Comments for Bank Nationalisation - Back-door Socialism Strikes the US! »
Posted By gamahuche 1 year, 2 months ago in Business & FinanceThe credit crisis has brought quasi-nationalisation to the home of free-market capitalism.
Read Full Story at independent.co.uk »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 118
-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hard to know whether Karl Marx is spinning in his grave but the paradox of the socialisation of America is going to be very, very shocking for those on the right, who have either suffered from mass-hypnosis, or are in blind denial of the long-term significance of what has been happening.
Reply
Back-door socialism, a creeping coup? How else can they describe it?
Common sense is being thrust upon them - but above all, these social changes are going to be far wider and longer reaching than which party has the misfortune to win this election and carry the can..-
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The U.S. has always had an endlessly evolving mix of policies based on perceived needs as they arise. Those in positions of power do try to allow markets to operate naturally as much as seems feasible. This type of intervention has occurred before, though, and this time it was done before the market self-corrected instead of following a complete crash.
Reply
An estimated 25% of people in cities were homeless in the Great Depression, and there is a sense that the government should seek to prevent that for a variety of reasons. We saw a lot of temporary socialist programs following the Great Depression, too. -
-
-
100%
amervtrn1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Government intervention may lengthen the cycle but it can not stop the boom to bust. I originally posted this before ( about three weeks ago )the Scam Bailout, since then things have accelerated, but that only lengthens the recovery time. In about a year and a half, when the real estate market is at 50 percent, and DOW has stabilized at between 7800-8000, NASDAQ 900-950, S 700-750, it will be the bottom. Then it will be safe to go back. Until then it is a Day trader's market. Gambler's paradise. The bailout is just a waste of resources. In fact it will compound the problem. Much like the physicians of old who would bleed the patient, to give the appearance of action. The Scam Bailout is an action to give the appearance of care and concern, but will in truth deplete needed resources for healing and extend the time required for recovery. We are looking at a very rough 3 to 6 years, according to who is president and how much more Socialistic debt is added.
Reply
-
-
0%
amervtrn1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The USA's enemies are drooling at the thought of Obama. They love the naive inexperience weak amateur. Where there have been young leaders in the past, they had over a decade of (real)experience, yet we paid a price for it.
Reply
This artificial market making is a continuation of the building a house of cards. Where as the original problem was a house of cards built on worthless derivative contracts( reminiscent of the South Seas Bubble) now we are furthering this fraud by printing money( at a rate even Germany 1920-23 would not believe )with no backing. The Great Scam Bailout will come back to bite us in the "Keaster" first in the tax of slavery for generations to come, loss of resources to recover when the Scam fails, rape of the Constitution, and as has already happened the rape of the USA Citizen's rights of representation. Socialism/Communism is not acceptable to the USA. Nikita Khrushchev's speech before the U.N.,"America will fall without a shot being fired. It will fall from within." It seems his words have come through with ringing clarity.
-
-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey Bud, how is it going.
Reply
You said "Common sense is being thrust upon them" whereas I see them as anything but common sense.
Yesterday we, as Canadians went to the polls and elected our new Gov, same as the old as it turned out but no one in USA has made a comment, expressed any interest at all nor, if they even knew about it would they. If it does not happen inside their borders then it is a non issue.
Trouble is as we, Canadians supply 24% of their imported oil, this new Gov may have some new regulations that will be a big pain for USA.
Seems Harper wants to limit exports of oil to countries whose emissions are of a lower standard than ours, so USA needs to upgrade theirs , and of course this will mean more Gov intervention, which means a small step farther down the socialistic view of Gov involement.
Maybe they will invade us, Good luck on that.
As always your submits cause some to think and agree with.
Thank you.-
100%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I read about it. The Conservatives picked up more seats but not enough to form a government. The Liberal Party were the big losers, but their leader has made no move to resign. It remains to be seen what sort of coalition government will be formed and how they'll govern. But hey, I care. Not all Americans are clueless and uncurious about what happens outside our borders.
Reply-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Did not mean to imply all, as I have found a few on here that are like you, they have interests outside the borders.
Reply
Dion will resign, he has no choice, and a coalition will be formed, most likely with the bloc and NDP for about 2-3 years, then back at it again.
