John Kerry is a Socialist!

POSTED BY: Anarko
UPDATED: Thursday, October 28, 2004 23:37
VIEWED: 9610
PAGE 3 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

HJERMSTED

Thursday, October 21, 2004 4:25 PM

Your argument fails from the first word you type by presuming that socialism in and of itself is automatically a bad thing.

There are numerous socialist nations on this planet, some more successful at it than others. You can still buy a coca cola in all of them. There are still citizens wealthier than other citizens in these nations. They sell lotto tickets at their Quick-E Marts just like everywhere else. And, most importantly, citizens still vote in regular elections in the majority of them.

Sure they're taxed a little higher but not by as much as you think... just add up all the taxes you pay (city, county/parish, state, federal, sales) and compare it to a socialist country that only pays federal and sales taxes.

There's nothing totalitarian about the socialist governments of nations such as Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway or Canada for example. But there IS a smaller gap between the rich and the poor (the US wealth gap is obscene by comparison... an embarassment). There IS guaranteed healthcare (hopefully you don't need to be reminded that the US does NOT have this). Some of these socialist nations even guarantee access to higher education and trade school to their citizens.

So, let's see... guaranteed healthcare and higher education as national priorities VS. priority given to protecting wealth addiction and bloated military spending... (forcing citizens to fight amongst themselves for the crumbs that come "trickling down")

Honestly... as long as democracy prevails in a socialist state what is there to fear? The real question becomes do you want to live in a fair society or not? Socialism at its core is PRO-society.

We can't hide in the hills with our guns fearing our neighbors and/or government forever, can we? We ARE our neighbors and we ARE our government.

mattro

WHISPERING

Thursday, October 21, 2004 5:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hjermsted:
Some of these socialist nations even guarantee access to higher education and trade school to their citizens.

Here (Finland) all schools are free. Also we have a Student Financial Aid and a guaranteed healthcare :)

http://www.minedu.fi/minedu/education/
http://www.stm.fi/Resource.phx/eng/subjt/healt/hinsu/index.htx

MRSMACK

Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hjermsted:
[Honestly... as long as democracy prevails in a socialist state what is there to fear? The real question becomes do you want to live in a fair society or not? Socialism at its core is PRO-society.
mattro

Two things about what you posted. The idea of fairness in any way shape or form in life is pretty much ludicrous. Nowhere, and at no time has life been a tad bit, even a touch, fair. And the push for fairness is morally ambitious, while being completely and utterly fruitless and impossible.

Second. If you really studied the sitituation of all these socialistic countries with their free health care, you will find that the system is ultimately flawed and will not work. Not unlike our Social Security system. The US has the best health care system period. When people need the best care they come here. It may not be Fair, it may mean that the rich have better health care than you or I, but it does also mean that we have the ability to get treatment. My dad recently got out of the hospital, and things were rough financially for a while, before everything insurancewize kicked in, but he got better, and I'm sure that had he lived anywhere else he'd be dead.

Sorry, I just can't see why it is even the federal governments business to step into the healthcare industry. I just want them to put a limit on Malpractice so that maybe my kids will have healthcare.

HARDWARE

Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:12 PM

You think that's bad, I found this definition of Fascism and damn if it doesn't sound like the USA I'm living in at this very moment.

http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Politics/Structure3.htm

Pretty soon Bush and Heinrich,...err, I mean Rumsfeld will have the masses Seig Heiling in front of the reflecting pool. Leni Riefenstahl eat your heart out!

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

SIGMANUNKI

Thursday, October 21, 2004 9:47 PM

@Anarko
You really need to look up the definitions of socialism and communism. They are *very* different.

And the main reason why the US "won" the cold war is because Russia didn't play anymore. Ergo, the US "won" by default. Russia couldn't support the massive military expenses require. < sarcasm > So, yay america for having a more resiliant economy than Russia did. < /sarcasm >

Your black and white mentality is quite telling. You are aware that there *are* shades of grey, right?

