 |
|
|
|
Friday, January 7, 2011 - 10:40 pm  Oh, the american Congress has the most creative
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 01:36 am Should we follow Portugal's creativity and beg for other countries to bail us out?
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 01:57 am Maybe if you read the news instead of browsing, you would have written Wall Street, Ireland or Greece. And of those three, only Wall Street begged.
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 05:11 am lmao
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 05:00 pm Border C, almost every country in Europe have free and universal health care. If you think the healt care cost too much and the financial problems are because of that... you should read and study more. Germany, France and other countries don't have financial problems and have free health care. The money we spend in health care are the less of our problems. I can't understand why the people in USA are afraid of free and universal health care. This is a sign of selfish. But...well... when we see a country that don't want others to have atomic bombs, but is the only country who had ever used them... or a country that make wars because of oil, and have in prison people without being judged, or... do torture,etc etc.
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 08:27 pm *American (capitalized) Selfishness is a virtue . . . perhaps reserved only for the free and the brave?
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 09:20 pm Nationalities are not capitalized under my orthography. Just because I write in english, it doesn't mean I follow all of its rule, even though I am aware of them. Selfishness is king among the blind.
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 10:44 pm Scarlet, perhaps... but whatchout for the patriot act. We never know when they will knock on our door.
| |
| Saturday, January 8, 2011 - 11:36 pm Selfishness is the foundation of capitalism, individual rights, personal property, etc. If selflessness is so good, why not just have communal property and a moneyless society where everyone is equal and receives equal benefits? EDIT: The correction was a bit tongue-in-cheek, Laguna. As an American, I'm obligated to a certain level of self-important nationalism. Maybe other Americans are losing this sense, but I'm sure my breed isn't altogether dead. In all honesty though: if there were a more American (in the sense of ideology rather than mere nationalism) country than the USA, I'd jump ship and move there.
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 12:53 am You're French.
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 07:42 am I remember when we used to have debates and such on IRC Laguna(It's Ace if you remember me from years ago) about like topics and current affairs. I miss those days.. Any who why wouldn't they repeal it? According to the polls a good majority do not approve of the bill and the reasoning "O they don't know what’s in it and that’s why they don't like it" is a bit stupid if you ask me... For one, why not tell the American people what is in the bill unless no one in this country actually knows what is in it. Given that certainly no one knows how it will actually affect healthcare and the deficit. One thing I really don't like about the bill is the size. Because they couldn't agree on certain parts they had to get all the million parts they wanted and duct tape them together while still making the bill larger by supergluing things like Student loan reform on it as well.. Needless to say our (US) Congress shouldn't be playing arts and crafts when we have such a horrible mess of a recession. How can we know what is wrong and how to fix it if they keep changing the equation on us?
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 10:48 am I agree with Jose. What's wrong with semi-free or free universal healthcare? In Australia, we have MediCare, so that if you're poor, you don't have to live with broken limbs because you don't have all that much money. It hasn't killed our economy.
| |
Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 04:06 pm
Well... would you prefer that the United States had not participated in World War II? Or would you prefer it that the United States DOES want other countries to have atomic bombs? If neither, what is your point?
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 05:53 pm To all you young whippersnappers: don't mess with my medicare, my social security and my pension. Be sure you start saving at least 10% of your wages, since most of you don't pay any income tax (it's returned at the end of the year) and you won't be able to rely on healthcare after you're over 50 and receive have limited ss, if we have it for young generation. Hopefully you won't be laid off more than two or three times in your lifetime and not be unemployed for more than six months at a time, since this will wipe out all your savings. and figure on working until you're seventy five unless you can't get healthcare and die at a younger age. But since many of you are libertarians i'm sure you're buying gold and hiding it in your refrigerator. And by the way, be sure and keep me alive with tubes and stuff in the last months of my life costing you millions of dollars because we're afraid of "death panels". I also want a heart transplant when i'm 95 so i can creep around in the old folks home dribbling all over myself and not knowing who i am. And don't forget to blame immigrants for our healthcare woes, even though they are younger, having more children that would change the demographics and if educated would not only funnel more money into the ss and medicare and healthcare system, but would help kick China and India's butts by producing more engineers and scientists. i'm partially doing this tongue in cheek, but the austerity programs that Europe and Japan are dealing with are coming to your hometown soon. My generation has done a lot for this world, but we've also made a lot of mistakes. We've lived on credit, both as individuals and as gov't believing we can put it off until tomorrow. That makes me sad, since i believe it didn't have to be that way. As an older American i believe that we will all have to make sacrifices and not think we can live in lala land forever. That means me too. We need healthcare and other developed countries in the world have systems that provide that. It may not be gold plate and they've got their problems but it's adequate. If you're twenty five and healthy you may not see why you should have health insurance, but you will. There's a lot of problems with what we've had in the past and what we'll have in the future. But if we keep our heads in the sand and not face reality, you will be the ones to suffer the most. The political theatre that we've seen on this subject over the past few years is almost comical, if it were not so tragic.
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 05:54 pm My particular problem with this bill is its terrible, terrible, terrible name. That's why I didn't write anything about it. It was also an indication that some politicians have reduced themselves to think through slogans. Yes, I remember you, Ace. Welcome back.
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 06:34 pm Well spoken Jojo
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 07:43 pm I like the name. LOL, it's funny. Could be even better, though...perhaps The Repealing the Job-Killing, Bureaucracy-Feeding, Big Government-Fertilizing, Overall Perverse-Incentivizing, So-Called "Health Care" Act. edit: Thanks, EC
| |
| Sunday, January 9, 2011 - 10:38 pm Parsifal is right just the young dont know about it yet and its going to slam them in face when it does
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 02:52 am For a nation where many people claim that we are a Christian nation, we sure seem to be in denial about death. Stay young and prolong life as long as possible, even though there's no quality of life.
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 04:38 am Your Wisdom is refreshing Parsifal.
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 06:30 am "Stay young and prolong life as long as possible, even though there's no quality of life. " I'm a proponent of the right to die and euthanasia. I find it morally wrong to keep sustaining life when no utility or meaning can be sought by it. Also on a more sly and grim note not having to pay for great life sustaining measures a great deal of people go through sure would reduce healthcare costs. >_>
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 01:35 pm thanks PH and The Don.