Hopefully by then we may have some decent leaders, as it is not that way now.-
100%
humemacdonald1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was ready to cry into my cheerios this morning, but at least he didn't get a majority government. There was a comment made on CBC late last night that I thought was right on target about the liberal party. Getting rid of Dion will not fix the liberal's problems- Dion, himself is symptom of the fractures within the party not a cause of their problems. Until the party has 'new blood', a leader with wider appeal especially in the Western regions, and a unified vision f where they want to go, we are going to be stuck in this situation for awhile. I wonder if the young Trudeau will be seen as a possible uniter, or will the name still be a problem out West.
Reply
Of course a minority government can be beneficial, but I foresee problems ahead when you have a bully at the helm. On the drive to work this morning a PEI MP (liberal) commented that he wasn't surprised that the federal leader (Harper) "attacked him" during the campaign; as he put it, Harper doesn't like people standing up to him. Interpersonal skills are definitely not his forte'.-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey there great to see you about again, hope all is well
Reply
What you say about the west and Libs is true, but there is some history on how the east has put the west down.
I still have a logo pin( those that are slightly larger than a twoonie) that has a pic of western Canada (Man. west) and the words,"Rep of Western Canada" compliments of the feelings in the 70's.
And when I say east it is mostly Ont..
Many out here want an elected Senate, like USA's, not the old boys club of a joke that we have now.
It would give PEI the same clout as Ont in the senate.
Ont and Que elect our Gov the other 8 Prov just go with the flow.
And yes harpo is just a baby shrub.
But as bad as the libs are in my eyes; my hat goes off to them for keeping us out of Iraq; would have got my vote for that if an election was held then.
And Layton almost got my vote for wanting to pull our troops out of Afgan next year.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hi HB. Good to see you too! Your latest elections were somewhat redundant by the sound of it. I remember when the last ones happened that the result was somewhat messy and stalemated. I had a few seconds of fame when the BBC broadcast a live comment of mine regarding the very uneven coverage they were giving to the last election with Tweedledum and Tweedledee Canadian commentators on their "World Have Your Say" programme.
Reply
At least Palin hasn't declared a desire to join her turf to the "mainland" by annexing your Western regions. Yet.. -
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They covered it on C-SPAN.
Reply
Besides, to be honest I was pretty sure what would happen considering the general party situation. I'm pretty sure what will happen in the US as well in the Presidential elections so I ceased paying much attention to that (well, actually, its fun to consider the size of the Obama landslide), though still watching the Senate fairly closely.
I don't think you should take much offense at Americans not paying attention to the elections. Americans, generally, ignore other people's elections. Its one of those few things they aren't hypocritical about when they essentially ignore international attention to their own elections. In fact alot of Americans ignore there own elections.-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As I understand it, the conservatives joined together into one uber party not so long ago, correct? More leftists exist in Canada then conservatives, but the conservatives managed to make themselves the biggest party? That sounds alot like what happened in the United States. Traditionally, the United States has a leftward tilt ever since Theodore Roosevelt. Alot of people don't realize Hoover and FDR had very similar policies and one of the principal complaints in the election was that Hoover and FDR were so similar. Unfortunately, in the 80s or so, the social conservatives stopped being apolitical and we have the modern day Republican Party.
Reply
The simplest solution to the problem would be for two of the remaining parties to join together, but then you enter dangerous territory when it comes to party number. You could end up in the same party situation as the United States, eventually. Two uber parties that are really five or six parties all together.
-
-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
-
100%
Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
-
-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One should always take great care when sticking ones nose into the business of others.
Reply
It's two easy to pick the wrong side for lack of information or you might just tick them both off and have them hand you your ass.
The Founders disapproved must strongly of Military Adventurism and rightly so.
There are some fights that simply must be fought, there are many more it is better to let be.-
-
-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As I see it,me making comments on your elections or you on mine is not meddling in either affairs but stating opinions, some which may be valuable as they are seen through neutral eyes.
Reply
Besides, there are very few countries that are very similar in all respects as our 2 are.-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Besides, there are very few countries that are very similar in all respects as our 2 are."
Reply
Now that is a Flat Fact my Canadian Brother! :)
A man who can't take some constructive criticism or well meant advice is a man with a closed mind.
I submit that such a man would be very foolish. -
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nah, I don't see it as meddling. I was commenting mainly on why Americans rarely observe other elections; they do see it as crossing a line of sort, or many do. Living where I do there is still disgust with American involvement in World War I. In many areas of the country, it is very strong. This leads to the lack of interest in foreign affairs in general.
