Ok, so tell me again why we post diaries? | 57 comments (57 topical, 0 hidden)
some logical fallacies (none / 1)

1. "socialist takeover"? Some of us wish Obama was a socialist. Most people who have studied Obama's policy prescriptions would not call him socialist. That was a vapid statement. By the way, it was *your* president who did more to socialize the government than anyone since FDR. And the manner and substance of the socialisation is abhorrent to real socialists. You should focus your energy on the republican party, which deserves to be gutted by true opponents of socialism.

2. Voters and productive people are not mutually exclusive categories. However in your case I think the argument could be made.

3. No one is being asked to "provide health care" for someone else. Businesses and individuals are alike pushing the government to provide basic services so that they don't need to be met by the same businesses and individuals. If this doesn't happen, our businesses will remain uncompetitive with their counterparts in countries that do provide these services. In fact, all that has been proposed is for the government to offer affordable, high quality health insurance. You are for the free market, aren't you?

I can tell you without reservation, that I do not like what the free market has given me in health insurance. It is not responsive at all to consumer demand. I intend to sign up for the government insurance as soon as it becomes available. Maybe it will suck, but it can't be much worse than Aetna if its good enough for Congress.

4. Providing basic services is not equivalent to a "defeat" for capitalism any more than is building roads, maintaining a police force and a military. Nor is it a "defeat" for capitalism to regulate commerce. Even Adam Smith understood this.

5. 60 million affluent people. Really? Obama campaigned on a promise of cutting taxes for 95% of taxpayers. By my calculation that leaves 15 million (of 300)  who are not receiving a tax cut or may indeed have their taxes raised. Will you find 60 million people who hate the idea of the government offering insurance? Good luck with that, my friend.

6. "we have money to invest". This is a laughable statement. I didn't realize rich people were holding back!

7. Retirement needs. The government doesn't serve anyone's retirement needs. We decided collectively in the great depression  that we no longer would stand for elderly people going hungry. That ship has sailed, dude. Bush came the closest anyone is going to come to destroying social security in a long time. It is one of the main reasons his popularity dropped precipitously after 2004. There are two solutions for the problem of feeding old people. You can euthenise them or give them a little pocket money. We chose the latter. Grow up and get over it.

 

by hazmat on 01/05/2009 07:52:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Not true (none / 0)

"...socialism is the ultimate goal."   

I've not heard that anywhere on this site in the many years I've been posting. There are some - repeat, SOME programs which ought to be covered by the "general welfare" desire in our Constitution. I go much further than Obama (single payer, dude!) on some of his issues but that doesn't mean I want a socialist country. I want a Fair Trade policy - nothing wrong with trade or profit, just obscene profits and grossly unjust trade.

I like businesses so much, I'd like to see corporations go back to being businesses and lose their "personhood" status. It would make it sooo much easier to hold these bastards accountable. How is that a Socialist view?

I could be wrong; there might be some full-fledged Socialists hangin' around, I'm just saying that my impression is that posters are for a responsible capitalism instead of the "Grab It All!" form we've been seeing since Reagan.

Bush, the Banks, the Financial giants of this country did Al Qaeda's bidding - drove our economy straight into the ground. That course needs to change.

"...being forwarded to people who didn’t work hard..."

Wanna try that one again? You mean like waitresses, cooks, dishwashers, janitors, retail employees, etc., etc.? You think those people haven't worked hard? Simply outrageous. You think them bums? There is NO direct correlation between how hard a person works and what they are paid. If that were so, diswashers would be getting executive salaries and executives would be getting janitor wages.

And you're trying to pull a fast one with that "$3000 a month S.S. check" nonsense. That is only if you've averaged $7685 per month income and don't retire until 70. Most people get much, MUCH less. You might call it "subsitance" level - if the recipient is lucky. (of course, what ought be considered "subsistance" in 2009 is a whole 'nother thread...)

Oh, and as a low income person, I do want you to know that I don't drink malt liquor and I've been rolling my own cigarettes for a decade so my monthly bill for those combined items is roughly $35 per month - and the tobacco taxes goes to the state health insurance program which I don't qualify for because my $950 income per month is too much.

Guess that's what I get for being a bum...

by MedfordTim on 01/06/2009 02:14:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I tried... (none / 0)

I tried to email the author asking him to break that down because I don't believe him, but you have to be a subscriber to WSJ to contact their writers. That figure is smellier than a Salmon sitting in the back seat for a week. I am kept at an income level which barely qualifies for Food Stamps. $10 per month is the MAX I qualify for. He would need to explain to me how he arrived at that figure - it just doesn't fit the real world.

But I DID notice that the rest of the article pretty much sums up the point I was trying to make. Unscrupulous loan agents signing up anyone they can so they can sell the mortgages. Greedy profiteers cold calling people with loan offers and bending the truth in order to get the loan through.

by MedfordTim on 01/06/2009 11:25:05 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Ok, so tell me again why we post diaries? | 57 comments (57 topical, 0 hidden)