scarlet wrote on Dec 12, 2013, 14:06:
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Dec 12, 2013, 15:08.

Clearly, someone can't handle a inoffensive opposing point of view here. Rather pathetic the administrator of the site saw fit to remove it rather allowing a very innocuous observation to stand. Says a lot.

Thank you, nin and harlock for quoting/reposting my comment.

* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Dec 12, 2013, 15:08.

Nice... so the barbs come out. When logic is not on one's side, resort to the profane and ad hominem attacks. How dare anyone disagree with the mighty kabloie, master of the Blues News realm without even a single mention on the substance of the poster's argument.

Please, kabloie, do not trouble yourself with a rebuttal. You've said more than enough already.

Do you we really want the gov't involved with our healthcare tracking every minute aspect health with no detail too personal? Do we really want the added waste and fraud? What about the costs? We are learning the economic costs are much high than previously put forward, shocking I know? Why have the gov't involved at all with all the waste, fraud, and bureaucracy that comes along with it?

How quaint to carry the media's water and demonize businesses without any regard for the negative ramifications rather than working with them for free-market solutions that do not involve the gov't.

Most who had private healthcare privately were happy with it. Now, they are being told they cannot keep their doctors and that costs will double or triple. What about those? No regards? How about those religious institutions who are being forced to pay for contraception coverage when it goes against their religious beliefs? Why should they be forced to take the brunt of punishment from a bloated bureaucracy's policies?

Again, who will oversee the gov't? Why is the government so righteous?

"Good ole early 1900s"? Is this the early 1900s? The media gets in a tizzy at the mere hint of any questionable manufacturing practices of companies like Apple or Nike overseas . The public outcry over poor working conditions or policies would not last a second with the hyper-sensitive media we have today.

Many flaws with this rationale and much oversimplification. To hell with this anemic economy right and to hell with those who disagree, right?

The right thing? Who is the arbiter of "the right thing"?

Who is going to limit the gov't? The gov't puts policies in place the hurt the common man and the economy night and day. By allowing the gov't to rule over us like overloads deciding what's best for us? Who's going to check the govt's power? If you say the people who vote them into office, I'll tell you it's a massive failure.

Their main concern is increasing their own power. They have nothing but disdain for us little people. Why do you hold the gov't in such high regard? Who's going to make the gov't "play by the rules"? They will never limit their own power and both dems and republicans are equally guilty.

.....

You only have to watch MSBNC or listen to NPR for mere minutes to realize their left-wing bias. You know how I know, virtually no conservative voices. On Fox, you at least hear some conservative voices (mind you, most of the voices are moderate ones at that. Hannity and maybe a couple others are true conservatives, but the other networks have zero true conservatives, and Hannity and the others on Fox don't pretend to be unbiased like the commentators on the other networks.). Maybe a token conservative here or there on the other networks and the token is usually a weak RINO like Joe Scarborough.

It's as Mad Max states, they self-indentify as liberals, so don't take our words for it.

swedishfriend wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 20:48:

Creston wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 10:30:
Good work, government. Really, just a job WELL FUCKING DONE. Vote yourselves another raise, you clearly deserve it.

Please everybody, vote all these fucking incumbents out of office at the next election(s).

To be fair: any website that cost a lot of money works like shit. The more money spent seems to be a direct indicator of how much it will suck...

Just like our education system. Thank you, Department of Education.

swedishfriend wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 20:38:

Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 11:28:

Necrophob wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 11:08:

Creston wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 10:30:
Good work, government. Really, just a job WELL FUCKING DONE. Vote yourselves another raise, you clearly deserve it.

Please everybody, vote all these fucking incumbents out of office at the next election(s).

I wish it was so easy, but remember, the only idiot you have the power to vote out is YOUR idiot You have no control over all of the other idiots in the House, and their districts are usually so gerrymandered that they have no fear of losing. I saw a statistic on The Daily Show the other day that mentioned that there is a 91% incumbency rate in the House. An MSNBC article mentions that Congressional approval is down to 5%...

Meanwhile Obama's approval is down to a record low of 37%, even lower than Bush's rating at this point in his presidency. When Bush finally reached it after 6 years the liberal dominated media celebrated. Now it's not even being reported by those same hypocrites.

Most polls put Obama's approval around 50%. Maybe that is why the lower number isn't reported? What media is liberal? Even public TV and radio leans right for years now. Are you talking about media in other countries? About 25% of the American public are completely sold on the propaganda and keeps repeating it in the face of all evidence while the rest of the world scratches their heads.

The latest numbers have his approval rating pegged at 37%. I don't know about what that would mean in Sweden, but that's very unpopular for a president here. I do not know how he's able to keep it that high, truthfully.

The media in the States is heavily liberal by all accounts. They are virtual mouthpieces for the White House and the prez's administration.

Regulations can mostly be handled on the state level. Where they cannot be, the Feds need to tread very lightly, because they jeopardize everyone's personal liberties. They have a massive bootprint.

