In a socialist system, the banking and lending, the housing, the businesses, the manufacturing, etc are all controlled and planned by a central authority. This is certainly not the case in Denmark or anywhere else in Europe. In fact, we only have two good examples of a socialist system today - North Korea and Cuba.
Wasted information on these. They've been told all their lives to fear the word so they apply it to everything they don't know anything about.
Need a bogeyman, communism used to suffice but today it's gotta be "socialism" without having the faintest freak'n idea of what socialism actually is.
Probably won't attend a Strawberry Social and of course no vet will ever attend his VA appointment.
All those people using those little EBT cards at the supermarket are all loser socialists.
Gads; so much fear and angst over a word incorrectly used.
You don't have any idea you're already paying for someone else's healthcare within your tax rates do you? How do you suppose Medicaid is funded ..unicorn poop?
Remember that google insult you threw at me, well here's where it helps:
Remember that family in Canada is shelling out less overall per year to cover every single citizen. I know you're a member of the "I've got mine fugg you" brigade so that argument will likely fall on deaf ears.
Self determination can be measured by willingly paying a reasonable tax to insure yourself and others are fully insured from cradle to grave with no third party dictating your coverage. That's self determination in a nutshell.
Oh, and in spite of all the "personal" insults that are fine and dandy for you and my personal groupie, I don't report to the mods either. Never have, never will.
LOL. I wasn't looking for Canada's tax rates, I was looking for Canada's tax participation rate, that is, how many people in Canada have an actual tax liability. In the US, it's only around 50%. That's why socialized medicine would be a huge tax increase for the middle class. But thanks for the link to information I didn't need.
Your statement here:
"Remember that family in Canada is shelling out less overall per year to cover every single citizen. I know you're a member of the "I've got mine fugg you" brigade so that argument will likely fall on deaf ears."
This is instructive in discovering that Brusan thinks he has moral standing over me or anybody that doesn't have a collectivist world view. This is the hallmark of a socialist. They call themselves "progressives" as a kind of self-adulation and truly believe their beliefs represent a higher order of evolution and consciousness.
He then makes a ridiculous argument that self-determination equals paying for yourself and someone else, which is pretty much the exact opposite of that concept.
On top of that,
He accused me of reporting him to the mods while whining like a little b---h, finds out I didn't do it, and then instead of manning up to say he was wrong about the accusation, he just ignores it. LOL.
Here's where I circle back around to socialism and its adherents:
1. They are never wrong.
2. They are better than you.
3. They are attached to their ideology the same as any religious zealot.
4. If they are wrong ... see 1 & 2.
5. The needs of people are a right that some must work for and others get for being alive
6. Individual merit and effort exist to provide equal outcomes, not distinguish the individual.
Americans were fed propaganda about communism during the Cold War, but the reality is quite a bit different. The big red menace (aka Soviet Union) was a socialist country and a terrible one of that. Marx originally envisioned for socialism to develop in a highly industrialized nation, which Russia was obviously not at the time. Government was supposed to take a backseat, but that's not what happened with either Lenin or Stalin.
So, if you use the SU as a benchmark for socialism, then you'd be right, but there are social democracies in Europe (Norway, Sweden) that do a pretty good job of mixing capitalism with positive social policies.
Americans were fed propaganda about communism during the Cold War, but the reality is quite a bit different. The big red menace (aka Soviet Union) was a socialist country and a terrible one of that. Marx originally envisioned for socialism to develop in a highly industrialized nation, which Russia was obviously not at the time. Government was supposed to take a backseat, but that's not what happened with either Lenin or Stalin.
So, if you use the SU as a benchmark for socialism, then you'd be right, but there are social democracies in Europe (Norway, Sweden) that do a pretty good job of mixing capitalism with positive social policies.
They also tax their middle class at a 45% tax rate (on average, I already posted a link to the data). Who thinks Americans earning $52,000/year (average US income) will be OK with paying 45% of that in federal taxes every year?
Oh, and in spite of all the "personal" insults that are fine and dandy for you and my personal groupie, I don't report to the mods either. Never have, never will.
It takes a lot of cognitive dissonance to call a group of people “retarded idiots” as you did earlier in this thread, then poor mouth the response as if it’s unwarranted.
You’ve become verbally abusive. Don’t do that. Stick to the topic.
I always think of people in the 1950s who imagined a commie under every bed.
Can We Please Relax About ‘Socialism’?
Only in America is the word freighted with so much perceived menace
By David Bentley Hart
It may be amusing to hear Republicans assert that a military kleptocracy like Venezuela is a socialist country because its government uses that word when lying about itself (rather in the way that North Korea claims to be a people’s democratic republic). It may make one wince to see Senator Bernie Sanders obliged (as he was on Monday at a town hall hosted by CNN) to explain once more that the totalitarian statism of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with the (far older) tradition of democratic socialist thought....
Well — only in America, as they say. Only here is the word “socialism” freighted with so much perceived menace.
Most of the Socialist talk is propaganda by the wealthy elites.
Clinton reformed Welfare to the point where if you are a single male, you are pretty much on your own.
Our welfare budget spiked after the 2008 banker created financial crisis but over the years it has fallen some.
That tells us all we need to know.
Throwing the dam bankers, lobbyists, and others pushing for trade with slave labor countries and we will have attacked the problem once and for all.
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.
