A little History test, not sure if all the Qusetions are real

[rapter 0]

AND NOW .. HOW ABOUT A LITTLE QUIZ?
A little history lesson: If you don't know the answer make your best guess. Answer all the questions before looking at the answers. Who said it?

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above

3) "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above





Answers:

(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

Only the good die young, so I have found immortality,

[quade 3]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/marxist.asp

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

Quote

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/marxist.asp

Interesting and I understand the context perceptions that snopes addresses, however,some of her statements (in the context snopes gives) are still scary as hell.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/marxist.asp

Interesting and I understand the context perceptions that snopes addresses, however,some of her statements (in the context snopes gives) are still scary as hell.

Snopes only reinforced the context in my opinion. Sen. Clinton is not a democrat in the purest sense. She is a progressive, liberal socialist.

That's her prerogative, but her solutions about letting government being the answer to everything is wrong.

The Great Society idea failed. Social Security is broken. The War on Poverty has achieved nothing. Every "pet-project" which liberally throws money at it does not have the super glamorous success they were hoping for.

I'm saying that the ideas were with ill intent, but not adjusting your vision based on a track record like that...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

It's not broken, it's still in surplus. The problem is it will be broken unless it gets an adjustment to deal with future demographics, and our President who said SS reform is his top priority during two successive election campaigns has actually done sweet F.A.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

It's not broken, it's still in surplus. The problem is it will be broken unless it gets an adjustment to deal with future demographics, and our President who said SS reform is his top priority during two successive election campaigns has actually done sweet F.A.

I guess you don't get out on the streets much.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[1969912 0]

deleted. will start over

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[sv3n 0]

Quote

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

"(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

"We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

"I certainly think the free-market has failed."

"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

I don't believe there's anything scary about that............seems like she's talking a lot about us as a society and of the common good, which is what government is supposed to be doing.

She says that it's time to end a government of the few, by the few, and for the few. Makes sense.........75% of this country doesn't want to be in a war right now, yet we're in it because the top 1% are getting more wealth by staying in it. It also seems that these are the same people that are in power.

who's this line from? "...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

and why isn't it happening?

I hear messages of accountability for that elite class that's dictating prices..........for instance, keeping oil prices high for max profits while your average citizen is getting raped so that some billionaire can make an extra couple of million that year.

The underlying message is "for the common good". Think about that for a second. For everybody, not just the elite 1%......that's the government's job. Right now the system is allowing them to make laws so they can make max profits while the rest of the country suffers for it. This is the problem with the system where it stands right now............this is the reason why prices are so high and payrates are so low. Not because they need to be, but because it's better for profit than it's citizens who don't see any of that profit.

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................BS, the last 7 years have been nothing but that theory. Guess what the economy is dropping and moving towards a recession because of it. This would seem to be an example of "the free-market has failed".

The whole thing comes down to thinking about more than just yourself and that's a problem that a lot of people have..............right now that top 1% is focusing on how they can get more money rather than what's best for this society even though that's their job.

Quote

Income Inequality Hits Post-WWII Record

The Skinny: Richest 1 Percent Of Americans Taking Home Almost A Quarter Of The Pie

NEW YORK, Oct. 12, 2007


You know America's embarrassingly little income inequality problem has gotten bad when even President Bush is blushing.

New IRS figures out today reveal that the wealthiest 1 percent of Americas earned 21.2 percent of all income in 2005, the Wall Street Journal reports. That's up sharply from 19 percent in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8 percent in 2000, at the beak of the previous bull market in stocks.

The IRS only started keeping these kinds of figures, which include capital gains, in 1986, so there's some guessing involved. But academics say the rich haven't gotten such a big slice of the pie since the Roaring '20s.

Meanwhile, the median tax filer's income fell 2 percent between 2000 and 2005, to $30,881. Median, of course, means half of Americans earn less than that.

In an exclusive interview, the paper grilled the President over these numbers.

"Do I think some of the salaries are excessive at the top? I do," Bush said. "I don't think it's the role of the government to regulate salary. But I do believe it's a role of boards of directors to be very transparent with shareholders about these different packages, the employment packages that these executives get."