Reply
Frankly, I'm a globalist as opposed to an isolationist. But you'll find more isolationist Americans then globalists in anyone over 35 or so. Almost uniformly, in most developed nations I expect, people that grew up in the era of the internet will have a more globalist perspective.-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do not believe that Nationalism is necessarily a bad thing.
Reply
I believe the Constitution to be the greatest instrument ever devised by which men may live Free.
Perhaps I am captivated by the ideals of the "Great White Fleet". Once upon a time we were truly great.
Defenders...Teachers...Helpers...to All the World.
Fair, Just and Honorable.
Whatever happened to that?
I believe in my heart most Americans still believe in those ideals.
How we got to the point we are in today is a long and painful one and I have seen much of it pass by here on Propeller/Netscape.
Here in America the few have taken power over the many and act with impunity because the many will not act. There are people here that support putting our grandchildren in debt so they can blow some cash they don't have.
Where do Americans draw the line?
If we fall at the hand of our own complacence we have well and truly deserved it.-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I do not believe that Nationalism is necessarily a bad thing."
Reply
With this I agree, I have no problems with USA, but I am Canadian and want to stay Canadian; that is why this never heard of SPP issue scares me, we will be assimilated.
Remember we have a population less than that of Calf. but we have all the goodies.
Oil galore, 40% of the worlds fresh water, forests, minerals, but we lack people; and many immigrants are not prepared or even want to try our winters.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As a matter-of-fact, the Canadian election was featured all over U.S. news, and I personally made comments about it on another discussion, addressed to chuck-the-canuck.
Reply
Is it my imagination, or have Canadians stepped up their U.S.-bashing lately?-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Is it my imagination, or have Canadians stepped up their U.S.-bashing lately?
Reply
Not that I have seen or heard; it has always been there and always will be as many Canadians still do not like to belittled by USA just because we have 10% of your population.
Many times in this presidential debate, I have heard most candidates state "we are the best" or "we work the hardest";..... we see that as you believing you are superior to others, while most up here think "we are not the best, but there are none better" we are yours or Aussies, Brits, Russians, whoever s equals.
As a kid most movies coming out of Hollywood had"The Duke" and a few of his buddies winning WW!!, Audie Murphy we could accept, but the message of the rest, well it didn't sit right, but Americans believed it, as many still do.
Just recently the movie U-571 had to add a disclaimer to it as what the movie showed was something the Royal Navy had done 2 years earlier, and the implications of that movie portrayed angered England.
We all have faults, we all make mistakes, but we are all equal. -
-
-
0%
amervtrn1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry, I had posted this earlier in different forum. The USA should take a closer look at what is going on in the governments we call partners. Many of them are suffering with a more severe Socialist/Communist attack. Under the badge of Green or Gruener, many of them leftovers from the Communist/Marxist and radicals of the passed, especially in Europe.
Reply-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You have to stop with this commie threat all the time.
Reply
To me many of the people believe the BS that is fed them all the time about preceived enemies.
McCarthy died in the 50's but the BS is still with you.
If Russia is a threat, then so is USA.-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Off topic, but you should watch this:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn-R2HcxkeA
hilarious.
Anyway, on-topic, I really don't know where these "beware the commie threat" people come from. Wish I could do something about them, but I can't. I suppose its a hold-over from the Cold War.-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're definitely too young to remember personally the "reds under the bed" mentality which was prevalent both in the US and in W.Europe during the Cold War,
Reply
It didn't really disappear till the late 50's. It would be agreeable to believe that education helped to eradicate it but, alas, like much foolish mass-hysteria there was little correlation with intelligence.
Actually with the internet now its even easier to create bizarre alternative realities - of which there is ample daily evidence right here on dear old propeller.It only takes a cabal of 3 or 4 to instigate a hysterical misguided diversion.. On purpose, through ignorance or misguidedly...-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Its all part of my goal of spreading chaos so I can enact the NWO with my neo-conservative brethren!
Reply
Or not. I actually came across a website asserting McCain is the anti-Christ, though. Also one that said Bill Gates is a satanist.
Obama is very tech-savvy. If you Google something like "Obama anti-Christ" the first link is supposed to be an Obama campaign advertisement that explains how the claims are untrue. The same goes for most of the smears now, apparently.
-
-
-
-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LOL Great video
Reply
I watched last night and I laughed at McC's facial expressions on that one, good find.
And back on topic, USA has always had an enemy since 1941, when the Axis was destroyed the Russians became it, but what happened when communism fell, nothing to fill the void.
