you don't like the idea of tea party myths, that's great
and you don't like my reasoning on the issue, that's great
we still haven't heard one single belief of yours that would somehow make a better system that would therefore validate your criticism and opposition here
the issue is not about finding an ideal solution, there is none. the issue is accept the government as the payer, not because it is very good, it will suck. but even at that level of mediocrity, it is still far better than a corporation whose primary imperative is making money, not paying your hospital bills
we need to hold the propagandized fool's feet to the fire of the stupid things they believe
by which i mean: they should get an earful of what their toxic stupid social and economic policy beliefs actually result in, before we as well have to suffer for their idiocy
the people in power without any conscience or sense of decency or responsibility to the common man, who hold making cash more important than people's lives (the integrity of their water supply for dozens of generations)
and the complete and utter propagandized idiots who keep voting them into power
i understand the deriviation of the word. but just because you can invent a word doesn't mean it has any meaning
i understand how democracy and aristocracy works (aristocracy, btw, is not "rule of the best" it is "rule of the people who's parents had money"... calling it "rule of the best"makes me wonder about you)
now tell me exactly how idiocracy works
it doesn't. it just elicits laughs from a certain kind of person
it's a trendy term invented by cynical douchebags who hold their fellow citizens in contempt
what are you talking about? are you saying it is impossible to setup universal healthcare and universal education? and you tax people's incomes progressively?
you agree carrying insurance should be mandatory right?
otherwise, those without insurance avoid the bill for their broken arm or declare bankruptcy, and we pay for their medical care, as the bill gets passed on from the hospital in the form of state bailouts and increased costs
the marcellus shale has so much natural gas, we could all start driving cars powered by natural gas and all of the geopolitical headaches of oil would just go away. plus, with no incentive to safeguard foreign petroleum, we could just not care about security in the middle east
however, that's all fine and dandy until you consider the possibility that you are trading energy security for poisoned underground aquifers. i like my water supply clean, thanks
but the fracking goes on on a level far below the water table
still, it's like puncture holes that can induce mixing between layers. the poisons are not necessarily just from the fracking chemicals, there are all sorts of completely natural nasty minerals you don't want mixed up and introduced into your water supply with some artificial mayhem underground
the need then becomes that states and local governments REQUIRE drilling companies to go through a process whereby
1. they absolutely guarantee they follow procedures to carefully puncture the water table, 2. then seal their operations off from the water table, during operations, 3. and finally, when operations cease, to make sure they have a seal that is inspected and certified as the best we can technologically do
the problem is people acting too quickly and shoddy efforts and abandoned responsibilities, the usual lax standards when there is no fierce regulatory body around: you get the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico
this is a case where strict government regulation is an absolute must. government regulation something that is apparently evil according republicans. i guess republicans don't have to turn the faucet on in their home!
finally, there is the issue of the chemicals they are using your fracking. a lot of these mictures are trade secrets. well, that trade secret veil needs to be pierced: if it goes into the ground near my water table, i don't give a flying f*ck about your trade secrets, i want to know what you are pumping down there, and my right to know that my water is safe supersedes your capitalist imperative
however, i was recently amused to find out one major componet of the fracking brew:
Yes, the same thing you see listed as a thickener on your ice cream!
Which makes sense, you want to shove something down there thick and rigid and with a high viscosity to shove the natural gas back up: water laced with sand and thickeners. Makes sense.
So this relieves my worry somewhat. But I still want to know every chemical going into the ground. I don't care about your trade secrets, it's my water!
the government will implement taxing policies and social programs: healthcare, education
then there is no motivation for the people to revolt because the rules of their society is rigged to keep them poor
i don't understand what genghis khan is supposed to mean. the usa is a highly militaristic society. if anything, more economic productivity simply means more money for the military. while a country of a few ultrarich and mostly the rest poor and lower middle class: this is a society that has less revenue to spend on the military
so you are willing to accept that a smart kid, who, given the chance, will become a great person, should be denied, simply because they are born poor?
then what you are willing to accept, but don't understand yet, is that the french revolution, the russian revolution, or the arab spring, is coming to the USA
do you want that? no?
