Jump to content
DerelictStudios Forums

hawk10314

Volcano Soldier
  • Content count

    1,981
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by hawk10314


  1. Yes, one nation but 50 states. Each with the capabilities to govern the people more accurately on a local level than at a national level. Framework opens the door to more than is needed. Once you put your foot in the door your more likely to pry yourself into where you want to go and where government wants to go is always bigger, more clumsy and less productive. I rather see the federal government be a master of a few precisely defined duties and for those duties to be carried out well rather than a jack of all trades with mediocre results. Why do you need the federal government to do all this? That's whats so unique of America, From Many One. Each state has the ability to do everything that health care proponents want. It's so much easier at a state level. Also what right do you have over the other states to dictate how they should govern their denizens.

     

    I'd say my philosophy is strictly constitutionalists. A Jeffersonian would argue that 50 states would be better than one, in fact Jefferson never agreed with the constitution thinking it was TOO controlling over the states. And when we were founded we were 13 separate nations. However the Article of Confederation were too far to national anarchy, thus they just notched us over to the left ever so slightly with defined duties for the federal government to carry out. Your not going to get the whole nation to agree with a national health care plan and nor should they.

     

    Think about it, what is the one thing that your going to get the vast majority of Americans agreeing on most of the time? Security, Trade and Diplomacy. Exactly what the Federal government is supposed to do. Where people disagree they tend to collect in the states that best fits their ideals. Bible belt etc. And by them governing themselves the way they see fit will be better for the nation as a whole. Once you try to cover everyone with one blanket in a one size fits all kind of way your asking for trouble.

     

    Also what if it fails? What if it doesn't work what do you do. Once it is in you can't just fix it. It's just as complicated to undo as is to put in place perhaps even more. However if given to the states to provide, IF the people of the states wanted it to begin with, if it fails you simply move and it doesn't drag down and entire nation with it. The bigger you are the harder you fall the smaller it is the easier it is to pick up when it does fall.

     


  2. I am all for health care reform but this isn't the way to do it. The system of government in the US isn't designed to run health care, education, energy etc, it was designed for three things. Protection of rights, i.e. national defense, diplomacy, and regulation of trade between states and between nations. That's basically it, there are too many checks and balances in place for things to run smooth, there is too much bureaucracy for things to work at all. Things are under-estimated and over budget all the time. Just look at past government programs and there is your track record. I have no problem with Health care reform, however let me just go over some classical liberalism aka conservatism in a nutshell.

     

    I see a lot of talk in this topic about democracy in action, democracy this etc. The US is NOT a democracy, We are a Constitutional Republic. I have never voted on a piece of legislation in my entire life other than a few referendums at the state level. The US is 50 republican States, republican in this sense is the form of government not the party. Back in the old times when the word state was used it meant a country not a territory etc. That's exactly what the USA needs to be and it was intended to be. I have no problem with universal health care, I really don't. I just believe that this should be something taken up at the state and local level of government if it comes down to government health care or the option of government health care. Many hands make light work and the same holds true for this situation. Massachusetts, Hawaii, Oregon (I think) had either have a health care plan or had one at one time. It is just common sense to me that you have 50 states all with capabilities to more accurately cover the people in their regions. You deal with less people when it comes to change, It is easier to rally a state then an entire nation, create a plan, adjust the plan over time and remove the plan if it requires it. On a national level it's hard to get anyone to agree on anything, you basically have people in Massachusetts dictating what people in Texas should have and whats good for them and vice versa, same applies to any other state in relation to any other state. It just doesn't make sense to bloat down an already inflated government and bureaucracy with even more when they can hardly manage what they have. I think people need to start local and move to a state level at most when it comes to domestic programs like this. The federal government should provide defense, diplomacy and regulate trade among the states as stated in article 1 section 8 of the constitution. In the 10th amendment it states that anything NOT listed in this document is reserved to the states and to the people respectably. If crap hits the fan it's very hard for someone to leave a country but if your unhappy with the way things are going in your state it might be a bump in your life but its not impossible.

     

    People place a huge amount of faith in the federal government, if people put half as much as their energy of imposing reform on an entire nation as they did to get to know the state they live in and how it's run and put that energy into reforms at the state level you would see a lot more progress in my opinion. Not to mention that besides a national guard a state is privileged not to have to deal with diplomacy, and foreign policy.