The rest of your comments don't even deserve the keystrokes it would require to respond.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

SIGNYM

Thursday, October 21, 2004 10:18 PM

Quote:
Nowhere, and at no time has life been a tad bit, even a touch, fair. And the push for fairness is morally ambitious, while being completely and utterly fruitless and impossible.

Now, that has got to be one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard! I don't even know where to begin, so I'll just have to get to it later!

Quote:
If you really studied the sitituation of all these socialistic countries with their free health care, you will find that the system is ultimately flawed and will not work. Not unlike our Social Security system. The US has the best health care system period. When people need the best care they come here.

My friend, since my daughter was born with a very rare neurological disorder, I've had more contact with the medical system here and abroad that I would ever wish on my worst enemy. I don't need to "study" the system, I've lived it.

As far a having the "best" health care system, I can point to many parents with disabled children who have NO health care, who struggle day in and day out just to care for and educate their kids, sacrificing houses, jobs, and any meaninful life because they have no support whatsoever. Our infant mortality is worse than Cuba's, for chrissake!

What you mean is that FOR THOSE WHO CAN PAY we offer the most advanced treatment. Well, FYI the most advanced treatment and the best research that I've found for my daughter's condition comes from Singapore, Italy, and France.

RUE

Friday, October 22, 2004 2:36 AM

SignyM

I WAS going to reply, but you said it best.

NEUTRINOLAD

Friday, October 22, 2004 2:47 AM

AMERICANS ARE SOCIALISTS

Yes we are, don't deny it or you'll look foolish.
Just because certain circles consider the term derogatory doesn't mean we aren't socialists. Look at our actions and institutions, not the rhetoric.
BTW, if you check you'll find that fictitious persons are by far the largest recipients of our socialist largesse.
How we personally describe it all depends on whose ox is being gored.

MRSMACK

Friday, October 22, 2004 1:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

Now, that has got to be one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard! I don't even know where to begin, so I'll just have to get to it later!

My friend, since my daughter was born with a very rare neurological disorder, I've had more contact with the medical system here and abroad that I would ever wish on my worst enemy. I don't need to "study" the system, I've lived it.

Our infant mortality is worse than Cuba's, for chrissake!

First, I won't argue the first part, as we have vastly different ideas on that scope from my take of you in your other posts. Not saying you are wrong or right, just that we can agree to disagree.

Second, I'm sorry about your daughter, and I hope all is as well as it can be.

Last, I checked out what you said about Cuba and I can see that the numbers they post are better than ours. Of course, then I went and checked deeper, i.e.. read about 6 articles on it and did some other fact checking and this one summed it up the best. There is a reason that Cuba has us beat on Infant Mortality and it is stated below. The web site is

http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2002/000019.html

and here is some of what they write.

Ahh, heck here is all of it.

Recently released statistics on the infant mortality rate in the Western hemisphere yielded an odd conclusions -- Cuba's infant mortality rate, 16 6.0 per 1,000, is now lower than the U.S. infant mortality rate, at 7.2 per 1,000. Given Cuba's poverty level, its 6.0 rate is very impressive, but is it accurate to say that Cuba now has an infant mortality rate lower than the United States? No.

The problem is that international statistics on infant mortality are helpful in revealing large differences, but when it comes to small differences such as that between Cuba and the United States, often other factors are really behind the numbers.

The primary reason Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States is that the United States is a world leader in an odd category -- the percentage of infants who die on their birthday. In any given year in the United States anywhere from 30-40 percent of infants die before they are even a day old.

Why? Because the United States also easily has the most intensive system of emergency intervention to keep low birth weight and premature infants alive in the world. The United States is, for example, one of only a handful countries that keeps detailed statistics on early fetal mortality -- the survival rate of infants who are born as early as the 20th week of gestation.

How does this skew the statistics? Because in the United States if an infant is born weighing only 400 grams and not breathing, a doctor will likely spend lot of time and money trying to revive that infant. If the infant does not survive -- and the mortality rate for such infants is in excess of 50 percent -- that sequence of events will be recorded as a live birth and then a death.