then simply make some simple government policies to ensure society gives everyone a fair chance. or the people get fed up and destroy society. because it is unfair
then why do you engage in lawsuits rather than shoot people?
the law and courthouses are the answer to constant warfare
likewise, ensuring that being poor doesn't mean you don't have a chance, don't have bad healthcare, and don't have poor education, is simply a matter of government policy. who is fighting who exactly? where is the war?
if anything, we are preventing the war. to NOT counteract the effects of welfare inequality means that society will eventually go the way of the french revolution, the russian revolution, or arab spring: all of these situations are a natural result of a society entrenched in permanent welfare inequality
so what do you want? a bloody revolution when the people are fed up with the unfairness? or a simple government policy that ensures fairness?
everyone is greedy. so the movement towards permanent wealth inequality becomes natural. so a fair society counteracts this force by ensuring social safety nets of healthcare and education, so that greed doesn't mean you and your grandchildren are permanently poor and some other guy and his grandchildren are permanently rich
i want a meritocracy. i want a poor child to have just as much of a chance as a rich child. if this is not true, society is unfair, and all sense of freedom and equality is a sham
luckily that's historical, because that's even worse: that's chaebol, PLUS the racist imperial subjugation and theft of other people in their own lands
what is wrong is that being poor or middle class dooms you to poor education, poor healthcare, and no chance to become rich. i want people to work for their dream. i don't want people to work from some rich guy who can never become poor, and the workers can never become rich. then what's the motivation to work? if you have no chance at your dream, why get out of bed in the morning? but the republicans in the usa advance social policies that pretty much lock the poor into poverty, the middle class into lower middle class, and the rich as permanently rich
i don't want to redistribute wealth. i want to say the guy born to the poor person has just as much chance to become wealthy as the guy born to a rich person. then you have a real meritocracy
but when you have rich kids getting cushy jobs through connections and then saying the poor don't know how to work hard to get rich (irony!) then we have a problem in society
yes, and on the subject of the far east, it is pretty much worse than the USA, it is practically social, political, and cultural foundation of the society:
these guys can do no wrong. it's like the british monarchy also ran apple, ibm, microsoft, google, ge, and gm. this is way beyond special treatments and regulations in your favor. it's not even corporatocracy. it's more like corporate monarchy
someone: what's the term for this insane level of assimilation between political, corporate, and aristocratic power?
the point is, those without money should still get quality education, healthcare, and a chance at advancing themselves
but current tax laws in the USA and American social policies advanced by the right are stratifying society, permanently
meaning, if you are poor or middle class, you get inferior education, healthcare, and no chance to advance socioeconomically
the point of life should be to better yourself. not to slave your entire life for someone who already has a lot of money, always will have a lot of money, never suffers for their crimes in the same way as the poor, and lives in a system rigged so that they, their children, and their grandchildren, can never possibly be poor. while those are poor, their children, and their grandchildren, are in such a rigged system they can never possibly be rich
that's wealth inequality. a class society. that's where the USA is headed with the right wing republican political agenda
the USA should be a MERITOCRACY. this is not what we have. what we have are country club boys complaining that the poor don't understand hard work, while they get a cushy job where they hardly exert any effort, just for chumming with the dad of their friend. meanwhile, the poor and middle class bust their ass, sometimes in two jobs, and live paycheck to paycheck, where the smallest of accidents or healthcare emergencies can ruin their entire lives
THAT'S wealth inequality, and it is not a free society
Slashdot Mirror
you don't like the idea of tea party myths, that's great
and you don't like my reasoning on the issue, that's great
we still haven't heard one single belief of yours that would somehow make a better system that would therefore validate your criticism and opposition here
the issue is not about finding an ideal solution, there is none. the issue is accept the government as the payer, not because it is very good, it will suck. but even at that level of mediocrity, it is still far better than a corporation whose primary imperative is making money, not paying your hospital bills
mod parent up
no, they're not welcome
we need to hold the propagandized fool's feet to the fire of the stupid things they believe
by which i mean: they should get an earful of what their toxic stupid social and economic policy beliefs actually result in, before we as well have to suffer for their idiocy
wow, just wow
what is wrong with people?