The Balkans was a NATO thing, so it was not till shrub that a new enemy could be named, terrorists, even if you have to make them up.
But like USA has done in the past, they ignore China, it was Nixon that finally got USA to recognize 25% of the worlds population in 71-72, and then ignored again.
When communism died, in many minds so did Russia as a power, but look at them now.
USA uses 25% of the worlds oil, so yes, USA will do what it needs to to keep that supply coming in until they, if they can, are weaned off it. That is the political side.
Oil companies are the corporate side, and USA has always been about making money, many times that is more important than people, so how do you get weaned off those thoughts?-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.ls9.com/
Reply
An interesting development in bio-fuels.
On the money issue, the entire Western world is about making money and gaining power. It has been for centuries. Every other Western country, given the opportunity, will do the exact same things the United States is doing. Britain did it. Spain did it. Germany did it. Even Sweden invaded Russia at one point. It is just how the West is.
Oil is an issue that needs to be addressed and I, for one, have recognized this since I was 12. Its the proverbial elephant in the living room. The good news is that the technology is actually there to address this right now (including the link I supplied) and we haven't had Democratic control of government for a very long time; long enough that I think the Democratic Party will actually address this issue. Carter was starting too, at least.
Also, if you're worried about an invasion of Canada, it will be in a different manner. If anything, a form of North American Union is the most likely thing to come about. It won't be military because no way will the government be able to justify an invasion of Canada in the slightest. Canada is liked by over 90% of Americans, if Gallup is an indicator. That just wouldn't fly.
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well that's a good article - but perhaps this is an even better one here! Quote below is from the second article..
Reply
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/...
"Government owning a stake in any private US company is objectionable to most Americans, me included," Mr Paulson declared. "But the alternative of leaving businesses and consumers without access to financing is totally unacceptable."
The President himself chimed in, declaring the plan "an essential short-term measure" to ensure the viability of America's banking system, boost growth and preserve jobs. For Mr Bush the operative word is "short-term". The programme, he said, was intended to enable banks to buy the shares back, once markets had stabilised and capital could once more be raised from private investors. This may happen and the government may get its money back and more, just as occured once the Depression ended. But one final thought is in order.
This near-unprecedented intervention has been carried out by a Republican administration, in theory as conservative as they come. As matters stand, the next President seems likely to be a Democratic Senator, with one of the most liberal voting records in Congress. He will work with a strongly Democratic House, while his party could emerge from the election with a filibuster-proof 60-40 seat majority in the Senate. What further indignities might then be heaped on America's battered free market?-
100%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wonder if that is really what is going on or whether all this is an attempt to get the taxpayer to underwrite American attempts at "financial hegemony", which are condemned to fail (just as military hegemony will fail).
Reply
Soros sees end of US-led globalized market system
Billionaire investor George Soros predicted on Sunday that the financial crisis would mean the end of a U.S.-led market system that has dominated the global economy with debt and deregulation since the 1980s.
"Globalization, America as the center of the globalized financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world," Soros said in a CNN interview.
"This is now over. The game is out. It does mean a very serious adjustment for America," added Soros, a staunch backer of the Democratic Party.
As world leaders rushed to help banks weather the crisis that has sent stocks into steep decline, Soros blamed the turmoil on the faith in market forces that began under President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher a generation ago.
The notion that markets are self-correcting led to a massive expansion of debt financing that culminated in the sub-prime mortgages that epitomized the easy-money mentality at the root of the disaster, he said.
"This belief became the dominant creed. And this, then, led to the globalization of markets, the deregulation of markets and the increased use of leverage and all the financial engineering," Soros said.
"This whole enormous construct is built on false conceptions," he added. "You can go a very long way. But in the end, reality rears its ugly head and that's what happened now."
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/10/15/the-end-...-
100%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
-
100%
Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
-
0%
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
baloney.
Reply
soros is a vulture capitalist. he looks for economic weakspots and plays them. don't you remember that he nearly singlehandedly wrecked the Thai economy because of their unsophisticated governance? that collapse also sucked the south koreans and other south asian countries into the vortex.
he made lots of money and caused untold suffering.
no wonder. and look! he's a big democratic supporter?
does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?-
91%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How far do you have to see the economy collapse into smoking cinders before you realize that Reaganomics just doesn't work?
Reply
Hello!!!!!!! In case you haven't noticed the economy is falling down around our ears.
If people don't have money they can't spend money and that means no Economy.