Getting in the insurance business is another thing entirely. The more bureaucracy, the greater the waste and fraud. With the prez pushing our debt through the roof, this was last thing the country needed. Obfuscation on top obfuscation. They did not care. The dems seized their 15 minutes in the spotlight to ram thousands of pages of garbage down the hapless drudges' throats (us)... like a thief in the night.

Problem is government will always seek to aggrandize power whatever the toll it takes on our personal liberties. I say tear down the barriers to obtain a free-market solution that removes government from the equation completely. Tort reform? That will never happen because the dems kowtow to the bar association and the republicans are weak-kneed pansies.

Beamer wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 18:57:

Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:16:

Most of the people on this site and similar video game websites where they discuss politics are really really really ignorant as to who is running what and where the money comes from and how much. It's also very telling that most of them are liberal college students, aka "low information voters".

The money comes from people with money. And it's a lot of it. Few people manage to earn significant amounts without already having significant amounts. The wealth is extremely concentrated, as are the incomes.

It isn't rocket science. But it's beyond many, many people. Seemingly you, typically.

Maybe if the people didn't have the fruits of their labor (i.e. personal property) confiscated for redistribution by bureaucratic masterminds we could better enable them improve their fiscal situation. It wouldn't solve all problems, but it's a start.

Draugr wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 18:02:

scarlet wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:49:
France is fine? With a growth rate of 0.0%? What would be great be? What would bad be?

Let me be more specific, 'just fine' can obviously be very ambiguous, France is plodding along and while growth hasn't been explosive, it HAS been there (commendable when that isn't the case compared to the norm) and has been reducing their defecits quite a bit in the meantime, while avoiding explosive unemployment like others have suffered, which also means growth isn't as important as it is in these other situation (though it is still good.) They seem to be on the road to recovery and in this regard they are doing 'just fine'

Also I don't know where you got a zero number, unless it's outdated data. The growth isn't big but its there, which is better than many can say.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/france/gdp-growth

It was based on 2012's numbers. France is on track for .2% this year.

https://tinyurl.com/l4zxzfo

France's unemployment rate has been hovering around 10% for the longest time, save for a brief two-year period 2007-2008. Maybe that's low by European standards, but it takes a massive toll the taxpayers—money that can not be spent on investments is instead spent on lavish entitlements.

HorrorScope wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 18:01:

scarlet wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:37:
If you don't like a law like Obamacare, you cannot flee to another state. If you don't like the state income tax of a state like New York, you can migrate to Texas, example. If the Federal gov't decided the state income tax nationwide, which they'd love to do, there would be no escape.

True and that sounds right in a way, but then you can look at things differently and find good and bad. For example if the Federal defined a state income tax nationwide, then you wouldn't have companies uprooting 1000's moving state to state for the next sweetheart deal. That would actually be good to stabilize families. Not saying that is right or not, but a way to see a benefit if there was one state tax. It's actually complex and costly doing business in the US. In business in many ways it's like 50 different companies. While most other countries its just the country. Canada with much less providences than the US has states, it's still pretty complex dealing with them as they have some serious variances between the providences.

We don't have a federally mandated state tax now and the relocation of companies is not huge deal. Companies, states, and people SHOULD have the autonomy to set taxes and decide where they wish to locate. It's called freedom. To impose such a tax is dictocratic and robs us of our liberties.

You're almost making my case for me. If government is complex, that's government's fault and our fault partially for electing corrupt politicians. My argument is for moving away from that.

Draugr wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:40:

Quboid wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:32:
You guys realise that the EU hasn't actually disappeared into a black hole? Some of the countries have very serious debt problems, sure, but we're still here. I'm still here.

Most of the EU has economic growth and only the basket cases (Greece and Cyprus) are showing big problems. Spain and Italy are still struggling, not as much but as they're much larger countries any problems are magnified.

And they need to deal with the Euro, which makes their situation totally different than ours, as we have control over our currency, and for many of those EU nations that cannot be said. The Comparisons just don't hold up, there are too many differences when you're not in charge of your own currency.

Also there are many EU nations that are recovering just fine. France, for example.

France is fine? With a growth rate of 0.0%? What would be great be? What would bad be?

Quboid wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 17:32:
You guys realise that the EU hasn't actually disappeared into a black hole? Some of the countries have very serious debt problems, sure, but we're still here. I'm still here.

Most of the EU has economic growth and only the basket cases (Greece and Cyprus) are showing big problems. Spain and Italy are still struggling, not as much but as they're much larger countries any problems are magnified.

Europe has big problems. Suffice it to say, growth rates in Europe are pretty anemic like the US right now. The highest performing economy is Lithuania at 3.6%, but they are very different from the rest of Europe as they've gone through some serious waste-cutting to get where they are. Norway is at 3% but most are much lower (Greece is at -6%). The stalwart powerhouse, Germany, is only at .7%. I wouldn't be rejoicing over that. If that's the high bar, I'd hate to see things get worse.

I assume nothing. Look at congresses approval rating.

On both sides, people and issues are exploited to score political points. This is not about an ideology. It's about returning power to the people. As you move further away from the local circle, the individual's power is diminished.