     

    And for Brad, the reason why democrats get so fractured and unable to work when your dealing with far left policies like this is because they are not all democrats. Many are progressives which are far left and the other democrats are TRUE democrats who legislate from the center. I recommend reading a few books like American Progressivism, Liberal Fascism and the Federalist Papers James Madison and the creation of the American Republic etc. I learned tons from reading a few books than I did from any history course that I have taken. The first two go into detail of the progressive movement and their true ideology then and now. The later ones are a few of how America was intended to operate, function, and the reasoning behind multiple republics forming a large republic aka federalism etc.

     

    Korona, I think doing some research on the structure of American government, how its organized, the checks and balances incorporated and most importantly WHY they were incorporated into the government would do good to put your mind at ease in understanding this stuff. For instance, if they were to re-organize the bill as a budget bill (I believe not 100% sure) all they would need is 51 votes not 60. Some things need a simple majority such as budget bills, filibusters need 3/5, veto over-rides need 2/3, amendments need 3/4.


  3. What your seeing now is the arrogance that is displayed by majority parties. The same thing happens with Republicans just like it happens with the Democrats now. At the start of this health care debate the Democrats had their 60 super majority. So in essence, they declared the republicans irrelevant to the process, knowing that they could pass what they wanted when they wanted and how they wanted without a single member of the other party even showing up to congress.

     

    What happened in the Senate was this: A senator from Massachusetts, which is practically the throne of the Democratic party, who was the brother of JFK, Ted Kennedy. He held this seat for 40+ years and was a democrat. I mean, the seat was democrat even during Reagen, so for the democrats to think it would turn republican would be impossible. However, thinking that the special election would be a cake walk for them, they still thought they would hold the 60 votes needed to declare the republicans irrelevant. But when it all came down to it, a Republican did get elected and threw a gear into the machine. In a nutshell, their arrogance came to bite them in the ass.

     

    If you were to break down the bill into smaller ones it is more likely that Republicans agree with some things in the bill, combining it into one super bill that is overwhelmingly democrat proposed, ran, and finalized as a Republican you have no idea what is in it, how it's going to unfold and if you only agree with 4/10 things in the bill your one vote is going to be a one no when it could have been 4 yes and 6 no. If it was smaller they could pass the things the agree on and you would see more bipartisanship. However because Democrats thought they would have the 60 they tried to combine all their ideas and proposals into one giant bill for the sake of ease for them.

     

    Also Congress is always rated low as a whole, but ask any American how their reps and senators are doing and you will get "They are great." Then ask them what their names are and you won't get an answer. lol


  4. The whole idea of the US government is that there are many checks and balances. The filibuster is just another one of those check-points. The founders understood that government shouldn't change lightly or flow with what was popular at a time, and that the minority would be protected against the majority. They understood that you can't just have have a simple majority because that means that 51% would always trump the other 49% but yet they knew that you can't just have a unanimous consent on everything otherwise NOTHING would get done. The fillibuster is, in a nutshell, a tool used by the minority of a debate to protect itself from the majority. However, in times of actual crisis, such as 9-11 it is usualy unanimous consent for dealing with security and things of that nature.

     

    The reason why there is no coopoeration between the parties is simple. Being that they do have complete opostie philosophies, Republicans might agree with 4/10 things of the health care bill but because those things aren't seperated into seperate bills and the Democrats thought that they would hold the 60 seats to over-ride a fillibuster it bit them in the ass when the republicans got 41 votes. If they make seperate bills there are things that both parties would most likely agree on not the whole of the Republican party but some center memebers willing to vote on the issue to get it passed. In the end the arrogance of the democrats lead to their undoing.

     

    EDIT: One more thing, they can debate forever, it is not performed by one person. The party as a whole or whoever the 41 members are who want to fillibuster rotate. And senators don't have to be present for this. For instance, you can just have one guy talking to the clerk for an hour, another member comes and and all he has to do is say "I yeild the floor to the senator of NJ" at which point he picks up. As long as you don't yield to the opposing side it goes on. And unlike the house wich is much larger and speaking rules and times are agreed upon before debates the Senate doesn't need to abide by any set of debating rules, they have the abilitiy to debate and diliberate a bill until they get it right or it dies. Also, at any time you can request to over-ride it but it can only happen once per debate and you need the 60 to do it.