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 09:02 pm I agree with Laguna, politics does seem to be all about slogans, spin doctors, catch phases, hooks, manipulated public opinion polls et al. All smoke and mirrors and no substance. Real leaders have balls, something I dont see anywhere in the western world.
| |
| Monday, January 10, 2011 - 10:43 pm The philosophy that always rang the most true with me was: The only people who should be allowed to be politicians are those who don't want the job. Hugs and respect Jo
| |
| Monday, January 24, 2011 - 06:00 am The changing demographics of America don't care a whit for political partisanship or ideology. A decent private health care plan currently runs for 20-25k per annum. The lower end for a little less. This one is case were market forces won't come to the rescue. Demand is far outstripping supply and will explode in the next ten years as the boomers retire. Simple economics shows that prices will continue to escalate dramatically. Look for states to expand their current child coverage to lower income adults and eventually all but the highest tax brackets. Single payer systems are inevitable and hardly the end of the world. Covering the costs of the demand side does not entail nationalizing the supply side as anyone who examines other health care systems throughout the world can readily ascertain. Unfortunately, this "issue", like virtually every other in American polity, is inunadated in ideological rhetoric and duplicitous posturing from both sides of the spectrum. Forget the Federal Government. It is a derailed train incapable of anything but insubtantial gestures to placate and/or inflame its hysterical constituencies. Again, the various states won't wait for a recalcitrant Congress and will inovate on their own. Make of that what you will.
| |
| Tuesday, January 25, 2011 - 04:49 am "However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion." -GEORGE WASHINGTON, Farewell Address, Sep. 17, 1796 By far one of my favorite quotes just to express my opinion on political parties in general. Getting back to healthcare, I don't believe in caring for those with pre-existing conditions and providing "generous" and sometimes unneeded medical care to the elderly. For one people talk about how the human race is getting unhealthier and unfit. Have you ever thought that maybe it wasn't exclusively our habits but our superiority over the animals and dominion over the Earth? Just think of all those caring the genes to be prone for diabetes. Now think of them 4000 years ago or even just 2000 years ago and how those people were not able to reappropriate due to "premature" death. Now in present day the stupid, ill, cripple and unhealthy get to spread their seed causing the human genes to become much more tainted then natural usually intended. Needless to say that is a heartless position but from a Utilitarian stand point it makes sense.
| |
| Tuesday, January 25, 2011 - 05:18 am That's not utilitarian, that's eugenics.
| |
| Tuesday, January 25, 2011 - 11:04 am Or social Darwinism. Congratulations on sharing views with Hitler, Ace2.
| |
| Tuesday, January 25, 2011 - 02:37 pm Hitler isn't so bad. At least George Bush's family didn't think so. They even helped fuel the war machine leading up to WWII. Grandpa, Pa, and Little Bush were all in Politics too, interesting. Two were even presidents. WOW
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 03:52 am @Honey: And the Arizona shooter was a right wing palin-bush inspired mad man. All white people are bad. The rich are selfish and don't deserve what they have. Also even if that conspiracy was true do you really fault them for taking the money? I certainty would have taken the money... Human nature is like all forces of nature; in that it takes the path of least resistance. Accordion I don't take the approach of mass genocide or anything of the sort. I guess you could call me a Libertarian even though I hate the use of parties or any sort of political group. I'm a strong believer that life is only worth having when great quality can be attained. I also believe in "ultra" freedom in that one can do anything to one's body and that as long as your exercise of freedom doesn't prevent another enjoyment of their freedom it is permissible. Abortion, Euthanasia and the "right to die"(different from euthanasia) are some things I find acceptable in my political belief in terms of healthcare.
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 03:59 am O and a quote Accordion.. " If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought." -George Orwell
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 04:24 am Hey, I read that essay. Politics and the English Language. Anyway, insurance companies should not be required by law to hand out policies if they do not voluntarily wish to do so, but once they do, they should be required to abide by the terms of the contract they voluntarily engaged in. Individuals should not be required by law to pay for the insurance policies (or otherwise support the livelihood) of other individuals if they do not voluntarily wish to. Individuals should not be required by law to live if they do not voluntarily wish to. What is the whole point of freedom, if not to have only relationships and obligations that are taken on voluntarily?
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 04:31 am Ace2 Not sure what Conspiracy you are talking about, but... The proof is in the pudding. Bush Family Ties Part 1 Bush Family Ties Part 2 Enjoy, check those two links out and tell me if that is a Conspiracy or Fact.
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 04:58 am Ace2 when you get so wiped out on alcohol or drugs or fall off your motorcycle when you're not riding with a helmet, please don't ask the rest of us to pay your healthcare cost. if you really believe that you can live your life without any responsibility to the rest of us, so be it, but don't expect anything from us to take care of you when you crap out. Scarlet, as it stands now, we still pay the cost of those who are ill and have no insurance. we send people to emergency rooms when they may be at the point of death. this cost an enormous amount of money to keep them alive. the cost is then passed on to the insurance companies or municipalities resulting in higher costs. now, if you don't want to ensure that those without insurance get help, then we have another issue. who will pay for their funerals?
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 05:03 am I watched 7 minutes of the first movie. Sounds like the Da Vinci Code with less templars and more Nazis. lol. Never read that book btw. A lot of that sounds like hearsay. Lets say everything is true about the Bush family. Why would/didn't the media which is mostly left leaning say something during the Bush years? Surely they would have loved to linked the Bush's the Nazis... This sure did run away the actual topic and is more of a arguement then a debate.. :\
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 05:05 am last summer i was talking to the CEO of the Houston Medical Center. we were discussing the pending healthcare legislation. he said that if you could eliminate the cost of drug,alcohol,violence,auto accidents,STD's,obesity,and tobacco related illnesses you would reduce the cost of healthcare billions of dollars a year. so much for your personal freedom. if you choose to live your life as such, please don't ask me to pay. i also was talking to the CEO of a large publicly funded hospital here and he said that within five years public hospitals would require that people live healthly lifestyles to receive free healthcare. obesity, tobacco, alcohol, and drugs were the primary concerns.