In many countries, however, (including many European countries) such severe medical intervention would not be attempted and, moreover, regardless of whether or not it was, this would be recorded as a fetal death rather than a live birth. That unfortunate infant would never show up in infant mortality statistics.

This is clearly what is happening in Cuba. In the United States about 1.3 percent of all live births are very low birth weight -- less than 1,500 grams. In Cuba, on the other hand, only about 0.4 percent of all births are less than 1,500 grams. This is despite the fact that the United States and Cuba have very similar low birth rates (births where the infant weighs less than 2500g). The United States actually has a much better low birth rate than Cuba if you control for multiple births -- i.e. the growing number of multiple births in the United States due to technological interventions has resulted in a marked increase in the number of births under 2,500 g.

It is odd if both Cuba and the U.S. have similar birth weight distributions that the U.S. has more

ARAWAEN

Friday, October 22, 2004 3:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MrSmack:

Two things about what you posted. The idea of fairness in any way shape or form in life is pretty much ludicrous. Nowhere, and at no time has life been a tad bit, even a touch, fair. And the push for fairness is morally ambitious, while being completely and utterly fruitless and impossible.

It is called justice. By your logic why have laws, courts or governments at all? We punish a thief because it is not fair, even though he took the stolen item through his own skill and cunning or through the incompetence of the victim. We punish the muderer because it is not fair, even though he defeated his victim through his own strength and skill.

People live in community with one another, there needs to be a way to resolve disputes and allocate limited resources and again to resolve the disputes over the allocation of those same resources. Governments as the arbitrators of the disputes of its citizenry must take

Quote:
Second. If you really studied the sitituation of all these socialistic countries with their free health care, you will find that the system is ultimately flawed and will not work. Not unlike our Social Security system. The US has the best health care system period. When people need the best care they come here. It may not be Fair, it may mean that the rich have better health care than you or I, but it does also mean that we have the ability to get treatment. My dad recently got out of the hospital, and things were rough financially for a while, before everything insurancewize kicked in, but he got better, and I'm sure that had he lived anywhere else he'd be dead.

Must be nice to have insurance, an awful lot of us don't and the number is growing every year. Am glad your dad made out ok though, mine just had a cardiac close call so I can empathize.

I find it odd that the majority of the industrialized world uses a similar health care system, a similar education system and has a similar parliamentary government rather than the 'superior' American system. They must all be stupid or really stubborn.

Quote:
Sorry, I just can't see why it is even the federal governments business to step into the healthcare industry. I just want them to put a limit on Malpractice so that maybe my kids will have healthcare.

You don't want the federal government involved in healthcare but then you want them involved to cap malpractice. This is one of the double standards that drove me from the Republican party, you can't have small government and big government at the same time. You can't reduce bureaucracy by requiring more paperwork. I don't like large civil suits but I fail to see any industry reform without them, especially if want to avoid overregulation.

The reality is that the government is invovled in health care, they have to be. They set standards for pharmaceuticals, medical care and waste disposal, they supply grants for research and subsidies to hospitals and medical schools (supplied by taxpayers), they influence pricing via medicare and patent laws.

Those of us Americans who see the value in a national healh care system, see the value in a healthy community. A healthy community is preferrable to one where only the wealthy can afford to healthy. It is not dissimilar to the education system, the belief is that an educated community is preferable to an uneducated one. This is why even people that don't have children pay taxes towards schools.

Is it perfect, absolutely not! Utopia is not a destination, it is a direction. Anybody can say that perfection is impossible and decide to stop wherever they are. It is not like the current situation is some limit of human achievement. We might as well have stopped at any point in human history.

I guess I will leave with a quote which sums up so clearly why I choose to be a liberal and maybe why I don't get along so much with my fellow liberals.

We have remarked that one reason offered for being a progressive is that things naturally tend t

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE