|
On November 06 2010 07:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
The fact that Marx was an economist like Adam Smith proves my point: that you can't use authority argument with the economic "science", because it is ideology-related. That's precisely why Marx called his discipline Political Economy: because economy for him was always subordinated to politics. I have the same opinion: this idea that economy is an objective science that politics should basically follow is a huge joke.
"Political Economy" was the name of the discipline before Marx came long, FYI. Again, I do not disagree that there is ideology in Economics, especially when choosing one's model (google normative vs. positive). But that is a poor reason for rejecting economics as a discipline. Any time you create a model about how humans interact with each other, you are creating an economic model. To reject this method of analysis is to reject the only tool we have to determine the efficacy of policies. You are essentially saying we shouldn't even bother modeling human interactions and just go with policies on an arbitrary basis. That is bordering on the religious.
If not economics, what do you use to judge your policies? Your gut?
Now, I don't know if you are serious about scandinavia; I guess you are not. Socialism means high taxes, strong presence of the state, strong healthcare, strong public sector, public pensions, etc... If we agree on this definition, Scandinavian countries are the most socialist democracies today. Now if you want to say that the countries with the highest social protection and the highest fiscality are right wing, well, do so.
I don't agree on that definition. I have been using "socialist" in the sense of government control of the means, the way Marx intended. Scandinavia is quite the opposite, which again I view as a capitalist country with high wealth redistribution.
You clearly don't know the situation in UK right now. The state did cut more than 400 000 public jobs, which means that about a million jobs are disappearing in the next months / years. Public debt is one of the highest in Europe. Social sitaution is an absolute disaster.
I'll leave it to the Brits to comment on their country, but my main point was that cutting those jobs was not necessary for the good of the UK's economy. Again, look at British bond rates.
In addition, you can't simply use the UK's economic situation as an example of how "right-wing" economics have failed. Take a look at this chart, which encompasses just how "right-wing" a country is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom_historical_rankings
At the top, you have countries doing quite well, countries that are doing ok, and countries that are doing poorly. It irks me when people use the current recession as some sort of confirmation of their pre-conceived biases. Does the fact that Germany is on that list but France is not, yet Germany is doing quite well, somehow mean the French system is shit? Using your naive method of judging economic systems, it certainly would.
|
The video is pretty accurate of my view of US politics imo.
|
On November 06 2010 07:01 Scruffy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 06:59 Krigwin wrote:On November 06 2010 06:53 Scruffy wrote:
So I can bash your country in a thread, and you won't respond? Neat. What country would that be, exactly? Let's test how good your short-term memory is. I don't know. I haven't read the whole thread. Honestly, I don't care. You are either a Michael Moore loving American or typical European. (obv)
I love this thread.
|
Well as an American, I think that our country does have quite a few problems, but I don't think that foreigner views know enough of the story of the country to comment. The way the US is right now makes a low more sense if you know enough about history(AP US History level or so). We actually have had many parties, but they all died for one reason or another(Federalists, National-Republicans, Whigs, and a number of less relevant parties, most of which died 150 years ago after the Republican party formed). A large part of the youth is very much similar to Europe in their beliefs as well, it's just that they don't really vote too often.
The Republican party scares me as well, mostly because they have no leading figure that has an IQ above 27. They had Bush, but he lost his support in the country among everyone else in his terms as presidency.
The Tea Party is pretty bad, and thankfully most of us don't support it. There are more than enough candidates to scare me though.
But honestly, the United States may have stupid people, but as a whole European views are just as ignorant as the views of the ones they are criticizing. A lot of us hate the government and its corruption, and the America you're thinking of doesn't represent an overwhelming majority of the country.
Now, if Sarah Palin gets elected or something, I will retract all my statements and probably flee the country.
|
It works based on how many people who use the currency, the more users you have, the more "borrowing" you can do to get a de facto unlimited supply. Currently at well over 13 trillion as far as unlimited supply goes. The supply doesn't run out until they lose control. The more arm twisting you can do, the more countries you have using your currency. This is of course where military might comes into play - great for arm twisting. Keep in mind they don't have to be using the same exact currency, those are just papers with labels after all, what is important is that they are all managed with the interests of the IMF/Federal Reserve in mind, which they are. Groups such as the Council for Foreign Relations and members of the G20 summit all work for these interests.