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 05:19 am Line them up on the hill. Soldiers and doctors are over there, too. After the soldiers do their job, so do the doctors( motherfuc... No one would pay money to get their organs cause they are damage by alcohol and other drugs)
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 06:54 am Parsifal, freedom is freedom in choices. We are free to make whatever choices we like, but we are never free from the consequences of our choices. If the choice is between: 1. Free healthcare without free choice of lifestyle 2. Free choice of lifestyle without free healthcare Which option do you think represents real freedom?
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 07:43 am You watched 7 minutes.... Eager to talk, less eager to learn. You moved onto why the MASS media didn't cover it and ignored the raw information that reveals to you what you need to know. You can choose to interpret that any way you wish but the facts are there to be checked. The media did pick up on the story. How much of the media is another story. The evidence is in the videos, or on google if you cared to care enough to find it. A lack of effort doesn't mean the truth or facts aren't there for you, nor does it make any of what I pointed out less true. The very first video is a journalist, who went and researched the facts of the Bush Family being tied to the Nazis(using documents obtained from THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS at that), I'm not sure what part of that you consider hearsay. He has a name, he is not an unnamed source who doesn't claim ownership of what he has said. He even challenges you/others to recheck everything he is saying. The same way the media has perpetuated the story of 9-11 to the US and the world is the same thing that happened with this story. Why didn't the 'left leaning' media pick up on the obvious flaws an untruths about the 9-11 story? Your guess is as good as mine. Lack of media attention does not indicate that something is true or false. In fact I could argue the opposite being more likely in many cases. Congresswoman Giffords was reported dead before they realized they made a mistake. The MASS media reported that 20(well known to intelligence) hijackers boarded planes simultaneously, four or more to a flight, and ran planes into the twin towers. Did that make that story true? What happened when they(The MASS media) figured out 5 of them were alive and well after the attacks, and have not a single second of footage of any of the accused hijackers ever boarding their planes nor any Arab/Muslim names on any of the flight manifestos? Get my drift? The Tunisia riots are for the most part excluded from American media, even with the flow of video onto youtube. Should the lack of US media coverage mean it isn't really happening? The point is you deliberately ignored the information, which can be checked and/or proven to ask why the media covers what it covers, which is totally irrelevant(In this context at least). You would have to ask them that, but the proof is still there.
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 07:45 am Oh and Ace since real information doesn't tickle you, you could always click the "Hitler Reacts to Boxxy being Hacked" video in the sidebar. It is pretty funny, entertaining, and fiction. Maybe that is more up your alley. I try to put something on my blog for everyone to enjoy. Enjoy 
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 03:41 pm Scarlet, you're right about consequences. but our culture has taken the attitude that somehow freedom is not linked to others. if a skier decides to go on the black courses and doesn't know how to ski he should leave his money for rehab at the bottom of the hill so we don't have to bear the cost of another persons stupidity. it's the height of narcissim to believe that as free agents we have no obligations to others. it's like saying, "i am the center of the universe and i can do anything i want, but if i screw up, you've got to save me". same goes for not staying in school and being a productive member of society. or having a baby at fourteen (both boy and girl), etc. as you know, i generally come down on the side of compassion and interconnectedness, but some of this so-called libertarianism needs a bit of reality. you do the crime--you do the time. i also don't think that your two choices are the only choices.
| |
| Wednesday, January 26, 2011 - 04:25 pm True freedom Until he was a young man the Buddha lived a sheltered life. His father took great pains to ensure that he did not see the pain and misery of the world outside his cocoon But one day he broke out of that world and saw a side of life that he had never seen before. It caused him great sadness and wonderment. Why is the world as it is? That’s a question that most humans may never ask to the extent that the Buddha did, but it is always there. It was only after years of reflection and meditation that he came to realize that none of us is the center of the universe—that we are all interconnected and that true enlightenment only comes when we can let go of ego and merge into this interconnectedness. In a sense Jesus said the same thing—that our problem as humans is that we want to not only be like God, but to be God with unlimited power and freedom. But he too helped us understand that we must let go of ego to be whole and connected to God, to others and self. It’s a hard concept to grasp and for the Buddha it took nearly a lifetime to grasp. They both said that giving away self enables us to let go of self which gives us true freedom. Giving up self also demands responsibility to life and to others. But we are no longer alone as we are if we only see ourselves as the center of the universe without obligations, responsibilities and relationships. I realize this is an oversimplification of a very complex concept, but in my own imperfection, they have liberated me to be something that I would not have been otherwise.
| |
| Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - 12:13 am what's all this talk about Bush being a eugenics practicing Nazi...he wont even fund stem cell research because it would be playing God or some bullshit I don't see a problem with government run healthcare take out the insurance company (the middleman) and it could be Much more cost efficient the real issue though is people being so unhealthy my one major injury or disease that required medical attention was a broken collar bone which cost probably 20 dollars of salarys and a 2 dollar sling plus equipment for x rays which everyone uses collectively multiple times if people were healthier then healthcare wouldn't be such a problem sports or an exercise class should be required as an avert school activity for our kids instead of schools just feeding people less and having then go home all hungry and eat a box of twinkies
| |
| Saturday, September 22, 2012 - 04:47 pm lol its all a race to see whos currency going to fail 1st the Usa has almost no hope we will have to do bankruptcy soon or later we have 57T in debt http://www.usdebtclock.org/ and the Eu even tho they dont has as much debt they are doing almost as bad as us there debt may be small but have lots for there size
| |
| Saturday, September 22, 2012 - 07:45 pm Please, Jesus, give me strength...
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 01:01 am Alexandrov, So what you are saying is you want your health care run by the people that run the Bankrupt Post Office?
