Joe Friday Schools Obama

[jessicasimpson]

Originally Posted by MyrddinsPrecint

I do not want to live in a country with private police forces. .

Me neither, just watch the ecellent documentary "Robocop". it will show what private police force is like.

[jessicasimpson]

Originally Posted by Slim

Why do you assume the US it the most capitalistic country? It's not. The correct answer is Hong Kong.

So do you want the US to be more like Communist controlled China?

[MyrddinsPrecint]

So, there's this Heritage Foundation list.... yeah, yeah, Heritage Foundation, blah blah, but if you actually look at it...

http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.aspx

It's the "Index of Economic Freedom World Rankings".

Now, taking it at face value for the moment, the US is #6. We're beaten by, in order, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand. #7 is Canada.

I think this proves that there are a bunch of different ways to be an economically free (which is very similar to "capitalist") country. And you can do so while having police and schools and even the government involved in healthcare.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by Slim

The cries of socialism are based on fewer things being "privatized" and more things becoming "public-ized", which isnt a word. The word is socialized. The expanding programs and now companies are funded by confiscation of wealth (taxes) and managed by the government. Thats not capitalism.

{snipped and moved}

If you think the government owned car companies isnt socialized business, you're wrong.

If you think government owned banks isnt socialized banking, you're wrong.

In what sense is the Government "managing" banks and car companies? And on whose watch did this "socialization" begin?

Why do you assume the US it the most capitalistic country? It's not. The correct answer is Hong Kong.

My question assumed that the US was not the most capitalistic country. I wasn't asking who was--I was asking who was next after the US? Is your answer still Hong Kong? (Thus meaning you think the US is the 2nd most capitalistic country?)

Also--who's next after the US in the other direction? I'm not looking for gotcha's--I'm just trying to figure out what people think the actual continuum is--and how close we are to other "socialist" countries.

And if you think that the proposed "public option" isnt a further expansion of socialized medicine, you're wrong.

Further expansion, sure. But that ship has long-since sailed--and to pretend that now--and only now--is it "socialism" but the vast medicare and other government health system we have isn't, seems to me to be either staggeringly misinformed, or disingenuous.

The cries of socialism are not false. They are about a move away from a capitalized system towards a more socialized one.

Slightly more socialized, I suppose--but to suggest that there is any real impetuous to move away from capitalism seems overblown.

--Philistine

[Slim]

Originally Posted by migopod

The Chinese government decided to use it as a test-bed for free market capitalism, so in fact the People's Republic of China is now at least in part the most capitalist country.

No its not. Not even close. Ever cross the border between PRC and Hong Kong? For all intents and purposes, its another country.

You dont know what you're talking about.

[Hauptman]

Originally Posted by Slim

The cries of socialism are based on fewer things being "privatized" and more things becoming "public-ized", which isnt a word. The word is socialized. The expanding programs and now companies are funded by confiscation of wealth (taxes) and managed by the government. Thats not capitalism.

Why do you assume the US it the most capitalistic country? It's not. The correct answer is Hong Kong.

If you think government owned banks isnt socialized banking, you're wrong.

If you think the government owned car companies isnt socialized business, you're wrong.

And if you think that the proposed "public option" isnt a further expansion of socialized medicine, you're wrong.

The cries of socialism are not false. They are about a move away from a capitalized system towards a more socialized one.

To be fair, yes, some of these things are more socialist than capitalist. But that in no way makes this administration "socialist" because socialism is not the goal. The goal is a carefully managed balance between the two extremes because pure capitalism is as flawed as pure socialism.

The bigger issue with the cries of "socialism" from the Right these days is that they are just not honest. If there was a Republican in the White House enacting these policies we would not be hearing these things at all.

If you don't believe that then where were the cries of "socialism" when:

Reagan "nationalized" the savings and loans.
GHW Bush raised taxes.
GW Bush rolled out a huge socialized medicine handout to seniors and the pharmaceutical companies.
GW Bush nationalized banks.
GW Bush rolled out the TARP plan last year.

