"It is imperative that respect for the rule of law be restored."

[Odin]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath


if you are advocating public health care then yes you are a dirty disgusting socialist.

It's better than the system we have now where people go BANKRUPT because they can't afford health insurance. But you don't care, you think all poor people are lazy bums or other such right-wing propaganda, and thererfor deserve to die. Such a program would be easily pays fore if we cut some of the millitary buget, but that is never going to happen because our politicians are bought and sold by the Millitary-Industrial complex (and yes, Eisenhower would be horrified to see what our country has become).

[polarnomad]

I'm not sure why SLD is allergic to any mention of Gov't funded programs such as public health care. I mean, if that is such a disgusting concept, then would you do away with public schools?

Regardless, something I found quite astonishing is that some dental work I needed done 3 years ago would have cost me over $800 in the US (with an insufficient dental plan from work), but cost me 115€ at a private dental clinic in Finland (having no insurance coverage at all). I'm not sure why there was such a huge difference in cost. It certainly isn't as if Finland is a particularly inexpensive place.

This isn't very related to the thread's initial post, but I guess being OT in OT is just OK.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath

Spending money at home doesn't make you a socialist, however if you are advocating public health care then yes you are a dirty disgusting socialist.

um... no. Social Democrats are not the same as socialists.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath


Meanwhile, the wonders of socialism and communism continue to spread across the world enlightening all they touch and sparking a golden age in their countries.

I'm sure that's the real reason why people didn't flee New Orleans- they were just too high on the effects of their country's Golden Age to appreciate the danger.


Pass me another crack pipe, Alice.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Agathon
um... no. Social Democrats are not the same as socialists.

SLD is the type that doesn't see any differentiation among Democrats, Social Democrats, Socialists, Communists and Moderate Republicans. Anyone to the left of Pat Robertson is a left-pinko-commie scum.

If you attempted to explain to him the concept of market socialism, I'm sure his head would blow up.

[Patroklos]

Clinton's numbers are also very skewed, as what happened to the military after the Cold War?

The people responsible for being able to cut the governments largest budget muncher in half had no association with Clinton. Nero or Mugabee could have seen similar results with that rather fortunite feather in his hat.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If you attempted to explain to him the concept of market socialism, I'm sure his head would blow up.

[Japher]

If you attempted to explain to him the concept of market socialism, I'm sure his head would blow up.

Market socialism? Is that like hitting on chicks at the grocery store?

[Odin]

Originally posted by Japher


Market socialism? Is that like hitting on chicks at the grocery store?

Market socialism is when the workers own the means of production, but goods are distributed in a regulated market economy, IIRC.

[MosesPresley]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Clinton's numbers are also very skewed, as what happened to the military after the Cold War?

[MosesPresley]

The $125B cut in military spending doesn't explain the dramatic turnaround of the deficit by the Clinton administration . The Clinton admininstration recovered over $500B.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by MosesPresley
The $125B cut in military spending doesn't explain the dramatic turnaround of the deficit by the Clinton administration . The Clinton admininstration recovered over $500B.

and do you think that would've happened without:

1) the re-establishment of the countries positive self-image during Reagan's tenure as president

2) the republican's taking control of congress

3) Clinton's (positive in this case) ability to 'go with the flow' ie jump on the republican economic bandwagon.

[MosesPresley]

This Reagan self-image thing needs to be explained to me. How does a bunch of rednecks voting against their own interests and having pride in the military tranlate into economic recovery?

[MosesPresley]

I notice on the graphs that the deficit doubled under the Reagan admin. Under the Bush 1 admin, it dropped an additional $100B. During the Clinton admin we recovered $500B, admittedly with a republican congress, but with all three branches of govt controlled by Bush 2, we have lost $750B. So it doesn't look like the republicans had anything to do with the recovery. If anything we could conclude that they actually impeded what may have been a much larger surplus.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

1) the re-establishment of the countries positive self-image during Reagan's tenure as president

ha? you gotta be kidding me.

2) the republican's taking control of congress

haha? the republicans have control now. look at the fiscal mess we are in.

3) Clinton's (positive in this case) ability to 'go with the flow' ie jump on the republican economic bandwagon.

hahaha? thats why he raised taxes on the rich, because he was going with the republican flow, right?