Excessive executive compensation "just sends a signal of unfairness, and the people in America want ... fairness," Bush told the Journal.

Article Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/12/the_skinny/main3360511.shtml

...and you're in violation of your face!

[Royd 0]

Quote

I don't believe there's anything scary about that............seems like she's talking a lot about us as a society and of the common good, which is what government is supposed to be doing.

How's that socialistic plan working for your neighbors over there in Michigan?

[Royd 0]

Quote

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................

Let's play a little game. We'll accept your premise of taking everything away from the man who has scrimped, saved, invested, and built a successful business.
Let's say that the man is worth 1 million. He has 9 employees with your attitude, and by the will of the 'small' people, he is forced to divide his assets equally. Wow, you have $100,000 in your pocket. What are you going to do with it? Live fat for a couple of years? Start your own business? Oh, wait. You just hired three employees and each one of them gets $25,000. They got what they came for. Why should they put forth any effort to make your dream come true?

Let's call this plan the socialist trickle down economics.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/marxist.asp

Interesting and I understand the context perceptions that snopes addresses, however,some of her statements (in the context snopes gives) are still scary as hell.

Snopes only reinforced the context in my opinion. Sen. Clinton is not a democrat in the purest sense. She is a progressive, liberal socialist.

That's her prerogative, but her solutions about letting government being the answer to everything is wrong.

The Great Society idea failed. Social Security is broken. The War on Poverty has achieved nothing. Every "pet-project" which liberally throws money at it does not have the super glamorous success they were hoping for.

I'm saying that the ideas were with ill intent, but not adjusting your vision based on a track record like that...

Which to me reinforces the fact that these programs are not about taking care of any of the people but. are intended to keep an illusion of compassion to get and hold power.

Power? Yes power by controlling more and more money to in essence buy votes

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

"(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

"We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

"I certainly think the free-market has failed."

"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

I don't believe there's anything scary about that............seems like she's talking a lot about us as a society and of the common good, which is what government is supposed to be doing.

She says that it's time to end a government of the few, by the few, and for the few. Makes sense.........75% of this country doesn't want to be in a war right now, yet we're in it because the top 1% are getting more wealth by staying in it. It also seems that these are the same people that are in power.

who's this line from? "...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

and why isn't it happening?

I hear messages of accountability for that elite class that's dictating prices..........for instance, keeping oil prices high for max profits while your average citizen is getting raped so that some billionaire can make an extra couple of million that year.

The underlying message is "for the common good". Think about that for a second. For everybody, not just the elite 1%......that's the government's job. Right now the system is allowing them to make laws so they can make max profits while the rest of the country suffers for it. This is the problem with the system where it stands right now............this is the reason why prices are so high and payrates are so low. Not because they need to be, but because it's better for profit than it's citizens who don't see any of that profit.

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................BS, the last 7 years have been nothing but that theory. Guess what the economy is dropping and moving towards a recession because of it. This would seem to be an example of "the free-market has failed".

The whole thing comes down to thinking about more than just yourself and that's a problem that a lot of people have..............right now that top 1% is focusing on how they can get more money rather than what's best for this society even though that's their job.

Quote

Income Inequality Hits Post-WWII Record

The Skinny: Richest 1 Percent Of Americans Taking Home Almost A Quarter Of The Pie

NEW YORK, Oct. 12, 2007


You know America's embarrassingly little income inequality problem has gotten bad when even President Bush is blushing.

New IRS figures out today reveal that the wealthiest 1 percent of Americas earned 21.2 percent of all income in 2005, the Wall Street Journal reports. That's up sharply from 19 percent in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8 percent in 2000, at the beak of the previous bull market in stocks.

The IRS only started keeping these kinds of figures, which include capital gains, in 1986, so there's some guessing involved. But academics say the rich haven't gotten such a big slice of the pie since the Roaring '20s.

Meanwhile, the median tax filer's income fell 2 percent between 2000 and 2005, to $30,881. Median, of course, means half of Americans earn less than that.

In an exclusive interview, the paper grilled the President over these numbers.

