Resident of Maryland, i really think you need to revisit what the term socialist means in reguards to government. If you truley believe that A government collecting taxes and distributing it to local authorities is socialist then you are severly misunderstanding socialism.

Socialism
a political theory advocating state ownership of industry
an economic system based on state ownership of capital
No where in the description will you see "A Government that collects taxes and distributes it to services requested by the people."

The government does not own the Police, or fire department. Also to further explain how police and F.D. are not socialist is that the federal government has no say in how they are used. Its up to they local governments, IE - State, County, City, Town. State cant regulate the Counties Police, County cant regulate the city, and so on. Though they are out ranked in reverse order.

For further reading on your argument Resident of Maryland please refer to,

"Sorry i cant post links yet just copy past. and fix the space in tthe .com area"

This site will explain to your the differance in how your manipulating the term socialism to the "T"

 

You are aware of the fact that taxes = capital, correct?

Actually, they can. If the state police get involved in a case, it's their jurisdiction and they're able to essentially tell the sheriff's deputies what to do. The FBI is the same way. The federal government also helps fund the state/local police. There are also federal laws the police must abide by.

 

That started on a massive scale with Ronald Reagan. Who did you vote for in 1980, and 1984?

 

What does that have to do with the subject? It started long before that.

For whatever reason, the US and the world had decided to use credit to finance growth, we are paying for that false growth.

You love to fix blame, why not fix the problems?

 

Right now it is obvious that the Republicans have no interest in fixing economic problems. They want to prevent President Obama from doing anything, and they want to blame him for the fact that the problems continue.

Who gets blamed influences which solutions are chosen. If Al Smith had been elected president in 1928 the stock market crash and the Great Depression would probably still have have happened. However, Smith and the Democrat Party would have been blamed. It would be remembered that the United States had had eight years of Republican prosperity. Protestant Fundamentalist preachers in the South would say that the Great Depression was God's punishment for electing a Papist. The reforms of the New Deal, such as Social Security, unemployment compensation, and government protection for labor unions never would have happened. Instead, the reforms of the Progressive era, such as the income tax and the Food and Drug Administration, would have been repealed.

If Gerald Ford had been elected in 1976 the Iranian Revolution, the gasoline shortage, and the inflation of 1980 would probably still have happened. However, the GOP would be blamed. It would be remembered that under Kennedy and Johnson the country enjoyed prosperity. Ronald Reagan's presidency and the Republican ascendancy never would have happened. Instead a liberal like Teddy Kennedy would have been elected in 1980, and the liberal direction the country took during the 1960's would have resumed.

 

And all of that rhetoric still doesn't explain how the Republicans are blocking the healthcare bill. You just can not do it can you?

 

It's not false growth, it's an effort to stabilize the economy. It seems to have worked, at least temporarily. It's not a long term fix, however.

 

The credit induced false growth was realized in the world over the last fifty years, not last week. Our present recession is due to the economies of the world adjusting for that false growth. Real growth comes from increased production and controlled spending, not growth fueled by future earnings.


Now for the present.

How the hell can you claim that it is working?? Unemployment is up, there has been virtually no return for the hundreds of billions that we dumped into the economy

The first rule to follow, when you find yourself deep in a hole, is to stop digging.

 

So for, they haven't succeeded...they've only succeeded in slowing down the process and watering down the bill.

But I'll try one more time. When your votes constitute the vast majority of the "no" votes on a given bill, when you threaten a filibuster, you are attempting to block the bill from passage. What is it about this that you have trouble understanding, tenguy?

 

I understand it perfectly well, when someone opposes an idea, it does not automaticly mean that they are an obstructionist. It might mean they have a different idea, one that should be considered.

Since not one idea from the opposition has been put into the bill, the only reason it is not passing unchanged is that some of the loyalists aren't too loyal.

Spin it however you'd like, the fact is the Republicans can not stop the Dems from doing what they want to do. But this will probably change in 2010, so the bill will either pass now or die next year.

 

Tenguy, the fallacy of what you are saying here is that the level of medical accessibility, technological advantages, and medical advancements the US has would automatically just disappear if we used some other means to pay for them. That's both illogical and irrational.

No, now bullshit tenguy, I'm just not going to stand by and listen to you tell that bullshit story again. You can brush it up with all the theoretical reasons and history you want to, but that ain't the fucking truth.

It doesn't make a shit what the vehicle or chain of events were. What REALLY happened is the same thing that always happens and always has. Those in the richest segment of our economy looted that segment for nothing more than sheer unadulterated greed. That happens repeatedly because the laws of a nation usually tend to favor the ruling class so for the most part they are protected from both financial loss and criminal prosecution.

Don't try to dress it up or over complicate it.

Greed. Hypocrisy.

 

Try this. Here's the republican's response to the democratic health care reforms.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/24/ap-gop-spinning-hard-on-h_n_368791.html



Nearly everyone in this nation knows we need to reform our health care system. And this is the Republican's response to trying to solve that problem.

 

Only in your Alice-in-Wonderland world, tenguy, can people vote no on bill monolithically and yet not bear ANY responsibility for it's failure to pass.

 

Republican fiscal irresponsibility

According to the United States Chamber of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, in the first quarter of 1950 per capita gross domestic product in the United States was $12,692 in 2005 dollars. In the third quarter of 2009 it was $42,229. That is real growth, tenguy.
http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...ar=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no#Mid

Unfortunately, in 1980 Ronald Reagan and his voodoo economists convinced the American people that, in Dick Cheney's words, "deficits don't matter." The result of this thoroughly unconservative falsehood can be seen in the following chart:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

 

When the majority party has enough votes to pass and still does not, who is to blame? That is like blaming the Gore loss in 2000 on Florida and not the other states who voted for Bush.

 

But you're assuming, Alice, that Democrats vote as a group, like sheep. That they are all alike.

 

No, I don't there are a few who actually agree with the idea that socialized medicine is a mistake for the country.

You who disagree with them would rather blame the Republicans than your own party.

Maybe if enough Dems get a backbone, they won't lose as many seats next year.

You may call me Alice in here, but not to my face, okay Allen?

 

*laughing* Actually, there are a few who received more campaign dollars from the insurance industry than the others did.

 

distant lover, kimiko,stumbler

Right now it is obvious that the Republicans have no interest in fixing economic problems. They want to prevent President Obama from doing anything, and they want to blame him for the fact that the problems continue.

Its obvious the same 3 losers are still arguing their lame points and taking no blame on the lame democrats who did the same thing to President George Bush. You fixed nothing, nothing is stable in the economy. next year it will bite you dumb ass's and pocketbooks and your answer will still be blame the republicans and mine will be blame the democrats . Roadtoad