Guess what! It isn't trickling down.
Business practices that are antithetical to the free market concept are being thrown willy-nilly into the breach to keep the fat cats fat.
When will you start looking at the men behind the curtain of what's happening in America today?-
13%
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you are listening to the democrats.
Reply
'trickle down economics' is plain old macroeconomics with a nifty political label.
the implosion/current credit crunch is an example of meatware failure thanks to CDO and CDS gaming by investment bankers.
there is no reason for CDO and CDS failure if they had any regulation at all. the investment bank gurus went too far beyond reasonable accounting assumptions.
it was unsustainable.
a portion, disproportionately impactful, of the system is broken. it doesn't mean that the underlying macroeconomics is broken.
listen to what the dems say. close your eyes and take a deep breath. open your eyes. ignore the democrats. they are full of baloney.-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The point is that though theory may sound real good the practice isn't working.
Reply
You can go on and on laying blame.
It isn't working!
The fix is NOT putting my grandchildren in debt so the board of AIG can party in the Caribbean.
"a portion, disproportionately impactful, of the system is broken. it doesn't mean that the underlying macroeconomics is broken."
If a bridge collapses when you are halfway across does it matter at which point it failed?
You admit to an inherent weakness in the design and then claim it's irrelevant because of it's unlikeliness.
Looks like the unlikely has come home to roost.-
Neutral
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
its not a weakness in the design.
Reply
there was no regulation for CDO's and CDS's because they were invented in the late 1990's after the CRA reauthorization in 1995 and the wizards of Wall Street figured out the new game.
the Gov't always trails new markets. and yet the republicans were yelling for congressional oversight for the last three years.
i'm not casting blame. what i'm saying is that the Gov't doesn't have to dynamite the whole system. the macroeconomics is solid.-
Neutral
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is going to have to be some trickle down for it to work.
Reply
There is no reason that this country should not be more affluent across the board.
Someone who works hard should earn good money in return.
Enough cash to exist at a decent standard of living.
That isn't happening...more and more wealth is going straight to the top and staying there.
The theory may actually work...there is no evidence of it because only half of it is being applied.
Greed maybe? I think that's the primary cause of the failure.
-
-
-
-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"trickle-down" works only if the people to whom you are giving tax breaks are actually those that might invest in job-generating enterpises, or at least provide the capital for some. These days, most small businesses are started by hungry immigrants, and the loans they are able to get do not come from the investments of the wealthy (that is a whole different tier of the economy). The wealthy are investing internationally...
Reply -
rimbaudComment removed: Spam
-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The big profits to be made are in the growth economies in Asia. American companies cannot affor to not invest, there. Even the engineering and technical skills are available, there, for cheap. US companies will build and sell products, there. Only the profits will come home to Bush's "ownership society" (those rich or smart enough to invest). It's a natural progression for a wealthy people: why work hard, studying math and engineering, when you can be the gentleman rulers of the earth just by investing your capital? (...wait, is it the Chinese, not the Americans, who are doing that?)
Reply -
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The reason the investment houses began packaging mortgages as investments is there was really no quick money to be mode in stocks (at least not since the year 2000). To lure leary investors, they backed the mortgage packages with credit default swaps. Unfortunately, not only were the investments no good, the investment houses never had the capital to back up the credit default swaps. We were the victims of bad accounting by the investment houses.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
beavith, you`re wrong or incredibly wrong on so many levels I would not know where to start.
Reply
Your naive posturing of blaming the Asian economic collapse on one man notwithstanding, Soros and Bush I just happen to be two different people.
When you say `baloney` to someone`s comment, you just might want to address something in their comment. Today`s one-point manner lesson.
-
-
-
-
-
-
89%
Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> What further indignities might then be heaped on America's battered free market?
Reply
Two things:
1) we never had a free market
2) the so-called free market is the one gaining the most from this record-setting entitlement program for the rich
What further indignities might be heaped on us taxpayers and consumers is the question that really needs to be asked?
They screwed us on the profit side as customers/home owners, and now that their house of cards has collapsed they are screwing us as taxpayers.
I for one am sick of govt earmarks like the Bridge to Nowhere, entitlement programs like so-called deregulation that just allow multinationals to screw us consumers, and handouts to the elite rich who never earned their wealth in the first place.
-
-
100%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We really need to go through a time of national soul searching to figure out what is best done by government and what is handled efficiently by private industry.