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 02:56 am lol good point....its worked in many other countrys why not here are we not good enpugh?? i think not asgard your post is uninformed we have 15 trillion debt and the EU is "bigger" then the US economically and yes does have less debt
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 03:10 am "Power Grows out of the barrel of a gun."(Al Capone i believe) Blood is its water,sulfur its food, ashes its fruit, corruption its seed, and chaos its fields. The US government is over the 200 year mark that is the average lifespan of a republic. It's flaws though few compared to many others, have had a full life to cause a rot from the inside. You want something to change? Blockade the Whitehouse, Capitol, and the Court, fill the streets of washington and kick every bastard good and bad out of there, shut the stupid media up Liberal and conservative BC neither are true or really care. and start over. and if they refuse Burn the place down and let the swamp take it back. Bc the damn swamp its built on top of is the only thing that's worth anything. But it wont happen. Why? BC they have the population spoiled, and pacified. Democrat Republican neither of them fricken care thats just a show. Politics is a game and Party is just the symbol they put on their campaigns and base the speeches around. The only President worth having is the one that the Media, and the "Congress" collectively and unanimously hate, and same goes for Congressmen. Politicians are Vain and Statesmen are powerless. But the one way it can change wont happen. Because they have us all arguing over #($* that Doesn't matter, doesn't really change the course of the country, and keeping us divided with pointless debates that they dont care about. those guys that when congress is in and you see them almost cussing each other out? yeah they play golf on weekends. but we're too distracted by arguments. and when we're not arguing we got our mind on games in our modern Colosseums Just as the Romans did.
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 04:21 am W00t W00t!!
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 05:37 am Laguna: Amen! Luke: It was Mao Tse-Tung who used that phrase, and he backed it up by murdering more of his own people than Hitler ever thot of. Exact figures are impossible to verify, but conservative estimates are between 50 million and 75 million dead. I find myself unable to respond to this post without causing offense (probably). Suffice to say that I agree with some of what is here re: smaller gov't, less meddling in personal freedom, and yet personal responsibility as well. Some of you, the younger ones, i think, are clueless (sorry, but it's true). With the passing of the WW2 generation, followed closely by the Korean war vets, are we really going to have to re-learn the lessons of totalitarianism all over again?? One last thing before I start ranting: almost all large corporations were invoved in selling to Nazi Germany during the war, to some extent, at least until 1942-1943 on. The U.S was officially neutral until the end of 1941, by which time the war had been going on for over 2 years. If you check, you will see that the Kennedys were involved in this international trade, as well. To single out the Bush family for spotlighting is disingenuous at best. Hell, even during WW1 the Brits were trading oil for German sniper scopes thru Switzerland, until the kaiser put the kibosh on it because he was losing too many officers. (Crafty, can you verify this?) Allied corporations in WW2 did business with I.G. Farben corporation, a German company that made EXTENSIVE use of slave laborers from the concentration camps. I could go on, but i said I wouldn't rant...
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 08:28 am The example of Portugal being one of the nations in serious trouble was correct. You could have mentioned Spain, though, because they are standing in front of Portugal in the q of nations going bankrupt.
| |
| Sunday, September 23, 2012 - 11:34 pm I didnt even say anything about WW2? i am just simply saying that america is too spoiled with freedoms and privileges and are not willing to give any of them up. something that would be required to take a hit for anyhing to really change and Al Capone said it too
| |
| Monday, September 24, 2012 - 12:13 am Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Greece (the worst) are the "struggling" countries of Europe and the rich countries, Germany, France, UK, etc. Keep bailing them out. If you balance this out into one nation, (EU), what do you have? And yes, Health Care is free in Germany and it works great, I also agree with the selfish capitalist system, (that's how it works), do whatever you can for your business and for YOUR individual prosperity.
| |
| Monday, September 24, 2012 - 03:31 pm Are Americans feeling the pinch? Do you experience austerity in the current climate? In what way? services declining? welfare? I would like some comparison with Europe.
| |
| Monday, September 24, 2012 - 05:37 pm There is no comparison between USA and UK. If I was a man down on his luck, so to speak, I had rather live in the good ol' USA than UK. We might be sufferin' a bit now, but nothing like those feelin' it over there. Here we have so many more services and charities to help people.
| |
| Monday, September 24, 2012 - 05:50 pm @Luke: The WW2 digression was in response to another post that was singling out the Bush dynasty for doing business with Nazi Germany during the war. I should have marked that better. And you may be right, about Al Capone; it does sound like something he would say. Maybe he and Mao got together over tea...
| |
| Monday, September 24, 2012 - 10:27 pm I can agree with Lorelei, when I was living in the USA, it didn't and it doesn't look like its in a bad financial state, its great. Compare it with going to Spain, where you have people getting close to you at Café's and asking you for some money so they can buy food. Or, another fine example is China, yeah it may seem as if its booming and taking over the world economy or whatever, but if you go and get to know that country, most of the people are living in a bad financial state. Most people are poor, a huge gap between the high and low class... Its a beautiful country but the oppression on the people is huge (no facebook... etc...)
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 12:09 am "maybe he and mao got togethor over tea" LAMO and china is going to pop its economy is to dependent on exports....hopefully and ive heard britain was more like the US then europe but ive also heard its alot like germany so idk
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 12:52 am I dont think there is a reduction in services or welfare. In fact there are more people on welfare now than in the history of the USA. Thats why many have given the name of Welfare President to Obama. Some people claim that less government is what is needed. Some say there needs to be more government involvement. The truth is that there is a fine balance that needs to be met. There needs to be some gov involvement, but not to much. The problem is that with each politicians own agenda the common good of everyone isnt met. Politicians simply do not have the ability to govern others. Dosent matter how good their intentions are, they just simply cant do it! Just as if I had the brilliant idea that I could leap off a cliff and begin to fly. Cant do it... dont have the ability. I work in the construction field and sometimes when there is a job to do we begin looking for the tools to complete the task. If I have to plumb the drains in a kitchen sink and all the tools I have are a sledge hammer and a pitchfork I'd correctly say "Cant do it with these tools". In the same manner, if asked to govern others the response has proven to be the same.... "Cant do it with these tools"!
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 01:26 am Atleast no ones EU, UK, US or whereever is as bad off as (Southern and Central) Somalia, or Zimbabwe and alot of those other African "States" and i use that word very lightly especially in Somalia's case.