"Do I think some of the salaries are excessive at the top? I do," Bush said. "I don't think it's the role of the government to regulate salary. But I do believe it's a role of boards of directors to be very transparent with shareholders about these different packages, the employment packages that these executives get."

Excessive executive compensation "just sends a signal of unfairness, and the people in America want ... fairness," Bush told the Journal.

Article Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/12/the_skinny/main3360511.shtml

This was tryed and it did not work. Why do you want to give it another go

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

How's that socialistic plan working for your neighbors over there in Michigan?

Would you expand a little on the specifics of that plan?

Representative democracy - people voted for Romney, Milliken, Blanchard, Engler (91-03) and Granholm (03+).

Yes, Michigan's economy has *lots* of problems. I would argue that they are more largely driven by failure to respond (perhaps, predict accurately the extent of) globalization and changing realities of market-based economics, such as (but not limited to) the prices of wages and benefits (e.g., healthcare).

And is that more due to the choices by the leaders of the American auto industry or the elected governor?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

Bill Clinton said pretty much the same thing:

22 Sept., 1993 televised speech by WJ Clinton:

....."the costliest and most wasteful system on the face of the Earth"....."most urgent priority"....."the challenge of our time."...

I may be mistaken but was not that specific speech the one regarding healthcare reform?

On a relative scale which system is having more problems currently healthcare or Social Security? And why?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

Bill Clinton said pretty much the same thing:

22 Sept., 1993 televised speech by WJ Clinton:

....."the costliest and most wasteful system on the face of the Earth"....."most urgent priority"....."the challenge of our time."...

I may be mistaken but was not that specific speech the one regarding healthcare reform?

On a relative scale which system is having more problems currently healthcare or Social Security? And why?

VR/Marg

SS is the one headed toward failure. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

SS is the one headed toward failer. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

Would you expand a little on what qualifies as failure?

Both systems are predicted (based on models) to be impacted heavily by changes in demographics (i.e., Baby Boomers retiring and getting older).

What are the respective percentages of the GDP that go to healthcare versus social security? And what are the models predicting for 10, 20, 30 years? I honestly don't know the specifics, but think it would be an interesting comparison.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[1969912 0]

Quote

I may be mistaken but was not that specific speech the one regarding healthcare reform?

On a relative scale which system is having more problems currently healthcare or Social Security? And why?

VR/Marg

You do have a point

I'll learn to read one of these days.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

Bill Clinton said pretty much the same thing:

22 Sept., 1993 televised speech by WJ Clinton:

....."the costliest and most wasteful system on the face of the Earth"....."most urgent priority"....."the challenge of our time."...

I may be mistaken but was not that specific speech the one regarding healthcare reform?

On a relative scale which system is having more problems currently healthcare or Social Security? And why?

VR/Marg

SS is the one headed toward failure. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

SS is solvent and will remain solvent for a long time. Any crisis, if it actually happens, is a long way off and will be due to failure of our political leadership to make adjustments necessitated by the demographics of the US population.

If the politicians fail it will be due to their being spineless toads. Like Bush, who twice promised to fix it as a matter of priority, but has done sweet FA in 7 years.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

SS is the one headed toward failer. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

Would you expand a little on what qualifies as failure?

Both systems are predicted (based on models) to be impacted heavily by changes in demographics (i.e., Baby Boomers retiring and getting older).

What are the respective percentages of the GDP that go to healthcare versus social security? And what are the models predicting for 10, 20, 30 years? I honestly don't know the specifics, but think it would be an interesting comparison.

VR/Marg

First off I do not acept the premise that healthcare is failing. SS is known to running out of money.

The problems with the current health care system are government caused in my opinion. States mandate that health insurance cover procedures and care never meant to be covered. The mix of all the state requirments cause the costs to go up because there is no consistancy and therefore is it not as easy to have competative systems of health insurers.

Now, you say the health care system is failing. How?

I do not know of anybody that has not gotten emergency care when they needed it. And I really dont care if health care covers elective type procedures

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Social Security is broken.

I haven't noticed any elderly people starving on the streets recently.