Reply
We already have a good deal of socialism and much of it makes perfect sense. The interstate highway system, the air traffic control system, the military, Medicare, CHIPS, the Federal Reserve, and the health care system Congress gives itself are all socialized systems.
I don;t think you'd find much support for disbanding our military and turning defense of the United States over to Blackwater and their likes. Not many would favor letting private contractors build our roads and bridges and finance them strictly through tolls.
When it comes to health care, in studies of infant mortality, death in childbirth, deaths from preventable disease, etc; the US is statistically at the bottom of the industrialized world. We are #37 in the quality of health care, just below Costa Rica. http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
The only thing we are number one for is cost per person. In that metric, each citizen pays nearly twice what the next highest nation pays. Single payer health care with private doctors and private hospitals would make terrific sense. But we're so cowed by the right's false fears we can't even talk about it. Maybe now is the time to change that.-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"When it comes to health care, in studies of infant mortality, death in childbirth, deaths from preventable disease, etc; the US is statistically at the bottom of the industrialized world. We are #37 in the quality of health care, just below Costa Rica."
Reply
That is a shocking statistic. Some other "advanced" countries are also having serious problems with their health services too. In Britain the NHS hospitals barely manage to scrape along with the help of low-paid employees from abroad, some from the former government, some from the newer members of the EU. In some of the former Communist countries the care can be dismal, especially in small towns. Our hospital would do its patients a favour by going out of business and a recent horror story crossed my radar regarding some friends who were not able to reach the nospital of their choice in time for a birth and suffered a gruesome irdeal as a result. In the end its NOT the system that counts, but the people - however the system does have an influence on which people are available.-
83%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Its "true" in a sense. But ET made a mistake. The 37th ranking was based on a WHO report that didn't measure quality so much as system. In terms of raw quality, excluding fairness, availability and costs the United States still maintains among the highest quality. The WHO report in question used 3 criteria to determine overall rankings, one in which the United States ranked something like 42nd, another in which they ranked something like 30ish and the last was responsiveness, which was ranked as number one. The WHO report measured the "system" as opposed to the care itself, in other words. Its interesting the United States manages where it does as they lack any kind of a system that was planned out at all.
Reply
Yeah, what ultimately matters is who's giving the service itself as you said. A single-payer system in the United States, including extra funding for PE programs at schools and preventative health-care in general would be a sight to behold. I'd be almost certain, considering rates for things like cancer survival and things like that in the United States, that a new WHO report would have them knocking France from the top. As it is costs and availability is what hurts the United States in the WHO report as opposed to anything else.
Interesting facts about a single-payer system in the United States include that in the early 1900s Theodore Roosevelt was a strong supporter of health-care for all and since 1943, a bill for a single-payer system has come before Congress every single year and not passed. Oh, and around the same time every other country on the planet was adopting single-payer systems the Republicans were beginning a bit of a "red scare" and convinced people that the plan Truman supported to create a single-payer health system was communism and thus, was shot down. The last interesting tidbit; something like 75% of Americans support a single-payer system and I'd be almost certain the rest support some kind of change to make it more available. That's just one reason the Republicans are getting thrown out in droves this year.-
-
-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If only more Americans would vote.
Reply
Election Day should be a National Holiday and it should be a crime to make someone work on it.
There are people who have a hard time making it to the polls for many reasons.
Americans need to get out and Vote.
It's the only way things will change.-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with you, completely.
Reply
I also think we should alter the electoral college to go by congressional district with the popular vote winner picking up an extra two electoral votes (like Maine and Nebraska). It would be better way of doing it, in general.
I expect this election to have record turnout, again. Perhaps as high as 70%, this time around. Obama is really getting people out to vote early.-
-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think we need as many as five parties. They are represented in each party now, but not as well as they should be. I don't mind the elections every two years, I think that with a variety of parties the animosity would be kept lower.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lurch,
Reply
Good point--and this hits the middle class hard--people who have what they believe to be "good" insurance.
And injuries that involve liability coverage are a real problem, as I learned myself when it took a company 4-1/2 years to pay me (they forced me to sue and then waited the maximum legal time to settle)--so I had to actually take a loan out on my home to pay for it. Imagine if I hadn't qualified?
A colleague told me he had called to get help when he was extremely depressed, and they told him it had been subcontracted and gave him another number to call. The other number never called back for 3 weeks, and he was too depressed to keep calling and just gave up. What if he'd been suicidal? That is really freaky.
I also don't see that anything the government runs has much of a track record, however, so it's a Catch 22.