the people in power without any conscience or sense of decency or responsibility to the common man, who hold making cash more important than people's lives (the integrity of their water supply for dozens of generations)
and the complete and utter propagandized idiots who keep voting them into power
because... gay marriage!
wow, it's utterly depressing
good, you're with me, you believe in single payer universal healthcare. thank you
i understand the deriviation of the word. but just because you can invent a word doesn't mean it has any meaning
i understand how democracy and aristocracy works (aristocracy, btw, is not "rule of the best" it is "rule of the people who's parents had money"... calling it "rule of the best"makes me wonder about you)
now tell me exactly how idiocracy works
it doesn't. it just elicits laughs from a certain kind of person
it's a trendy term invented by cynical douchebags who hold their fellow citizens in contempt
what are you talking about? are you saying it is impossible to setup universal healthcare and universal education? and you tax people's incomes progressively?
what's the big mystery?
you agree carrying insurance should be mandatory right?
otherwise, those without insurance avoid the bill for their broken arm or declare bankruptcy, and we pay for their medical care, as the bill gets passed on from the hospital in the form of state bailouts and increased costs
the marcellus shale has so much natural gas, we could all start driving cars powered by natural gas and all of the geopolitical headaches of oil would just go away. plus, with no incentive to safeguard foreign petroleum, we could just not care about security in the middle east
however, that's all fine and dandy until you consider the possibility that you are trading energy security for poisoned underground aquifers. i like my water supply clean, thanks
but the fracking goes on on a level far below the water table
still, it's like puncture holes that can induce mixing between layers. the poisons are not necessarily just from the fracking chemicals, there are all sorts of completely natural nasty minerals you don't want mixed up and introduced into your water supply with some artificial mayhem underground
the need then becomes that states and local governments REQUIRE drilling companies to go through a process whereby
1. they absolutely guarantee they follow procedures to carefully puncture the water table,
2. then seal their operations off from the water table, during operations,
3. and finally, when operations cease, to make sure they have a seal that is inspected and certified as the best we can technologically do
the problem is people acting too quickly and shoddy efforts and abandoned responsibilities, the usual lax standards when there is no fierce regulatory body around: you get the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico
this is a case where strict government regulation is an absolute must. government regulation something that is apparently evil according republicans. i guess republicans don't have to turn the faucet on in their home!
finally, there is the issue of the chemicals they are using your fracking. a lot of these mictures are trade secrets. well, that trade secret veil needs to be pierced: if it goes into the ground near my water table, i don't give a flying f*ck about your trade secrets, i want to know what you are pumping down there, and my right to know that my water is safe supersedes your capitalist imperative
however, i was recently amused to find out one major componet of the fracking brew:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/world/asia/fracking-in-us-lifts-guar-farmers-in-india.html
Guar gum!
Yes, the same thing you see listed as a thickener on your ice cream!
Which makes sense, you want to shove something down there thick and rigid and with a high viscosity to shove the natural gas back up: water laced with sand and thickeners. Makes sense.
So this relieves my worry somewhat. But I still want to know every chemical going into the ground. I don't care about your trade secrets, it's my water!
what do you mean rely on yourself?
explain what this means in the context of your healthcare
for example: you break arm... what does "rely on yourself" mean when you break your arm, exactly?
the government will implement taxing policies and social programs: healthcare, education
then there is no motivation for the people to revolt because the rules of their society is rigged to keep them poor
i don't understand what genghis khan is supposed to mean. the usa is a highly militaristic society. if anything, more economic productivity simply means more money for the military. while a country of a few ultrarich and mostly the rest poor and lower middle class: this is a society that has less revenue to spend on the military
it's ok to think the government would do a poor job at providing for our health
but it's insane to think corporations would do a better job
therefore, you choose government
for example, those europeans with universal healthcare live longer than americans, and pay less for their healthcare
because the american model is not about our health, it is about maximizing profit
the Japanese people will no longer blindly trust their government
because I point to a source of propaganda can only mean I am a victim of propaganda?
so you are willing to accept that a smart kid, who, given the chance, will become a great person, should be denied, simply because they are born poor?