Without the current US financial system, the US would completely lack both funding and interest in attacking countries like Iraq. Plain and simple.
Since you want it simple what it comes down to is the US saying "use our economic system, or else...". That's why when you look at US allies you see a wide range of governments ranging from democracies to ruthless dictators - because the US values cooperation with their financial system first and foremost with everything else including human rights and dignity being quite irrelevant. This is why every country on the "axis of evil" also happened to be countries that expressed interest in selling barrels of oil NOT priced based on US dollars. Countries like Iraq, Venezuela (which the US most likely tried to overthrow), and Iran.
We have no reason to keep the common people down, economically. The more money common people have, the more customers we have and more things they'll buy. It is in our best interest to better the lives of common people worldwide and help developing nations develop. Economics is not zero sum so stop claiming that it is in certain instances. Because its not and never will be. No economic system has ever worked like that.
Essentially, America would much rather kill you by selling you lots of fast food, than kill you with bullets we have to pay for.
I find your argument against humans rights and dignity to be completely ridiculous. Look, a solid economic state is the only to actually better people in another country. I don't support our warlike efforts, but wielding economic and diplomatic power is a good way to actually do something better for the world without hurting people. What would you prefer to do? Nothing? Isolate ourselves? Ignore the global economy? It's idiotic and will only help destabilize a lot of economies including your own.
It's also amusingly ironic that the only people tripping over themselves to defend America in this thread have all been conservatives, while at the same time the most common complaint the actual foreigners have against America is that there are too many conservatives. Aren't you kind of proving their whole point for them just by posting?
I'm not conservative and I've been defending America. Mostly about economics though. There are perfectly humanitarian reasons to be more capitalist than socialist (to some extent. As I said, I'm not a conservative).
|
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha
|
On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha
As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it?
|
On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it?
For all the talk about America being the most charitable nation you really hate helping your own citizens.
|
On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it?
We have to consider that MOST of America is insured by employee-sponsored coverage (Won't be for long thx to Obummer). For example, my boss recently had his prostate removed because he had a little bit of cancer. They caught it early, so he will be fine. Did he pay tens of thousand of dollars to have this done? No. I think he told me it was like maybe 1200 USD or so. So no, he didn't die. Yes, his insurance covered it.
If their is rationing due to socialized medicine, then he would have had to wait (from what I hear). What if the cancer got aggressive, and then he died? Is that the governments' fault? Maybe. Rather have it in my hands than some lazy bureaucrat.
The British have gotten past their fascination with huge, hulking, inefficient government. That is why all those govt workers will get laid off soon (for austerity). So they have lived the nightmare that Obama is trying to force on Americans. If we could only learn from them =/
Also, here is an interesting article about us and the Brits:
+ Show Spoiler +Excerpt: "Health care in the U.K. is provided by the government-funded National Health System, which has come under fire and has been used as a bad example of a public health-care system by critics of President Obama's plan. Smith said the U.S. system is better at treating sick people and prolonging their lives than the British one, even though it is not as good in at preventing them from getting ill. "We are consecrated to repair in America," said Bortz. "We should be consecrated to prevention." He believes there is a secret to a longer life. "Aging is no longer an unknown. It comes down to fitness," said Bortz, who just ran the Boston marathon for his 80th birthday. "Fitness is a 30-year age offset."" http://www.aolhealth.com/2010/11/05/americans-sicker-live-longer-than-british/
Edit: Hopp, we can help ourselves (and everyone else).
|
On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it?
If you get sick, its not your fault, no.
Everybody pays taxes - Taxes goes to healthcare, which everybody gains from.
The errors with capitalism, is that it promotes criminal activities, and works against everything thats just and fair.
Imagine, a guy has waited 6 years on a new liver on the transplant list. Hes working to the best of hes abilities, and hasnt drunk a single drop of aclohol, or anything what would ruin it further.