  5. If you are reading the news lately, Gordon Brown visited Washington and exchanged gifts, Britain gave us a pen carved from the anti-slave ship, HMS Gannet. And a first edition bio of Winston Churchill. In exchange, Obama matched it with 25 DVDs. (He can't even play them because they are in the wrong format) Oh and for the kids, they ran to the white house gift shop and gave them two Marine One Helicopter model toys. And to top it off, We gave you back the bust of Winston Churchill that was given to us shortly after 9-11 as a symbol of unity.

     

    For the Russians, we gave you a Staples Easy button with the words "Over Charged" written in Russian.

     

    Seriously, I am sorry. Britain, you should have been given a much more symbolic gift then DVDs and toy helicopters. It is embarrassing to say the least.

     

    As for you Russia, we should have at least spelled "Reset" correctly on your Staples easy button.


  6. That is the most insane idea I ever heard, do you know what happens when a government has no balance? When they can pass what ever laws they want with no opposition, I am not saying I love the republicans but Ill gladly take George Bush 3 over Karl Marx 2. Its not about the damn democrats or the republicans its about the people that they serve, WE the people don't deserve to be oppressed by a government with no limits. Don't you have any ability to better yourself and not have the government do it for you? Why do you guys think that the government should care for you other then your protection and build your roads. Its the local government and state governments that are the ones people need to pay attention to, not the federal government.


  7. This is scary shit.. If the democrats Republicans get their magic 60 in the senate and they have a majority in the house you can throw out the checks and balances, we will be at the will of the government. God help us...

    I believe that was the case in 2001-2006?

     

    No, the magic 60 means that if a party has a 60 senate majority it is immune from a filibuster from the minority party. during 2001 - 2007 the parties we basically balanced pretty evenly + or - 5 on each party. A similar time that I see coming is the arise of a new Jimmy carter era times ten. During that time the democrats had a 61 majority in the 95th congress.

     


  8. Cant get more clearer then this..

     

    For those Americans who are here, and I do not care what the views are from our European friends, please listen to this clip and understand if Obama gets elected he will destroy the very essence of of what America is. He describes the constitution as a Charter of NEGATIVE Liberties, talks about how it blabs about how it doesn't bind us to the state and WANTS THE SUPREME COURT (NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE!), to redistribute the wealth. My God, is this really the man we are going to elect? Someone who has no respect for the founding fathers and what their sacrifices were? The sacrifices of generations past, and by getting elected his first official lie to the American people will be when he takes the oath of office to uphold the constitution to the best of his ability, so help him god. He wants to reverse it! I swear if he had his way the first line would be "We The Government" Now you don't have to hear me talk about him being a communist and a socialist he says it clear as day right there for you.

     

    This is scary shit.. If the democrats get their magic 60 in the senate and they have a majority in the house you can throw out the checks and balances, we will be at the will of the government. God help us...

     


  9. Why I like Obama can be summed up very simply. He wants universal healthcare and he voted against the war.

    He is one of the sanest people in US politics. Is that saying much? Not really, but in a relative contest like an election the truth stands.

    I don't begrudge anyone the US economy right now though.

     

    :lol:

    I guess that, in the words of RA Einstein; "time Will tell".

     

    You sure he voted against the war? He wasn't even in the senate until 2005.


  10. I don't look in a dictionary to understand government. I look in a history book.

    Capitalist take advantage of opportunity to provide a service for others while being competitive with other services. By doing this your business is on the line if you don't keep an eye out on the other business. You compete to have low prices and thrive to out do them in terms of what you are providing. I don't understand how in ANY way this can be a bad thing as what you make it sound like. To say that capitalism is based on profit you are 100% right. But how is the profit made? You bring in a profit based off the success of your business. If you provide a shitty service to people at a costly price people wont buy from you anymore they will go somewhere else. You lose money you get less profit.

     

    There are people who are not greedy, look at bill gates, a good example on a massive scale but there are tons of smaller examples. He donated what? 3 billion? to charity? And to say that people should share and not care about money is just fooling yourself. Socialism looks good on paper but when it comes down to it its still about you and what you make of yourself.

     

    And if Europe's economy is looking to go into the drain why should we want to vote to become more like it?


  11. No one is debating they didn't have WMDs hawk. He gassed people. That's simple enough. Or that China is the one who got the oil deal, I was going to make a topic on that but decided not too.

     

    But speaking of that, talking with soldiers, they hate how its business as usual in America. Michael Yon phrases it succinctly:

     

    “We can win. But we can still lose. […] There are those who fought and those who didn’t. Our soldier’s often said, ‘The military is at war. America is at the mall.’ […] American combat troops don’t want pity. They’re ready to fight to the end; they just don’t want it to be for naught. They have been fighting for two nations, one of which didn’t seem to notice. The Iraqis noticed.”