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 04:53 am more people on welfare today then ever before,,,alot of that could have to do with the US having the highest population then ever before but idk welfare is a sticky subject its not very american to just give people who arent working money but its not very american to let your neighbor and his kids starve lol americans we are just so good arent we anything thats good well thats american lol basically i think the welfare system needs to be more efficient less corrupt and more focused on giving people work rather then money i mean there is alot of trash next to the highways idk if you can just use regular labor for roads anymore kind of a pain isnt it its not like the great depression where we can take a million people and put them to work on making roads your so optimistic luke
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 05:24 am I'm in a good move right now boss lol
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 07:06 am Step 1 determine the problem: Done (Too many people suckling the government teet) Step 2 gain ALL relevant information: Also Done Step 3 realize the best solution: Not Done, every idealogy in the world used except the obvious solution that would bring the greatest golden age in the history of the planet. This obvious solution would never be accepted of course because of the twisted mentality of people and an unbridled commitment to capitalism and economics. This solution should be especially available to this community because you all use this except for jan there with her refusal to play the game. So... all the government needs to do is supply sufficient opportunity to the people. When that is done all kinds of government assistance can be withdrawn. And so as long as opportunities are not available assistance needs to be granted. Even with government assistance handicap people may still not be supplied with opportunity and so they still qualify fpr assistance. Well what is opportunity then? Jobs? Pretty much, if you have unemployment in your country what does the government of your country do (you)? You either try to get a CEO to set up a corp or you build a profitable corp yourself. Now there should be no reason the government can't profit from ownership in for profit unethical industries, such as shoes for example. Building corps in locations were unemployment is at an all time high and such. Notice I said nothing about rationing anything, in fact the opposite force people to work in order to eat. It was an incredibly stupid idea to allow individuals the power over the neccessities of others to begin with. Collosal Government=Forever Existing Golden Age, well if done correctly anyways. See simple. And I'd love a rebuttle as long as it isn't derragotory, any constructive criticism would be great because if I'm wrong I'd love to stop following my false credo here. But I've yet to hear ANY compelling argument against this.
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 07:59 am I'm Firmly Socialist.... I believe that all truth lies somewhere in the middle of two extremes. I see what you're saying there Drew. But your "obvious Solution" presents an "Obvious Problem" (Other than the one you mentioned in the post) Too often ideas sound golden on paper and end up being catastrophic failures. Capitalism has the Apex and trough cycle (Of which we are currently in a trough) Communism has stability and equality on paper and in idea. and has worked wonders on small scale.(Commune or Tribe) but on Larger scale such as a nation (Russia or China) it fails miserably bc the lack of freedom of Ambition. The reason I'm saying all this is most of your solution is Golden in concept.... but its completely implausible and dangerous even. The idea has far too many "IF" variables that all are required to be positive. Yes if life were perfect and humans were interested in advancing themselves AND helping others in the process this would work. But people are not Selfless they never have been and never will be. someone will be the greedy bastard that takes advantage of the system for his own gain. Your system there would only function like any other. Perfectly only in a perfect world, and if the world were perfect enough for it to perfectly work the world would be perfect enough not to need it. Your plan seems to me to be more on the Strict side, and i detect a HINT of Inspiration from Roosevelt Style Economics... on short term this would be great to remove debt from the Private Side of the Economy and perhaps would not have as big of an impact of the Governments funding (Hence the money coming in from the companies instead of New Deal style organizations which basically just provided service to the government.) but still would increase the Governments Debt. I know what your first thought will be when you read this coming from me but... The idea of yours would work better on a state level rather than Federal. AND the reason i say this is because perhaps it would be slightly more acceptable to the masses to have a more local government take that roll. but then again I still have my doubts that it would work at all on anything larger or smaller than a provincial or state level. (IF that) and then only for a short time would it work before someone bent it over a raped it mercilessly . truth is Every ideology is perfect until it is tried bc if the human imagination can create it the human imagination can destroy it.
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 11:27 am In the UK the benefit system is under heavy attack. In most ways this is a good thing. It was so easy for youngsters to just have another baby and so get more child benefit, a larger paid for council house, tax credits etc etc. So many drop out of school and have no idea what a job is. Obviously not a sound policy to let this carry on. The trouble is, if there are no jobs for these people to fill, then what? Our govt. is constantly coming up with schemes to give the banks more cash to lend to small business and start up enterprises, but the banks keep the cash to cover possible hits, like from the payment protection scheme payback, billions of pounds worth. So non-joined up thinking reigns again. Again, public services are being financially stripped to the bone. Now a lot of liberal types are on their soap boxes crying about how these cuts (and benefit reform) effect the worst off the most. And there does seem to be some truth in it. But the real point is, if the department is run properly, then the cuts are coming from red tape and back office staff, civil servants, whereas the front line services are largely uneffected. Yep, this country is awash with useless beaurocrats, but they also require jobs worthy of their education and experience, managers maybe but constructive ones. Private industry is much harder to hide in than govt. So boiling down what info I can gleen from reading between the lines, it seems to me the treasury is still just feeding the banks, I can't see why it can't put stricter stipulations on what the banks do with the money, I know there is a LOT more to it than that, but I like to keep it simple, all the detail obscures the fact. Summary - trim the fat. (efficiency). Distance Govt. from banking and big business. Britain will be ok, we have the Dunkirk spirit remember. And economies seem cyclic from history. Dunno, maybe an economist can comment on that last bit?
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 06:22 pm 4 authentication errors in a row? GM, is there a problem here?
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 06:29 pm Maybe it's that "secret" code that Chiwoo was talking about. Only THEY (the roving eye) can understand it. ha ha ha ha
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 06:59 pm whats all this debate now. another war thread or something. lol.