Another guy has rich parents, is partying every night, find out hes livers broke - Keeps partying and acting irresponsible
Since hes parents are rich, they buy the liver which was ment for guy nr 1, who a week later dies, with "his" liver inside a brat who knows jack of lifes hardships.
Sounds "OK" ?
Everyone is eqal, exept if ur poor, then ur trash, and if ur rich, ofc you deserve more human value.
My god, capitalism, like religion, is stupid.
Social liberalism is by far the best ideology.
Another stupid thing with the U.S, is theyre weapon laws.
Ever heard of safty?
I mean, ive heard americans who think they own the moon.. Look at thire educationsystem, no wonders americans, or at least a lot of them, are so stupid.
|
Widar: I think that a lot of the dumb Americans are just inbred. It's sad.
|
On November 06 2010 13:35 Widar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? If you get sick, its not your fault, no. Everybody pays taxes - Taxes goes to healthcare, which everybody gains from. The errors with capitalism, is that it promotes criminal activities, and works against everything thats just and fair. Imagine, a guy has waited 6 years on a new liver on the transplant list. Hes working to the best of hes abilities, and hasnt drunk a single drop of aclohol, or anything what would ruin it further. Another guy has rich parents, is partying every night, find out hes livers broke - Keeps partying and acting irresponsible Since hes parents are rich, they buy the liver which was ment for guy nr 1, who a week later dies, with "his" liver inside a brat who knows jack of lifes hardships. Sounds "OK" ? Everyone is eqal, exept if ur poor, then ur trash, and if ur rich, ofc you deserve more human value. My god, capitalism, like religion, is stupid. Social liberalism is by far the best ideology. Another stupid thing with the U.S, is theyre weapon laws. Ever heard of safty? I mean, ive heard americans who think they own the moon.. Look at thire educationsystem, no wonders americans, or at least a lot of them, are so stupid.
The government runs our education (into the ground). Its the unions. They protect lazy, shitty teachers. And America loses. Grats.
|
long post:
+ Show Spoiler +
Personally, I think the party system is completely flawed right now in its current form. I am an American with a pretty extensive knowledge of U.S. history and politics, and I think it's just a joke. Democrat, Republican, whatever.
Right now, we have basically a two-party system. You can try to talk about other parties, but in the end the only way they matter is whether they lean Democrat or Republican. This means that progress is severely limited because there's only two avenues, both of which are owned by entities whose job it is to cover their asses to convince the general public that they're "better" in any sense than the other party.
Also, just consider the idea of being in a party. Each political party has a platform, a set of propositions, ideals, and beliefs. That sounds reasonable until you actually stop to think about it. Does this mean every single person who calls himself a Democrat has to abide to each and every single one of these ideas? What if I want abortion, but no illegal immigrants? The only way for my political actions to have any weight (ie running for office) is to make concessions so I fit in with the rest of the party line. This happens a few more times, and all of a sudden, everything I'm proposing goes against my beliefs. The same holds true for voting. When I vote for Obama, I'm voting for everything the Democratic Party stands for. When I vote for McCain, I'm doing the same thing, just on the Republican side.
Also, can a conservative please explain to me what the hell is going on. From what I understand, a conservative is someone who wants a more limited government. He wants lower taxes, so he (or as he likes to describe himself, "the people") can choose what to do with his hard-earned money. On the other hand, he is against raising the minimum wage so "the people" as a whole can have more money, because he doesn't want to pay his employees more. Also, he is in favor of government interference when it comes to issues like abortion and school-sanctioned religious services.
Liberals, whatever. They have unrealistic ideas and goals when it comes to equality and what's right for America. I do see a lot of truth in what liberals argue, but they rely just as much in half-truths and extremism as the other camp.
And yes, I am aware of all of the nuances of economy (blah blah raising minimum wage leads to x which leads to y, let me show you my cool aggregate supply/demand curve, etc). That does not change the fact everyone is insane.
America as a member of the global family is the retarded youngest brother.