Actually, almost every president has "nationalized" banks because in reality it just means the FDIC is taking over a bank as it is failing to make sure that the depositors get their money back in an orderly fashion.

Screaming "socialist" is just not accurate or honest.

[Bayou Bum]

Originally Posted by Philistine

Slightly more socialized, I suppose--but to suggest that there is any real impetuous to move away from capitalism seems overblown.

--Philistine

So, you don't mind slowly moving down the road toward socialism, whereas, I want to put the car in reverse and back away from it as far as possible. I commend you for at least being honest about the move toward socialism.

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

I want to put the car in reverse and back away from it as far as possible.

Why is that?

[Bayou Bum]

Originally Posted by tchwojko

Why is that?

Because we have been heading more toward socialism since FDR.

[migopod]

Originally Posted by Slim

No its not. Not even close. Ever cross the border between PRC and Hong Kong? For all intents and purposes, its another country.

You dont know what you're talking about.

So you're suggesting that Hong Kong isn't part of the PRC?

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

Because we have been heading more toward socialism since FDR.

What about socialism bothers you?

[Slim]

Originally Posted by Hauptman

Actually, almost every president has "nationalized" banks because in reality it just means the FDIC is taking over a bank as it is failing to make sure that the depositors get their money back in an orderly fashion.

And that worked out real well, now didnt it?

[Purple Fencer]

Originally Posted by Slim

And that worked out real well, now didnt it?

Sure...how many people actually lost their funds when the bank failed and was taken over? I didn't when Downey Savings failed...and US Bank is doing allright by me.

Stop talking up every action by the government as some dark plot....sometimes they actually get it right.

And btw...Hong Kong IS, in fact, part of China now...has been since 99.

Hong Kong can be considered a province of China....same as Rhode Island is a state in the US.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by tchwojko

What about socialism bothers you?

It is inefficient and unfair.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

So, you don't mind slowly moving down the road toward socialism, whereas, I want to put the car in reverse and back away from it as far as possible. I commend you for at least being honest about the move toward socialism.

Originally Posted by Bayou Bum

Because we have been heading more toward socialism since FDR.

So, if you think that the country has been going in the wrong direction for 70 years, the best course of action is back away in reverse? Sounds like an awfully long reverse drive to me. Would it not be easier to turn around?

You know, it helps your case if you do not make metaphors that don´t work!

[Gav]

I can't believe you guys honestly think that doing something to help the people around you is akin to socialism. That's pure comedy (in the tragic sense).

[Bayou Bum]

Originally Posted by Gav

I can't believe you guys honestly think that doing something to help the people around you is akin to socialism. That's pure comedy (in the tragic sense).

Helping the people around you is called charity. Using the government to take from others and help those around you is called socialism.

[Bayou Bum]

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

Hi!

So, if you think that the country has been going in the wrong direction for 70 years, the best course of action is back away in reverse? Sounds like an awfully long reverse drive to me. Would it not be easier to turn around?

You know, it helps your case if you do not make metaphors that don´t work!

I gave up on driving. I'm waiting on my plane ticket!

[Slim]

Originally Posted by Gav

I can't believe you guys honestly think that doing something to help the people around you is akin to socialism. That's pure comedy (in the tragic sense).

Shining example of the liberal mentality.

"Hey, you have too much stuff. We're going to take some of your stuff and give it to people who we don't think have enough stuff. What's that? Unfair to take your stuff? Well, you're just mean spirited and cold hearted. Shame on you."

[keith]

Originally Posted by Slim

Shining example of the liberal mentality.

"Hey, you have too much stuff. We're going to take some of your stuff and give it to people who we don't think have enough stuff. What's that? Unfair to take your stuff? Well, you're just mean spirited and cold hearted. Shame on you."

Good job the US rolled back the tax rates inflicted by that socialist Reagan.