Bill Clinton said pretty much the same thing:

22 Sept., 1993 televised speech by WJ Clinton:

....."the costliest and most wasteful system on the face of the Earth"....."most urgent priority"....."the challenge of our time."...

I may be mistaken but was not that specific speech the one regarding healthcare reform?

On a relative scale which system is having more problems currently healthcare or Social Security? And why?

VR/Marg

SS is the one headed toward failure. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

SS is solvent and will remain solvent for a long time. Any crisis, if it actually happens, is a long way off and will be due to failure of our political leadership to make adjustments necessitated by the demographics of the US population.

If the politicians fail it will be due to their being spineless toads. Like Bush, who twice promised to fix it as a matter of priority, but has done sweet FA in 7 years.

And why pray tell Mr profesor, is it he has not been able to get anything done huh?? Because of your side spewing crap and untruths to stop him. And why woudl they do that????? Because it would be a political failure of your side. Suck it up pal. You like to throw blame but you have no solution. Typicla lefy type shit.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't believe there's anything scary about that............seems like she's talking a lot about us as a society and of the common good, which is what government is supposed to be doing.

How's that socialistic plan working for your neighbors over there in Michigan?

I assume you're referring to the auto industry closing down plants and moving thousands of jobs to mexico..........that seems like a business decision. The big boys want more money so rather than running the company for the good of all the employees, they keep the worker ant salaries down, and keep the prices rising. But then still decide their chunk isn't big enough and fire all the employees and find cheap labor elsewhere.

The auto industry isn't the only one with those problems............greed is not a good thing. Think enron.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................

Let's play a little game. We'll accept your premise of taking everything away from the man who has scrimped, saved, invested, and built a successful business.
Let's say that the man is worth 1 million. He has 9 employees with your attitude, and by the will of the 'small' people, he is forced to divide his assets equally. Wow, you have $100,000 in your pocket. What are you going to do with it? Live fat for a couple of years? Start your own business? Oh, wait. You just hired three employees and each one of them gets $25,000. They got what they came for. Why should they put forth any effort to make your dream come true?

Let's call this plan the socialist trickle down economics.

That's a great way to get off topic and ridiculous, but let's stay on topic.

Nobody is saying the rich should give up their millions and split it up amongst the employees. What they are saying is that rather than allowing the top execs to make millions while their "worker ants" try to scrape by on $20-$30k a year, that everybody gets their "fair" salary and pays the same taxes. And before you go off on some tangent about "fair" meaning everybody gets the exact same pay let me clarify that. If the rate of inflation is not matching the rate of salary increases then that's a problem. That means that the "big boys" at the top of these companies are uping prices faster than they are uping the salaries...................that's an issue that needs to be addressed. This problem starts a lot of different problems...............both parents now have to work to support a family rather than just one. Now nobody is home taking care of the kids, so who's teaching the kids values. A family should be able to raise their own children rather than have somebody else do it so they can work.

It has nothing to do with socialism, nor is it some trickle down affect.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................

Let's play a little game. We'll accept your premise of taking everything away from the man who has scrimped, saved, invested, and built a successful business.
Let's say that the man is worth 1 million. He has 9 employees with your attitude, and by the will of the 'small' people, he is forced to divide his assets equally. Wow, you have $100,000 in your pocket. What are you going to do with it? Live fat for a couple of years? Start your own business? Oh, wait. You just hired three employees and each one of them gets $25,000. They got what they came for. Why should they put forth any effort to make your dream come true?

Let's call this plan the socialist trickle down economics.

That's a great way to get off topic and ridiculous, but let's stay on topic.

Nobody is saying the rich should give up their millions and split it up amongst the employees. What they are saying is that rather than allowing the top execs to make millions while their "worker ants" try to scrape by on $20-$30k a year, that everybody gets their "fair" salary and pays the same taxes. And before you go off on some tangent about "fair" meaning everybody gets the exact same pay let me clarify that. If the rate of inflation is not matching the rate of salary increases then that's a problem. That means that the "big boys" at the top of these companies are uping prices faster than they are uping the salaries...................that's an issue that needs to be addressed. This problem starts a lot of different problems...............both parents now have to work to support a family rather than just one. Now nobody is home taking care of the kids, so who's teaching the kids values. A family should be able to raise their own children rather than have somebody else do it so they can work.