In other news, South Korean politics is pure comedy.
|
Yea, religion is retarded in politics.
I want to get rid of religion altogether.
Lobbying is stupid.
Edit: Oh yea, and if the tea party ever wins presidency, I will literally shoot myself.
|
On November 06 2010 12:54 Scruffy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? If their is rationing due to socialized medicine, then he would have had to wait (from what I hear). What if the cancer got aggressive, and then he died? Is that the governments' fault? Maybe. Rather have it in my hands than some lazy bureaucrat.
you do realize that the price mechanism is rationing, right? I mean you'd be a complete idiot not to realize that, so I hope you realize that.
|
On November 06 2010 12:50 hoppipolla wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? For all the talk about America being the most charitable nation you really hate helping your own citizens.
Well, that was never me saying it, so whatever.
On November 06 2010 13:35 Widar wrote:
If you get sick, its not your fault, no.
Everybody pays taxes - Taxes goes to healthcare, which everybody gains from.
The fact that everybody gains from it isn't sufficient to justify that you take money from people to pay for services rendered to someone else.
Everybody gains if they're given a Ferrari, too, but you don't see any attempts to redistribute income so everyone can have one.
The errors with capitalism, is that it promotes criminal activities, and works against everything thats just and fair.
Imagine, a guy has waited 6 years on a new liver on the transplant list. Hes working to the best of hes abilities, and hasnt drunk a single drop of aclohol, or anything what would ruin it further.
Another guy has rich parents, is partying every night, find out hes livers broke - Keeps partying and acting irresponsible
Since hes parents are rich, they buy the liver which was ment for guy nr 1, who a week later dies, with "his" liver inside a brat who knows jack of lifes hardships.
Sounds "OK" ?
Except for the fact that this is completely illegal, yes. There is not actually anything wrong with this, unless you're claiming the authority to tell everyone else how they're supposed to live (in which case, you're pretty much a fascist).
Another stupid thing with the U.S, is theyre weapon laws.
Ever heard of safty?
I mean, ive heard americans who think they own the moon.. Look at thire educationsystem, no wonders americans, or at least a lot of them, are so stupid.
You're aware that pretty much every time a town has shifted to less regulation on weapons, crime rates have gone down, right?
I'd prefer for my safety to be in my own hands, rather than the hands of some incompetent bureaucrat.
|
As a Canadian...
We think your politics are fucking hilarious. Watching your country is like watching a dog bite a sprinkler, get hit in the face, bark at it, and then continue to attack the sprinkler. 2 years at a time.
Yeah, your brothers to the north are similar to you in a lot of ways, but at least our government is willing to nickel and dime instead of spending a trillion dollars a term on shooting afghan civilians and facelifting a dow number.
EDIT:
Reading the thread, there's a lot of USA bashing, and I'd love to get in on it, but I'm going to be fair about it...
The majority of people in this world are * FUCKING * * DUMB *. That's the same pretty much wherever you go. People are going to be stupid as all hell.
|
V
The problem with the US is that the culture and society -feeds- all of those idiots. It feeds them until they have the confidence and the means to root themselves and infest the world around them.
Like any country, the States have a ton of bright, thoughtful people. Like any country, they also have a ton of stupid, ignorant people. It just happens to be a country where the stupid and the ignorant yell louder than the smart.
|
On November 06 2010 16:31 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 12:54 Scruffy wrote:On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? If their is rationing due to socialized medicine, then he would have had to wait (from what I hear). What if the cancer got aggressive, and then he died? Is that the governments' fault? Maybe. Rather have it in my hands than some lazy bureaucrat. you do realize that the price mechanism is rationing, right? I mean you'd be a complete idiot not to realize that, so I hope you realize that.
I don't realize it. I guess I am a complete idiot. If an individual has insurance, he or she is obviously not paying full price for healthcare. If I went out and got a $50,000 knee surgery, I will not pay that out of pocket. I will pay my deductible, and the insurance company covers the rest. That is what insurance is for, right?