-
-
75%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm sure you are quoting Republican disinformation that has been disguised as truth, but here is the link to the real basis of this statistic. http://www.photius.com/rankings/who_world_health_r...
Reply
It looked exclusively at actual health care outcomes vs. how much is spent per capita to achieve them.-
100%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not quoting disinformation, actually. I've researched the WHO report a bit before this, and not from Republican sources. Its more then just a number, its about how the number came into being. If you don't know that, then you don't know what the issue's are that need to be corrected. Straight from your link, which actually corroborates what I said:
Reply
The nations with the most responsive health systems are the United States, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Canada, Norway, Netherlands and Sweden.
That was one of three criteria actually used in the report. Another was fairness and I believe the last was cost/availability. Those two areas are what lowers the total ranking of the United States; thus, a US system should be based around increasing overall fairness and availability while maintaining responsiveness.
On cancer survival, which I mentioned:
Where you live plays a role in cancer survival, according to a new study that shows the U.S., Japan, and France recorded the highest survival rates
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-s...
I could go on, if you like, with statistics that show the issue isn't the quality of health-care, but the lack of availability/fairness, which I do believe needs to be addressed and I am in favor of a single-payer system. I was simply stating you were incorrect; you can't just take a number and start making assertions without viewing how that number was arrived at. Your statement was false. The United States isn't 37th in quality and evidence exists its still among the top in that regards. Its system is just utterly horrible, which the WHO report actually measures as opposed to quality. So its system, in how well it performs in cost, availability/fairness and responsiveness is 37th.
Numbers are tricky things. I've once argued that Canada had a higher rate of violence then the United States. It you actually look at the raw numbers, which you seem to be doing with that WHO report, you think this assertion is true. If you look at how the numbers were arrived at, you realize the numbers for Canada measures more things then the United States whereas the United States measures fewer things. This is sort of like that in you say the WHO report was on quality of health-care, when its on quality (or effectiveness) of the health-care system. Two different things.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
83%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's the flailing about since the bailout that shows they were wrong about the bailout.
Reply
I am telling you...the American People are being robbed blind in an unconstitutional banking maneuver.
Someone is stealing whatever credit We have left. -
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
beavith1,
Reply
Yes, inflation always makes the latest bailout seem over-the-top in expense compared to earlier ones..
And the bailout and flailing both creep me out. What concerns me most is that everyone takes a political approach to it and looks to see how they can gain political capital from it.
I'm not a fan of Obama or McCain, and I think both their platforms have some real shortcomings. And anyone who watches C-SPAN knows congress spends most of its time blowing hot air. But I don't think the U.S. is alone. It's just a big target, but I've watched governments of a number of countries in session, and it's never a pretty sight.
-
-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For those of you who don't get what the bailout really means let me explain just a single facet of it.
Reply
The Federal Government of the United States has just had the temerity to sign a very large banknote in your name in order to loan money to the very people who print it and some very, very rich bankers. This is a crime against the Constitution in more than one way.
We already have a dearth of imaginary liquidity...that's what got us here.
How is more imaginary liquidity is going to fix it?-
-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They want the general public to imagine that the banks are safe, businesses to be able to get loans to keep people working, and all of us to imagine we can really afford the credit payments on our national debt. Meanwhile, governments do not have the money to keep our infrastructure from crumbling from old age, nor to educate the next generation.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
Tango571 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The current economic crisis is no surprise to me. We've endured 8 years of the worst this country has ever given out. All of us can make a list a mile long of all of the wrongs. And what have we gained? A better understanding on corruption? greed? Has anything positive resulted in the last 8 years? Reports started over a year ago over the Superhighway in the US connecting Mexico and Canada. There is already a currency line up to take the place of the dollar, it's called the Amero. To achieve this end, certain economic conditions must be met. I'd say those conditions are well underway.
Reply-
0%
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amero
Reply
read up.-
-
-
Neutral
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
its never going to happen.
Reply
dropping Canada into the US wouldn't make a splash. for better or worse, we are too similar. trying to combine the US and Mexico is nearly impossible. our cultures are too different.
i'm not sure of a rationale for it....
am i for it or against it? i don't know. i can't believe it would ever rise to the level of a real possibility..
-
-
-
-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
George W Bush forged ahead and gave the Republcans all the things they had been grousing about all these years. Now, even they are balking! If their plans could not be discredited as ideas, they have now been discredited in practice. There is no real way to defend their voodoo, neo-liberal, slight-of-hand economic philosophies. Unfortunately, it does not appear Obama will stray too far to the other extreme: he is the conservative in this election.