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 08:05 pm Crafty's point seems to meet the opposite of his desired end. If you want greater bank regulations that is more government. But Luke this was the juicy one! I think you had a very well thought out response to my umm... I guess proposal. But I find it very innacurate. First of all I'd like to point out that I've continously called out for the dismantling of states, and local governments below that the most inefficient small picture governments need to have almost non-existant power at that. I could re-explain why but I don't want to send this off topic to far. I believe you misinterpretted my suggestion as it appears closely nit to communism. You then associated my systems flaws with those that exist in communism. But there are many fundamental differences that void this system of ethical work and personal progression, far moreso then any other government type. There would be ZERO redistribution wealth this was touched on when I said something like no rationing system. A doctor WILL indeed make more than a custodian. I never implied differently. This lack of motivation and ambition would be much stronger, as the income divide of the world actually rips apart the free-market system at its core in this regard. If a third party was given the ability to determine ther valuation of pay grades then we would have the ability to reward a far more diverse workforce, then just what those shwindler CEO's can get away with. Only rewarding financial services with high salaries is problematic. More problematic when it comes to encouragement then even fully blown communism in which I'll say again I am not suggesting. Furthermore I'd like to ask you about the IF's. What are they, IF government does supply enough jobs? IF the government can't run profitable corporations? I can't think of anymore, but those two are pretty important IF's. The first IF should never be an issue. Why can't the government have the ability to pick an industry put the competitors out of business enhance productivity with more accessible investment opportunities, whenever employment is low? In fact this IF would allow us even more prosperity as it would allow us the ability to make better jobs than simply just more jobs. Revising the system and bringing forth more incentive to take additional opportunities so people WAY more money. And that is the simple truth of it, as long as the opportunities are present and reasonable the worforce will mobilize, I say that implying as long as their general wellbeing or salary will be enhanced greatly enough people will seek out those opportunities. The second IF is also devastating if it doesn't happen, but this is also a farfetched IF also. To say a macromanaged set of instructions can't be created to ensure each corporation is successful is a little pessimistic. The government with essentially infinite resources (they at least pretend that they do) can't compete with some dude who pays his shareholders half the profits and pays himself an 8 figure salary is very farfetched. Paying executives 500k-750k is amazing there is no need to pay them 10m-20m. This complete inefficiency of the public run enterprise is plagued with these inefficiencies, that don't need to occur. The more inefficiencies you alleiviate the more productive the work force is. So if you have other IF's just let me know. You also mentioned cost. Cost is definitely unavoidable. So the costs need to be worth those expenses without a doubt. However I implore you to got to the Whitehouse.gov and look at our countries income statement in the form of a budget. The military costs we use are intense yet they make no money. The Social Security we pay out is high, yet I advise we phase that entirely accept pay back to those we owe. We have 16T$ of debt, but what would happen if we spent 1T on this project. That is huge, but how big is that is the business world? I'd say roughly 80Million jobs. We don't need that many though. 1T is more than double the net worth of the largest company. The largest company is in fact smaller than our defense budget. I don't say this merely to deligimitize our military but instead put things into prospective. The amount of good that can be done with a number that once seemed huge far exceeds any other way we can spend our money BECAUSE it has a return that outweighs its expense. This is of course on top of the civil service of employment it offers. So the only recoognizable fault with the system is that it competes with the private sector. It doesn't outlaw them, but requires them to be more adaptive which will service the stakeholders better, stakeholders referencing consumers. Increased competitions always leads to a better deal for consumers. So alas I fail to see these IF's? And dismantling entitlement programs because people will no longer need them will also be beneficial. The gov has to be strict, as it doesn't give people access to their civil liberties and as long as we believe in this blatent liberalism we will never be able to access which liberties are a neccisity for human development. Sorry I was vague but I didn't want to completely hijack the thread
| |
| Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 08:55 pm Want another simple answer to a problem???? Here it is... Make everyone responsible for their own actions! Then things may get a bit better!
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 12:40 am This is authetication error message Christmas here. We can even see the IP now.
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 12:40 am English banks are self-regulating. There is nothing to stop the treasury imposing conditions on loans. Top CEOs are paid that much because of the demand for them. Pay less, get lower calibre people. It's 'knit' not nit. Nits are those things in your hair that make your head itch.
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 03:40 am Drew, interesting idea, having government run businesses. As you say, you'd think that with such superior resources, and without the need to turn a profit, that they could be more productive. But the fact is that the private business virtually always is more productive than the govt one, producing the good or service that costs less yet is higher quality. It's a well established fact, and you're right to ask why. The free enterprise system seems to have ways of pushing and pulling people into making better decisions and working more efficiently than they do in government run enterprises.
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 10:16 am No condescension intended, but what government run enterprise? The one's that do exist most likely aren't run properly Crafty you are telling me that there isn't a misappropration of skilled labor? Only management gets to decide what people are worth, not any free market mentality. If you think the free market decides and people merely choose whatever job brings them the most money and then this would be true. But that isn't how people should think the free market then we be telling people to do not what makes them happy but do whatever piece of crap will pay you the most. In addition to this I believe that's why progress has slowed in many industries, research in robotics is at a stand still because of the decrease in engineering professionals led to higher wages however outsourcing has replaced technology. This is problematic to the world in many ways. And yes Serpent I agree, but you can't expect ignored people to have the skills or desire to take care of their own responsibilities. Enlightenment to some extent has to be reached first
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 06:22 pm BTW drew i'm still here i just have not had along enough moment to read your whole post. only enough time to check and see how many new ones have been posted i'll try to get on that tonight but just letting you know you haven't scared me off lol infact i enjoy debating with you Your Big Government and I'm Small(ish) Government. your actually one that i think actually knows what he's talking about, unlike so many others who just spout out Middle School grade knowledge on civics lol
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 06:47 pm Interesting debating.
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 07:50 pm =)
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 09:52 pm yes drew is fantastically convincing but im still skeptical want to know a problem with our economy education...our education is poor
| |
Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 11:00 pm
Ignored people? Please explain further. If you mean disadvantaged people then I agree to some extent. However instead of supporting those individuals and allowing them to drain the system and continue to be ignored or disadvantaged, give them the same opportunity that others have received. But when it comes to desire, that's each individuals own responsibility. We... you and I should not be responsible for others lack of desire!
| |
| Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - 11:58 pm Top directors are chosen by the board of directors Drew. They will need enticement to take the position because they know someone else will pay it. Maybe if the position is one they really yearn to do then that could sway a decision. Of course market forces are at play here. People of calibre are a commodity just like any other thing. You are young and foolish but you will grow to realise that generally one job is just like another, and the pay is the important factor. Of course there are idealists that want to do certain things in their lives, but one still has to pay the bills at the end of the day. Some people do obtain their ideal jobs and are very happy, I'm happy for them too. It's a shame it's only a few. Have a look around the city, study the faces of the mindless organisms as they go about their daily routine, on automatic, taking their valium to last the day and going home to drink themselves into a sleep hoping for the release of a pleasant dream. Sorry kiddo, but you have a lot to wake up to. Young, middle class America, ahhh... been there, seen that, came away disillusioned.