     

    Considering I've heard this from friends and guys who've been there and back, I'd say its accurate. We're not in a wartime economy, a war mindset. The war is in the back minds of people. The capitalist, the consumerist mindset is precisely the problem here.

     

    I agree with you 100% I'm just saying that the war in Iraq has had little effect over the economy replying to a previous statement. I have a few friends in the military and my cousin is going into the navy hopefully to become a navy seal. He told me he know what he was signing up for and I trust his judgment. People need to understand that we went to war for the a people, a nation to be free from oppression. The Olympics meant nothing to Iraq during Saddam when he would tortured the athletes that didn't win. The fact that they can go around driving in custom cars with a smile on there face, knowing they wont get shot by their government. The fact that people risk their lives to go out and vote and actually have a choice instead of Saddam or Saddam. That's why we fight that's what the war is for. When our own war in America was over I doubt there was wide spread peace, I'm sure British loyalist did the same thing back then as loyalist are doing in Iraq. American ideals mean nothing to me if we are selfish to keep them to ourselves. That's your fishing pole in a desert.

     

    As to business as usual. I'm just putting some talking points out here. Bush isn't to blame for everything. I agree with his foreign policy but on a lot of issues I don't. I can't blame him for gas prices, he did his job of removing the executive ban on offshore drilling. Its up to the congress and they went on vacation. The party of Barak Obama is the same party of the latest congress who's done nothing and in the middle of a gas crises decided to go on vacation and bash bush while they sit with a 9% approval ratting. That's business as usual. I really don't like the republicans, either. I think they are not the same party of Ronald Reagen, The say lower taxes and less spending but they spend a fortune! that's business as usual. McCain doesn't even know what he is! He says hes for lower taxes but then votes against tax cuts. This is business as usual. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and barak Obama. They all say "I'm the first woman to do this, the first black man to do this, the first Italian speaker" WHO CARES you weren't elected based on these criteria and should have no barring on how well your doing your job, but they throw that in there. This is business as usual. If i could find a pile of dog shit that could do a good job making the right decisions I'd vote for it. To give more control to a government that has done nothing good for us except waste our money increase our taxes and talk about solving the oil crisis for 30 years with NO RESULTS its a path to failure. I wish I could say that Barak Obama and John McCain can solve our problems but when it comes down to the wire you are on your own. And for the best results its best to have as little government as possible intertwined with your life. Unfortunately this is not their fault, after all "We the people" elected them and this is what we got...

     


  12. By using the money we flush into Iraq?

     

    Actually because we are capitalist, we can afford to go liberate a country and still grow our economy. second quarter for 2008 our GDP rose 3.3%

    People still pay $8 for a hot dog at a baseball game go out to eat at a restaurant make batman a box office record and still we can wage a war on two fronts.

    If you think Iraq was about oil I'm not saying that you do but getting it out of the way anyway, they made an oil deal with the Chinese not the USA. and to ship oil from 2/3 around the world I think oil would be a little higher then $3.50

    And no WMDs? 500 tons of yellow cake shipped out of Iraq.


  13. You still don't get it do you?

     

    Republicanism is a state of mind. It's "I have what I have. I wont share it unless I explicitly benefit". It's a close link to the Capitalists who currently run your healthcare system. You have your two cows. You will spend them on healthcare if you need to. Your neighbor has no cows and suffers a coronary. Tough luck, nobody's got his interest at heart.

     

    On the other hand, you have two cows. The government takes one (note; one, not both. Taking both would make it communism). If either you or your neighbor has a coronary, there's nothing to worry about since all those cows the government taxed from everybody will pay for your treatment. That is Socialism.

     

    Republican is a party, that try(keyword)to stay with conservative views which favors capitalism. And maybe if people actually had a sense of health awareness they wouldn't need so much health care to begin with. Examples. I'm not going to care about your health if you

    smoke

    drink

    eat Mcdonalds

    aren't even a legal citizen who might get hurt working illegally in the country and need to go to a hospital to get treated for free

    do something restarted like pay your friend to hit you with a car. (its on youtube) and other similar acts.

    sit on your ass all day and collect welfare.

     

    With 300+ million people and America being the most obese nation in the world not to mention the millions of illegal citizens. There's plenty of people who don't even care for their own good health on a daily basis. Why should I care about you if you don't even care about yourself.