It has nothing to do with socialism, nor is it some trickle down affect.

Any move to have more control by government is socialist by its very nature. No amount of rhetoric can change that. Are there functions the gov must run? Absolutely. Health care is not one of them

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[sv3n 0]

If 17k people are dying a year because of lack of health insurance that's failure.

If health insurance companies are allowed to weasel their way out of covering life saving procedures, that's failure.

A lot of people aren't in debt, trouble, or dead due to not having health insurance..........but rather due to the fact that they are or were underinsured.

There's two parts to fixing that problem though.........reasonable healthcare prices and reasonable insurance rates for complete coverage.

One fix for that would be a government run healthcare plan.........it's the easiest way to keep prices low and make sure everything is covered.

Just take a look at oil prices, this theory that by letting companies compete it will keep the prices down isn't working.

Also, I'm not saying that government run healthcare isn't the only option........but it would be the quickest and easiest.

Quote

Quote

Quote

SS is the one headed toward failer. The healthcare issue is being created for political power. If the gov gets ahold of it it will fail too

Would you expand a little on what qualifies as failure?

Both systems are predicted (based on models) to be impacted heavily by changes in demographics (i.e., Baby Boomers retiring and getting older).

What are the respective percentages of the GDP that go to healthcare versus social security? And what are the models predicting for 10, 20, 30 years? I honestly don't know the specifics, but think it would be an interesting comparison.

VR/Marg

First off I do not acept the premise that healthcare is failing. SS is known to running out of money.

The problems with the current health care system are government caused in my opinion. States mandate that health insurance cover procedures and care never meant to be covered. The mix of all the state requirments cause the costs to go up because there is no consistancy and therefore is it not as easy to have competative systems of health insurers.

Now, you say the health care system is failing. How?

I do not know of anybody that has not gotten emergency care when they needed it. And I really dont care if health care covers elective type procedures

...and you're in violation of your face!

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

"oh but reaganomics, they're the cure"............oh so you want to give the "elite" more tax breaks so the excess they get will "trickle" down. First of all, think about how ridiculous that sounds........it's a great slave mentallity. "If I work harder and let the boss save a few million maybe he'll spend some of that money on me"......................

Let's play a little game. We'll accept your premise of taking everything away from the man who has scrimped, saved, invested, and built a successful business.
Let's say that the man is worth 1 million. He has 9 employees with your attitude, and by the will of the 'small' people, he is forced to divide his assets equally. Wow, you have $100,000 in your pocket. What are you going to do with it? Live fat for a couple of years? Start your own business? Oh, wait. You just hired three employees and each one of them gets $25,000. They got what they came for. Why should they put forth any effort to make your dream come true?

Let's call this plan the socialist trickle down economics.

That's a great way to get off topic and ridiculous, but let's stay on topic.

Nobody is saying the rich should give up their millions and split it up amongst the employees. What they are saying is that rather than allowing the top execs to make millions while their "worker ants" try to scrape by on $20-$30k a year, that everybody gets their "fair" salary and pays the same taxes. And before you go off on some tangent about "fair" meaning everybody gets the exact same pay let me clarify that. If the rate of inflation is not matching the rate of salary increases then that's a problem. That means that the "big boys" at the top of these companies are uping prices faster than they are uping the salaries...................that's an issue that needs to be addressed. This problem starts a lot of different problems...............both parents now have to work to support a family rather than just one. Now nobody is home taking care of the kids, so who's teaching the kids values. A family should be able to raise their own children rather than have somebody else do it so they can work.

It has nothing to do with socialism, nor is it some trickle down affect.

Any move to have more control by government is socialist by its very nature. No amount of rhetoric can change that. Are there functions the gov must run? Absolutely. Health care is not one of them

A government taking care of it's population, seems like a good move to me. You want happy and healthy citizens to keep a society progressing.

Accountability would be a government responsibility issue. Those things aren't going to fix themselves.

...and you're in violation of your face!