| |
| Thursday, September 27, 2012 - 01:35 am haha I love it crafty but damn am I depressed
| |
| Thursday, September 27, 2012 - 06:39 am Serpent that is exactly what I implied. No one should take advantage, but that's impossible unless proper opportunity is granted to them. So we are in agreement. =) @ Crafty- Why do you think people are mindless, or at least not as productive as others? It's not intended to be rhetorical but so I'll give my answer. The lack of stimulation, the lack of positive reinforcement is corrupting people. Because at the end of the day it is all economic tyranny. Skills are selectively awarded by people who don't understand value. It is kind of enfuriating countering you, not because its difficult, but because it is like you post right out of business psychology text on some posts and a basic economics book on another. Short term orientation, and profiteering or far too dangerous for our large scope problems. Open your mind a little and realize that just because things are the way they are doesn't mean its the right way to do things. The fact is being a manager at any level is far more simple then nearly any occupation. And as of earlier today this thought process of mine has allowed me to be a potentil doctoral candidate. So you keep implying that the young are not tested enough, yet the old force their broken system on us and complain when we try to fix it? It's as if you want the next generations quality of life to drain and drain and drain until we are a cesspool of retards clinging on to flaws concepts like reaganomics, and pretending we have supply and demand, when supply can be continously manipulated. @ Alex, skepticism is fantastic! You know nothing until you have challenged the idea with all of your brain power. Taking my word for something is horrible, taking Crafty's regurgeation is very destructive to your development. So never stop thinking and innovating its how I live and it fills me with purpose. If you are going to blindly take in any instruction take in 'don't blindly take in any instruction'
| |
| Thursday, September 27, 2012 - 12:09 pm *sighs*
| |
| Thursday, September 27, 2012 - 09:47 pm The sad fact is that many/most who are given the same opportunities choose not to accept them, but instead choose to be leeches of society. Many times its cultural but its beginning to take over everywhere. Rarely is an individual not given the opportunity to make something out of their life. Those that are in that category are generally handicapped in some way either mentally or physically. So what do you mean when you say, "proper opportunity is granted them?"
| |
| Friday, September 28, 2012 - 10:41 am well it is diffult to expect people to rise o of obscurity and make the contienentious choice to make a bettr life for themselves when the route for some is much more difficult then the route for others. So in reality it all comes down to classic conditioning, that is what built this level of dependency in the first place. If there were job availibility for everyone that would be a start. As if everyone collecring benefits and not working sought out employment right now there would not be the appropriate quanity. Bu what is probably the most important is that people have to be motivated by experience. People need to see the effects of their effort. Only when people can see and live the circumstance then working and not qualifying for benefits outweighs working and paying for benefits will the situation ever produce positive results. And trust me I do realize that the end justifies the means a little here, take away benefits and working means survival but that eliminates the possibility for people to have the time and energy to benefit themselves further. When every person has the ability to rise up and become president or a CEO or a world class worker of any various vocation despite any socia-economic situation then we have successfully arrived at the oppurtunities needed to shut down these programs. But we are far from that. The poor can go to school, do great, be forced to work part time to help their parents out, get into community college and work through that, just to get a job that will pay rent. The benefits of hard work for certain individuals do not amount to a lifestyle in excess to recieving these benefits. As long as people live for neccessity they can never live for self-enlightenment. This here is the problem. It is complex it is hard to put into words what I'm saying especially without the ability for visual interpretations but its real late so this is gonna have to suffice for now.
| |
| Friday, September 28, 2012 - 12:45 pm Put like that you actually make some sense there Drew and I can agree with the gist of what you're saying. This is what I meant by the grey people going through their daily drudgery. I think if you could be more concise in your writing and not let yourself ramble off on sidetracks then there might be a lot more understanding betwixt you and I.
| |
| Friday, September 28, 2012 - 11:31 pm I would agree that for some people it is more difficult for them to succeed than it is for others. Simply put, some people are more intelligent, physically stronger, better looking, more humorous, a little taller, or what ever admirable qualities you can think of. But that fact in NO WAY means that those who aren't have an excuse to allow society to care for them. People have been conditioned to have others take care of them. That's why its no longer correct to call it welfare, but now its called 'entitlements'! I mean C'mon.... entitlements, they are not entitled to that assistance, its a gift, you did nothing to earn it. Even unemployment benefits, yeah you contribute to a fund made available so that in case you lose your job you have a way to survive as you tirelessly search for another. Not so that you can lay at home and wait till something comes along that pays more that your unemployment. Then you say
Exactly, maybe the experience of having to do without cellphones, cable TV and cigarettes for a few months will motivate them to get a job! If you do a little research you'll see that there are between 3.5 - 4 million skilled jobs unfilled in the US. That's skilled jobs, ones that don't require a degree, but does require some training. That figure doesn't count the unskilled labor force. So the question is.... Why do so many jobs go unfilled when there are jobs to be had? Obviously there are some that do need this kind of assistance and for those they should take advantage of the programs, but this is simply not the case. The GREAT majority that use the system in reality do not need it.
| |
| Saturday, September 29, 2012 - 05:47 am i didn't read this whole thread but to serpents point about 47 percent of those who take welfare pay payroll taxes and a large majority of those who take welfare are, veterans, the disabled and those who work but are below the poverty line, that is 24000 for a family of 4. so your assertion that those who take welfare are lazy people who are just trying to get cash from the government doesn't stand. and those jobs your talking about do require a degree, the reason their not filled is because people don't have the right credentials to acquire these jobs.
| |
| Saturday, September 29, 2012 - 09:59 am the number 89th.