then what you are willing to accept, but don't understand yet, is that the french revolution, the russian revolution, or the arab spring, is coming to the USA
do you want that? no?
then simply make some simple government policies to ensure society gives everyone a fair chance. or the people get fed up and destroy society. because it is unfair
that's your choice
then why do you engage in lawsuits rather than shoot people?
the law and courthouses are the answer to constant warfare
likewise, ensuring that being poor doesn't mean you don't have a chance, don't have bad healthcare, and don't have poor education, is simply a matter of government policy. who is fighting who exactly? where is the war?
if anything, we are preventing the war. to NOT counteract the effects of welfare inequality means that society will eventually go the way of the french revolution, the russian revolution, or arab spring: all of these situations are a natural result of a society entrenched in permanent welfare inequality
so what do you want? a bloody revolution when the people are fed up with the unfairness? or a simple government policy that ensures fairness?
you decide
everyone is greedy. so the movement towards permanent wealth inequality becomes natural. so a fair society counteracts this force by ensuring social safety nets of healthcare and education, so that greed doesn't mean you and your grandchildren are permanently poor and some other guy and his grandchildren are permanently rich
i want a meritocracy. i want a poor child to have just as much of a chance as a rich child. if this is not true, society is unfair, and all sense of freedom and equality is a sham
i said:
"now: what is the republican agenda in regards to what you have cited?"
i didn't say you stood for it. i didn't think you stood for it. i don't understand how you got that impression (scratches head)
it was an invitation for you to summarize the republican political agenda as you understand it in regard to the status quo you cited
luckily that's historical, because that's even worse: that's chaebol, PLUS the racist imperial subjugation and theft of other people in their own lands
it doesn't mean anything. i've come to the conclusion the only people who like that word are, themselves, idiots
society has problems. do you want to fix it? or just go "it's all stupid" and walk away thinking you've said something valuable and important?
what is wrong is that being poor or middle class dooms you to poor education, poor healthcare, and no chance to become rich. i want people to work for their dream. i don't want people to work from some rich guy who can never become poor, and the workers can never become rich. then what's the motivation to work? if you have no chance at your dream, why get out of bed in the morning? but the republicans in the usa advance social policies that pretty much lock the poor into poverty, the middle class into lower middle class, and the rich as permanently rich
i don't want to redistribute wealth. i want to say the guy born to the poor person has just as much chance to become wealthy as the guy born to a rich person. then you have a real meritocracy
but when you have rich kids getting cushy jobs through connections and then saying the poor don't know how to work hard to get rich (irony!) then we have a problem in society
yes, i agree with everything you said, and i celebrate these facts
now: what is the republican agenda in regards to what you have cited?
yes, and on the subject of the far east, it is pretty much worse than the USA, it is practically social, political, and cultural foundation of the society:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol
these guys can do no wrong. it's like the british monarchy also ran apple, ibm, microsoft, google, ge, and gm. this is way beyond special treatments and regulations in your favor. it's not even corporatocracy. it's more like corporate monarchy
someone: what's the term for this insane level of assimilation between political, corporate, and aristocratic power?
the point is, those without money should still get quality education, healthcare, and a chance at advancing themselves
but current tax laws in the USA and American social policies advanced by the right are stratifying society, permanently
meaning, if you are poor or middle class, you get inferior education, healthcare, and no chance to advance socioeconomically
the point of life should be to better yourself. not to slave your entire life for someone who already has a lot of money, always will have a lot of money, never suffers for their crimes in the same way as the poor, and lives in a system rigged so that they, their children, and their grandchildren, can never possibly be poor. while those are poor, their children, and their grandchildren, are in such a rigged system they can never possibly be rich
that's wealth inequality. a class society. that's where the USA is headed with the right wing republican political agenda
the USA should be a MERITOCRACY. this is not what we have. what we have are country club boys complaining that the poor don't understand hard work, while they get a cushy job where they hardly exert any effort, just for chumming with the dad of their friend. meanwhile, the poor and middle class bust their ass, sometimes in two jobs, and live paycheck to paycheck, where the smallest of accidents or healthcare emergencies can ruin their entire lives
THAT'S wealth inequality, and it is not a free society
in the USA, government is an extension of Corporations