At the federal level, the individual has very little power. Which is why the framers of the Constitution kept the Federal gov't limited in it scope of authority.

If you don't like a law like Obamacare, you cannot flee to another state. If you don't like the state income tax of a state like New York, you can migrate to Texas, example. If the Federal gov't decided the state income tax nationwide, which they'd love to do, there would be no escape. Now everybody has Obamacare (passed in the cover of darkness under a briefly controlled democrat House and Senate) dropped on them like a hammer with nowhere to run. The young and healthy like myself will pay through the nose.

Liberals such as Nancy Pelosi and all of MSNBC were quick to claim Occupy Wall Street was a grass roots movement when they were funded by the likes of SEIU. There's your comparison. And judging by how much of a disaster that was I'd rather side with the Tea Party.

Most of the people on this site and similar video game websites where they discuss politics are really really really ignorant as to who is running what and where the money comes from and how much. It's also very telling that most of them are liberal college students, aka "low information voters".

I couldn't agree more, Mad Max. On campus I'm surrounded by them. It's like they've lost the ability to reason for themselves. I'd say they are no-information or misinformation voters.

Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 16:53:

Beamer wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 16:44:

Dirwulf wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 16:31:

Draugr wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 16:20:

scarlet wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 14:29:
The tea party movement is truly a grassroots movement, not a giant political machine like the Republican or Democratic parties.

Hahaha.

I guess he's never heard of the Koch brothers.

The Tea Party was grass roots, true. Then, as mentioned, it became the tool of billionaires looking to control us.

The sad thing is people think it's trying to do the opposite. The tea party gets people up in arms over controlling stupid shit, like how large a soda you can buy, while making its party members believe it's ok to control the shit that matters, like your reproductive system.

Look over there, a three headed monkey!

People (mainly the liberal media) conveniently forget the Tea Party was founded by a single woman in response to everyone's outrage over the 2008 bailout George W. Bush signed. If the kiddies had any sense at all they'd do a little research instead of happily eating up the lying bullshit and bigotry they hear on MSNBC and the Daily Show. You should be on your hands and knees kissing the Tea Party's ass for going against progressives in both parties who are spending the country into an EU-like oblivion.

You're exactly right, Mad Max. I find myself in the same age bracket as those you speak and do not understand how my com padres can lap that stuff up without critically thinking for themselves. They simply regurgitate regressive dribble. Everything is always someone else's fault. Sickening.

Beamer, I wouldn't say conservatives/tea party-types were up in arms of the soda ordinance in NYC-mischaracterization. But, they did how asinine it was that Bloomberg feels people are incompetent to decide for themselves what size cola they wish to drink.

"Control your reproductive systems"? Are you speaking about the killing of unborn children? We can all agree pedophilia/sexual exploitation and predation is disgusting and reprehensible, but on the same hand the killing of an unborn is something that should be protected?

A person can be tried for double homicide if a pregnant woman is murdered. Isn't life worth protecting or has society become so deprived of humanity?

One thing good about Ted Cruz is that he made all these crooked financiers who bankrolled Tea Party funds squeamish and decked with serious case of buyers' remorse.

The tea party movement is truly a grassroots movement, not a giant political machine like the Republican or Democratic parties.

A majority are "worked up" over Obamacare. Even liberals have serious questions that are not being addressed by the biased media. Romney and the Republicans (wishy-washy, democrat lights) lost because they did not listen to the people. He did not differentiate himself from Obama. He was not a true conservative.

Revolution is the answer when a large swelling of people get to the point they feel that is the only way to fix it and have nothing to lose...

The country is unmoored from Constitution. Electing different leaders will not solve the problem, because they cannot be trusted to change/repeal laws to limit their power. The framers provided a way out for us short of revolution, the people, to amend the Constitution if such a case like this prompted itself. They had the foresight.

We should try this before hastily rushing headlong into revolution or succession (unconstitutional).

That sounds nice, but how do we go about doing that? Unless all 50 states join together and say to the Feds "you guys are out of control, we're taking some of the power back," nothing's going to happen.

The states are closer to the people. If your state goes rogue like California, no offense to Cali, you can move. Many native Californians have left for other less oppressive states. But with the Fed seizing control from the states, ruling over them like overlords, there is NO recourse. The only way out is to leave the USA entirely. The founding fathers fought so bravely against just this kind of tyranny (King George and England). They feared it, which is why they gave states so much power than the Fed. But states' powers have been whittled away by many congresses, presidents, and Supreme Courts.

We don't need 100% of states to pass a new amendment to limit the Federal leviathan, only 2/3's majority to propose only 3/4's majority to pass. Not easy, but doable.

I did, too. Alas, we still lost out to a babbling Tea Party chimp.

Pigeon, babbling? You're getting him confused with marbles-in-mouth Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or our prez (Have you seen him without his trusty teleprompter? He makes George Bush look like a Rhodes scholar.). The ever-brilliant Cruz runs circles around them all mentally with his powerful oratory. Reid, Pelosi, and the prez have the combined brainpower of a newt.