| |
| Saturday, September 29, 2012 - 10:55 pm Serpent I understand fully what you are saying. But Shallom pretty much said it for me. The real question is why work your ass of just to survive. If benefits are cut off and people have a choice to barely survive or to starve to death it becomes a difficult choice. It shouldn't be a difficult choice. If you work hard then you should be rewarded to a point in which it gives you the ability to enjoy your life. And you know the title of this thread is exactly what I'm trying to convey here. This bill is job-killing. But why exactly? This bill forces individuals to get health insureance (not job killing), and makes it harder for employment centers to get around not offering health benefits (job-killing). This means that it will raise costs for those companies that don't already offer health benefits. It just goes to show you how deperate those who work under the poverty are. This bill ,though i don't agree with it, allows it to be more exceptable for people to go back to work. Those who make 28k$ can not get healthcare from work rather than not work and medicaid won't matter. This job-killing aspect is nonsense, it only increases costs for those who underappreciate their work force. For EVERY other company it lowers costs as now health insurance has to spend at least 80% of your premium on Health Insurance if they don't it gets refunded. And if you assume that maybe an average of 50% of those premiums get spent of healthcare then a 30% refund cost to businesses that did the ethical thing it for sure isn't job killing it is asset enhancing for individuals and businesses. Just not for companies like Papa Johns in which employees are merely slaves that get paid a pittance as they all die from disease without Health Insurance. But don't misinterpret my stance I still don't like it for various reasons.
| |
| Sunday, September 30, 2012 - 09:59 am Really, I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that people and businesses will bother to comply with laws mandating healthcare. I could be wrong, but most businesses are small business... so it probably isn't a stretch to assume that a large chunk of jobs are provided by small businesses. I mean it's anecdotal, but whatever, I've never worked legally... maybe half the people my age I know that work, work illegally. Sure, a large corporation might have trouble hiding "illegal" employees... but a small business? Nah. If the government was doing it's job right, I wouldn't have ever had one. Is it any wonder that I figure it's good to ignore the law here? Why the hell should anyone care what the law says? Police? Prisons? Fines? My point, if anything, well, actually come to think of it, I don't really have a solid point... you know, why does everything need to be so damn hard? "The real question is why work your ass off just to survive?"
| |
| Sunday, September 30, 2012 - 06:21 pm Because that's the way life is! Who said it was supposed to be easy?
| |
| Monday, October 1, 2012 - 10:07 am Why is that the way life is? If life can be made easier shouldn't it be? The only point that is important on this topic really is: Things aren't fair things are balanced, if you can empower a large amount of the populace without harming the rest, than do it. More empowered people will help the economy and by extent those who don't currently reap those benefits.
| |
| Monday, October 1, 2012 - 04:15 pm Well i got my internet back... I got some reading to do looks like .... *Deep Breathe*
| |
| Tuesday, October 2, 2012 - 08:48 pm Empowering? a large amount of people (I take that to mean basically pay them more) reduces profit for the capitalist. Reducing profit causes less business to succeed. Result - higher unemployment. Hence the capitalist can pay less as there are more people after the jobs. As the capitalist pays less he reaches a stage where the workers dont have the money to buy the capitalists product, hence again many go out of business, more unemployment etc etc. So the obvious solution is to pay more, creating more wealth for people to buy his product...oh, but didn't we just realise that that causes loss of profit, loss of business,,,  Hmm, catch 22. Thats the main problem, marvelously simplified of course. Anyone have a viable alternative to capitalism? Nah, didn't think so, great economists have tried for centuries. This is why I am a protectionist in a political economic sense. Have to be careful though, else it's racism. The overful barrel of very cheap labor is what keeps capitalism going in the first world, and its great for India, China, Korea, S.American countries and the rest. Indeed capitalism is what allowed most of the greatest achievements of the modern world. But for a specific country, like mine, I want to start at home and fix our economy, not farm our labor needs out. So I believe in spending our way out of recession. Seems to me the only way to get business on its feet and creating jobs and wealth again, at least for another cycle of capitalisms boom and bust.
| |
| Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - 03:56 am a country would have to spend a morbid ammount of Money to combat a bust though :/ its a very hard subject on what to. do though I agree trickle down is bullshit idk maybe id our government stooped wasting money on stupid shit we could do it
| |
| Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - 06:46 am I agree with you crafty mostly. This is why my current sc problem really irks me, as I wanted a spending run system instead of this nonsensical presidents stealing money away from the corporation nonsense that this game seems to advocate. The fundamental conflict with your simplification of the system is the lack of control the capitalist system has to ensure the under compensation issue doesn't happen. That is why I have a problem with it. Corporations don't need that level of social responsibility and so I don't trust them with control. So really to rebut the rebuttal: empowering? As long as control is held by those without regard to social justice how is society supposed to operate in such a complex situation? That is all I'm trying to advocate, have an entity control wealth distribution that has every person in the society as a reputable stakeholder. Wages is a primary factor in what I refer to opportunities. Just imagine how sustainable corporations would become if they didn't have short term orientation or didn't have to pay dividends. Until then assistance to ensure some skilled people enter the work force is required
| |
| Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - 02:23 pm Co-operatives do seem to be making a comeback in this country, don't know about the US. Maybe this is the kind of thing Drew is talking about.
| |
| Thursday, October 4, 2012 - 12:44 am what are co operatives?
| |
| Thursday, October 4, 2012 - 06:31 pm Basically, all users of the service are the share holders. Any profit is used to improve prices and services. A truly publicly owned business. As Wikipedia describes it:
| |
| Thursday, October 4, 2012 - 09:24 pm That is a decent example of owners respecting those involved in the buisiness. It's not what I meant though, stakeholders Does not = shareholders. Stakeholders are anybody who stands to be affected by changes within the organization. So my emphasis is so broad that it will be simple to implement or rationalize. Organizations simply need owners that care about their effects on humanity or the society they live in. The stages of importance probably should move from 1.Local Importance->2.State Importance->3.National Importance->5.Global Importance. No actions ever be negative on any point, and more positive the lower the number. However it currently goes 1.Owners bank accounts->56.Keep the company running so that owners bank accounts continue to be filled. I'm not saying there isn't positive effects to ths level of capitalism but they are stunted and are inflicting a harsh income divide conflict, which is counteractive and harmful as it forces inflation and drops opportunity levels.
| |
| | Tuesday, December 4, 2012 - 11:23 am Authentication ErrorBy: (IP:58.20.97.172) You can only post messages if you are logged on as player of simcountry.You must also have a country in one of the worlds. New members can join the forum about 48 hours after registration.
|