Reply
-
-
88%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
At best, America tried "Free Enterprise" and learned the hard way that you can't "trust" corporate entities with out government oversight. Unfortunately we had to learn this the hard way....like today with the stock market crashing and burning.
Reply
It will be burning for months now while they try to fix it, and again, unfortunately, it will be with government over sight.
I wonder if the government is going to bail out those of us who have lost a good portion of retirement savings???? Hopefully a nice 100K stimulus check would be nice.-
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My family worked it out, and if they would just give everyone $640K, they could avoid the bailout altogether, and all those people who lost homes could buy new ones in the cheap housing market. Of course, that would mean letting a lot of organizations crumble and there would be no credit, and some of us would lose big time in both money and jobs. Damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Reply
Seriously, though, supply and demand is the law, and the more we let nature take its course, the better off we'll be--but with occasional intervention.
-
-
14%
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the problems on Wall Street have nothing to do with free trade.
Reply
FDR's trade war in 1932 drove the Hoover deep recession into a full Depression.
restriction of free trade is a dangerous choice. O talks about free trade with restrictions (labor, environment, etc) that amounts to no free trade at all. when you peeve your partner, you can count on a negative reaction.
a $100k stimulus check is stupid. its inflationary. your hamburgers wold cost $100. -
100%
canadianrancher571 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't know if we can call the bailouts of the banks really a socialist act, to me socialism is where the government takes over a segment of business for the benefit of the people of the country. Up here in Manitoba the government took over auto insurance because the public thought they were being ripped off and we gained lower rates from them, it was the insurance companies that suffered to me that was socialism, but when I look at the bailout deal I see the public providing the money for the banks and the government only getting a small share of the banks which to me means the banks gain and the public suffers by having to pay.
Reply-
100%
alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
rightfromwrong has it straight.
Reply
It's Fascism...it's stealing for the benefit of the bankers and corporations at the expense of the Citizen.
The bailout was never intended to help Americans ...it was just a way to steal enough money to keep rich people who had irresponsibly spent themselves into the poorhouse from having to pay the piper.
It was outright theft by a self appointed oligarchical elite who couldn't care less that people should go hungry and homeless as long as they are paying for the party at the Monarch Resort.
There are some who still defend it and and will try to tell you why you are wrong for not being happy over it.
Amazing isn't it?-
100%
canadianrancher571 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The thing that I find amazing is that people aren't up in arms about this, the average person has to balance their cheque book and when it comes to the bail out it is sort of like the fuel prices, we all know that there will be a bill to be paid and right now the average person really can't handle any additional taxes .
Reply
I was thinking the word Fascism when I read the artical but felt it was just a little to strong but after watching the news tonight and seeing the silly smirk that President Bush had when talking about the crisis it makes me angry knowing that it is not society that will benefit but people who were greedy and got caught.-
100%
Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What is happening in America is fascism or corporatism, but too many in America are so blinded by ignorant arrogance and hate that they would rather try to blame social welfare for a entitlement/deregulation problem than actually fix the problem so it does not happen the umpteenth time.
Reply
If only we could just get them to pay and not the rest of us who see this for what it really is. A fascist ponzi-scheme.
-
-
100%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Except that people work in all those organizations and rely on their services--or work in organizations that depend on those organizations' existence that also rely on their services. It's not ONLY a pack of malignant narcissists we're talking about. It would have a ripple effect on the entire economy, and not just hurt the fat cats.
Reply
I think that something should be done about all the golden parachutes and cashing out with insider information when the going gets rough. But a problem with the situation is that it was people exploiting loopholes that contributed heavily. Poor knowledge management across the board.-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can't say I'm proud of my generation (Paulson's and George Bush's generation). I think things came too easy for us baby boomers, and too manyof us chased the easy money of quick returns on our investments. I think some people interpreted "do your own thing, man" as license, rather than as tolerance for others.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for a marvellous conversation, one and all!!
Reply
Its grand in my physical remove from the direct seats of power and influence to have such a flow of energy and thinking pouring through, sweeping away logjams of unfinished and unprocessed thinking and creating fresh deep channels of movement of energy. I have to confess that my only real creative contribution to that was to edit the title of the story.. You all did the the rest! -
insuranceeseComment removed: Hard Banned
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.