     

    People are more willing to help each other if they are in control of their money not the government. The people are better off when they run the country, not the government. A government should be there to give you roads and protection. Our government makes things worse and voting to have them have more control on things would be a disaster. You want your health being controlled by whoever happens to run the government?

     

    Like I said, the Library is open to everyone go there, read, learn a skill and apply yourself to life and you wont need things given to you. You can provide a service for people and imo that's caring about someone other then yourself. I rather help the people directly, if I know of someone who is barely making ends meet working 2 jobs has a kid etc, Ill help them out. That's capitalism. I don't need the government to take my money and give it to the wrong person. And Obama's tax plan is to take water out on the other side of the bucket. I guess if you don't buy things from business, use gas, work for a business or run a business, you have nothing to worry about. And I'm sure that America is the land of opportunity not the land of free fish. For those who understand that, our health care is far better then any other health care. You know whats best for you, not the government.

     

     


  14. So with your cow example, because health care is basically run by the American people (owning the cows) at this point having it go universal and run by the government and then having them give us or some times sell us the health care (milks) it just proves its a communist system.

     

    Wrong again.

     

    Having it go universal shifts it from Republicanism to Socialism.

     

    You see, they take your cow (tax money) and give it to your neighbor (healthcare)

     

    the people own the cows (the insurance companies) they sell the milk (health care) the government takes away our cows and force sells us the milk (taxes)

    communism!

     

    Republicanism isn't even a form of government, it's a party who think they know what they stand for but they really have no idea what they are. same thing with the democrats.

     

    the way you solve the health care system in the US is make it easier for more health care companies to start. More companies drives up competition and the more competitions you have the lower the prices will go. If eds health care was $4 and freds was $3.50 eds health care would try to match freds and lower the price to $3. They would either do that or throw in an extra insentive to make people want to buy eds at $4.

    Another thing you have to do is make sure that doctors and specialist accept all health care forms, so they can't turn you away and make you go hunting for another doctor that can. Not to mention doctors need to pay huge amounts for malpractice insurance because we can sue them for millions of dollars, shooting us in the foot, thats another reason why its high.

    If you really want to talk about socialism take a look at our social security and look how good that's going. If that worked so well why would we want another social program?


  15. As for the Ideas on "communism", I see the McCartyism is still raging in the States.

    Confusing socialism with communism is really not knowing what you're talking about...

    The paranoia towards anything that has the word "socialized" in it, still haunts the poor American heads and souls.

    I'm by no means a socialist, but at least I can admit there are some merrits in such a system.

     

    It's amazing sometimes how much the Americans don't get the differences between socialism, communism and fascism.

     

    But this is funny and surprisingly accurate :D

     

    DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. You keep one and give one to your neighbor.

     

    SOCIALISM: You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.

     

    REPUBLICANISM: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So what?

     

    COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk.

     

    FASCISM: You have two cows. The government seizes both and sells you the milk. You join the underground and start a campaign of sabotage.

     

    CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

     

    So with your cow example, because health care is basically run by the American people (owning the cows) at this point having it go universal and run by the government and then having them give us or some times sell us the health care (milks) it just proves its a communist system.


  16. From my previous topic. I would like someone explain to me in a real answer how Obama would pay for all these government run programs that hes proposing.

    The same way every government does it: taxes.

     

    And you like being taxed? People have less money, people spend less money, business do poor because people aren't buying anything. They cant afford to pay all the workers, they get laid off. Now there are more people looking for jobs and collecting unemployment. But with all the government programs you are guaranteed health care and a welfare check. But we need more taxes to pay for the people. And the cycle starts again. Until we are all poor because the government keeps taking and taking and taking. People are more giving and helpful to other people when they have the choice where to spend their money not when its being forced from them to pay for everyone. America isn't about giving fish. Its about learning how to fish and then going out and fishing. No fishing pole? The Library is open to everyone.

     

    I live in NJ, one of the highest taxed states in the country and one of the most costly to live in the country. It cost $1000 to rent an apartment, a crappy one at best. You need to be a millionaire to own anything. They aren't building individual homes anymore here they are building community complexes, condos and more apartments. This is what taxing gets us. Newark NJ is the 10th poorest in the country and they haven't had a conservative mayor in 100 years... that's where throwing them fish got them. Poverty, loss of the individual home, high taxes, big government. Sounds like communism to me.

     

     

×