Also, I just want to clarify something. Every patient that goes to an E.R. in the USA will receive care. Hospitals that do not lose their federal funding. So that is the safety net for people that cannot pay. We are so terrible, aren't we? Just because we don't wanna rob Peter to pay for Paul's stubbed toe doesn't mean we "don't care about our own people." I mean give me a break. + Show Spoiler +Give me a break, give me a break. Break me off a piece of that Kit Kat Bar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, it seems my capitalistpig society has brainwashed me.
|
On November 06 2010 17:22 Scruffy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 16:31 Romantic wrote:On November 06 2010 12:54 Scruffy wrote:On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? If their is rationing due to socialized medicine, then he would have had to wait (from what I hear). What if the cancer got aggressive, and then he died? Is that the governments' fault? Maybe. Rather have it in my hands than some lazy bureaucrat. you do realize that the price mechanism is rationing, right? I mean you'd be a complete idiot not to realize that, so I hope you realize that. I don't realize it. I guess I am a complete idiot. If an individual has insurance, he or she is obviously not paying full price for healthcare. If I went out and got a $50,000 knee surgery, I will not pay that out of pocket. I will pay my deductible, and the insurance company covers the rest. That is what insurance is for, right? Also, I just want to clarify something. Every patient that goes to an E.R. in the USA will receive care. Hospitals that do not lose their federal funding. So that is the safety net for people that cannot pay. We are so terrible, aren't we? Just because we don't wanna rob Peter to pay for Paul's stubbed toe doesn't mean we "don't care about our own people." I mean give me a break. + Show Spoiler +Give me a break, give me a break. Break me off a piece of that Kit Kat Bar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, it seems my capitalistpig society has brainwashed me.
Completely nonsensical reply, thanks for confirming my suspicions!
It is interesting that you've managed to refute yourself in two posts. First preventative care prevents problems from being worse, then to solve a problem we should let people wait until they have an emergency by foregoing preventative care and just using the ER when the situation is critical. Striking cognitive dissonance, if I may comment.
|
On November 06 2010 17:28 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 17:22 Scruffy wrote:On November 06 2010 16:31 Romantic wrote:On November 06 2010 12:54 Scruffy wrote:On November 06 2010 12:37 kzn wrote:On November 06 2010 11:14 Widar wrote:
Theyre healthcare-politic is so hilarious, basically, if you get sick, it's your fault, pay up or die.
Haha As opposed to, if you get sick, it's not your fault, so everyone else has to pay for it? If their is rationing due to socialized medicine, then he would have had to wait (from what I hear). What if the cancer got aggressive, and then he died? Is that the governments' fault? Maybe. Rather have it in my hands than some lazy bureaucrat. you do realize that the price mechanism is rationing, right? I mean you'd be a complete idiot not to realize that, so I hope you realize that. I don't realize it. I guess I am a complete idiot. If an individual has insurance, he or she is obviously not paying full price for healthcare. If I went out and got a $50,000 knee surgery, I will not pay that out of pocket. I will pay my deductible, and the insurance company covers the rest. That is what insurance is for, right? Also, I just want to clarify something. Every patient that goes to an E.R. in the USA will receive care. Hospitals that do not lose their federal funding. So that is the safety net for people that cannot pay. We are so terrible, aren't we? Just because we don't wanna rob Peter to pay for Paul's stubbed toe doesn't mean we "don't care about our own people." I mean give me a break. + Show Spoiler +Give me a break, give me a break. Break me off a piece of that Kit Kat Bar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, it seems my capitalistpig society has brainwashed me. Completely nonsensical reply, thanks for confirming my suspicions! It is interesting that you've managed to refute yourself in two posts. First preventative care prevents problems from being worse, then to solve a problem we should let people wait until they have an emergency by foregoing preventative care and just using the ER when the situation is critical. Striking cognitive dissonance, if I may comment.
Well I have seen people go to the E.R. for routine shit. They just have to wait longer because its not urgent. How did I refute myself? I didn't say preventative care isn't important, but do we need the government to take it over to administer it? I don't think so.
Looks like you completed your PSYCH 2010 class before you dropped out of college. Congratulations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
